Bike lane design is a patchwork of disconnected approaches
On the Hustings
I have been riding my bike to work from south Winnipeg to Broadway since 2015.
I don’t ride everyday, I am definitely a fair weather cyclist. I prefer to ride in seasons without ice and snow.
I have tried different routes over the years and I believe I have found one with the LEAST potential to be hit by a car.
There has been news in the past few months about people having concerns about Active Transportation (AT).
There are drivers who don’t want to share the road, there are cyclists who have been hit by vehicles and there are pedestrians who don’t want cyclists on sidewalks.
On my “best” route, I have seen them all. I ride from south of Bishop Grandin, up Pembina Highway to the new AT corridor along the new underpass at Jubilee and then connect to he existing “painted” bike lane through Fort Garry/Fort Rouge to the Osborne Bridge and then to Broadway.
Along my route, I have access to the painted bike lane with and without a few pillars to remind vehicles to stay out of the bike lane; I have ridden on the “new” bike lanes which actually require you to ride behind the bus shelters and right through people waiting to get on a bus. I have also ridden on the AT corridors that are completely off the road. I have also occasionally had to quickly adapt my route and protect myself when suddenly the bike lane and sidewalk are blocked for construction and the options are limited.
Here are my observations. There is a patchwork approach to our AT network. Some neighborhoods have continuous designated lanes, some are disconnected for sections. The newer lanes are the best for riding as the pavement has been recently replaced and doesn’t yet hold a host of surprise bumps and gaping holes waiting to swallow you up or damage your bike.
There are interrupted sections of commuter bike lanes and disconnected sections of recreational bike paths.
It seems there has been a scattered approach to planning these trails, their use and how the neighborhoods connect. I am not sure if it is dependant on the ideas of the incumbent city councillor or the current city planner responsible for each area, but a lack of common purpose is obvious.
The commuter paths should be the most direct route for cyclists who are using Active Transportation to get from Point A to Point B for a purpose. These should follow the major traffic routes as they tend to be the most direct path. These should be separated from the vehicle traffic. I don’t feel safe sharing the bike lane with the buses on busy streets. I am sure the buses don’t appreciate it either, they can’t suddenly pull into the next lane to give a cyclist the proper space in the lane.
The recreational paths that exist are lovely, smooth, wide paths for both pedestrians and cyclist that usually wind along the river or through parks in the city. They don’t necessarily focus on getting you from place to place as much as encouraging you to take in the beauty our river city. They often meander away from major routes, for safety and a peaceful recreational experience. These paths are also segmented and disconnected through our various communities. The City of Winnipeg has a cycling map that lets you map out a route. If you view it you will quickly see that there are disconnected segments in both the commuter and recreational network that result in cyclists riding on roads or sidewalks occasionally.
In the new green world, we should be encouraging people to be active and healthy using AT routes but right now, the challenges remain. With consultation and planning, such as the consultations on the update to the AT plans for the City, we can improve the experience for cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles and work towards reducing not only our environmental impact, but also the friction between these groups. Improving the experience for all transportation users with proper planning will help us encourage more people to try the AT options available.
You can reach Nancy Cooke to comment on this article at [email protected].