Town of Penetanguishene, Township of Springwater Township of Tiny

ii. Bikeability:
Township of Tiny
As with walkability, both groups arrived at similar scores when evaluating the
bikeability of the Tiny Township, with one rating the community at “37” and
the other at “39”. As usually occurs, the bikeability of the community was
rated to be lower than its walkability
It should be noted that two questions:
� Do public transit systems provide facilities for bicycles such as
parking?
� Do buses have bike racks?
are not relevant to Tiny, so that the total maximum score possible for this
section was 92/100.
Group 2 did not give a rating of Excellent to any of the categories. Group 1,
on the other hand ranked as Excellent both the following:
� Does your community have an official bicycle and/or Active
Transportation plan?
� Is there a public advisory committee that addresses Active
Transportation and/or cycling concerns?
Group 1 ranked nearly half of the questions, 11/25, as Fair, with a score of
2/4. They also ranked four questions as Very Good, and five as Poor. Group
2 instead had six questions ranked Very Good and eight – the largest number
in any category – as Fair. Group 2 only evaluated five areas as being Poor.
Excepting the two questions that were not applicable, both groups had a
similar appreciation of what they ranked Very Poor. Group 1 scored three
only in that category, while Group 2 had four. Two of these were identical for
both groups:
� Do bike paths and bike lanes have clear signage and markers for
direction and regulations?
� Where bike lanes do not exist, is there “Share the Road” signage?
In the other cases, where Group 2 had scored the questions zero, Group 1
had only awarded them a one. The largest difference of opinion was for the
question: “Are existing bike paths useful for transportation to work and/or
school?” Group 1 gave a score of zero; Group 2 gave this a score of two.
15