LETTER

More on (stupid) winter cycling

 

In defence of the winter cyclist, I wish to respond to the objections of your readers to the presence of cyclists on snowy roads, as well as the addition of a few kilometres of 'all-season' bike lanes. First, a gentle reminder: cyclists have the lawful right to be on your road. I mention this as, on many occasions, I have had the pleasure of experiencing the irate Aylmer motorist yell, honk, slap and even throw a full can of beer at me, as, in their opinion, I was unlawfully on the road because it's winter. Those falling in this category take note: the Quebec legislature recently passed a new law that requires motor vehicles, when passing a cyclist (even stupid winter ones), to give at least one metre before proceeding.   

My defence of the winter cyclist is, however, not a legal one, nor is it a moral one. My case is this: cyclists of all seasons benefit those who don't cycle. Every bike on your road has been shown in numerous studies to take about .9 vehicles off your road, and every one of those .9 vehicles off the road yields a 3- to 5-second decrease on singular lane gridlocked roadways (I'm looking at you, rue Principale and Lucerne Blvd). Studies also show that, even in the snowiest of winter climes, building cycling infrastructure results in corresponding increases in car-bicycle displacement.  So, doing the math, if the new Lucerne bike lane takes off just 100 of the 15,000 Aylmer cars idling on that road, that saves 5 minutes. And if we could displace 300 cars, goodbye gridlock.

In addition, road construction and maintenance is the highest line item in almost every North American city budget. Numerous studies have shown that every car taken off roadways and substituted by a bicycle results in an annual net saving (after cycling infrastructure capital and operating costs) of between 50 and 80 cents to a municipal budget. This is free money. This is smart spending. Conversely, every dollar spent on car specific roadways results in a net cost  to a municipality of about 40 cents annually. This is one of the main reasons that Copenhagen, gridlocked and broke 40 years ago, is now cash rich and virtually traffic free, as they were one of the first cities ever to go on a stupid bike infrastructure building spree and, as a result, 80% of their daily personal urban trips are by bicycle. Here in not-stupid Canada, over 95% of personal trips are done by automobile.

These stark economic lessons are slowly but surely being embraced by similarly gridlocked and cash crunched cities across North America.   In Minneapolis-St. Paul, for example, over 600 miles of cycling specific lanes have been constructed over the past decade, resulting in huge savings in money and time as automobiles have been abandoned in huge numbers. In typical North America, critical mass has been reached - adding more roads does nothing to resolve gridlock and soaring budgets. But getting people out of cars actually works, and by far the cheapest alternative to cars for municipalities is bike infrastructure, as it actually pays it back.  

The point of all this is that building and maintaining bike lanes benefit not just those who choose to bike, but also those who chose not to bike. And while some may look at new bike lines and winter cyclists as stupid, I suggest that you instead focus on how every bike you see could be a car ahead of you, slowing you down, costing you money, adding to the toxic emissions filling your lungs. That bike lane means you are richer, healthier and have more time to enjoy your safer, quieter, healthier community. Of course, all of this is coming from a guy who has commuted by bike 40 kilometres every single day for the past 15 years, even in the snow, and loving it.  Feel free to call me stupid, if you must . . .  you're welcome.    

Doug Hoover
Aylmer