I think the suggestion of more riders is a good one but I now believe the only way to get there is protected bike lanes as cities like Copenhagen do. A few key issues need to be tackled.
Level of Service (LoS) needs to be addressed. If your city is designing street infrastructure to comply with LoS, the design will likely not feel safe for those cyclists who do not want to have a motor vehicle behind them or one passing without some type of barrier. LoS adds complexity to street design that currently favors motorists since they are the majority of users, Consequently, when a decision is made to add a bike lane vs a motor vehicle turn lane, the turn lane is selected. Until LoS is eliminated, active transportation growth will at best be slow.
Traffic Calming might be a great idea but it requires two measurements. First did the design calm motor vehicle traffic. Second, did the design significantly increase bicycle traffic and protect peds. If bicycle traffic was not significantly increase, the design only met part of the objective. Same for ped safety. So, advocates should not allow their city to view traffic calming as a success if active transportation is not significantly enhanced.
While i am still developing this concept, the other (perhaps the final significant change) is to change our on-street parking rules. On-street parking obstructs miles and miles of potential bike lanes and blocks the vision of motorists as it relates to peds. City parking rules need to be created that favor the use of moving vehicles (bikes for example) vs parked vehicles. For example, if there is a street of homes, all with driveways and it happens to be a good connector for bicyclists, street parking needs to be eliminated. And/or, parking ‘near’ a residence should be measured by bus stop distance in the community vs home owner convenience expectations. It is likely your city parking regs have not taken active transportation (moving vehicles use of the street) into account. If they did, city parking rules would be challenged.