Item 11

A response to Winnipeg's Executive Policy Committee regarding their endless delays on making modifications to Wellington Crescent after a cyclist was killed 6 June 2024. 

A piece of context that is needed is that this stretch of roadway was identified by the bike advocacy organization as a crucial stretch with inadequate protections for more than a decade before the vehicular murder occurred.

---

Every day, I open the news in the morning, and the frequency of times death due to road violence is one of the items is shocking. What's even more shocking is how blasé this carnage is treated. 

Why do we accept these deaths without question?

But folks like to focus on the positive, so I'm coming here to be positive. And I'm writing to you from the Netherlands, where I'm feeling really positive about riding bike.

To address the road carnage, you're recommending a bike lane on Wellington. I support the recommendation to fund a bike lane.

I support reducing the speed limit. (40km/hr is not low enough, but we're being positive here, so I support the direction of lowering the speed. But it's worth noting even though this is outside your purview: it's offensive that ebikes are speed capped at 30km/hr whereas vehicles have no speed cap, despite the fact that there is no context in all of North America where it is legal to reach speeds of 180+. Why are vehicle speeds not limited?)

I support hearing the results of the pilot.

(270 days seems a ludicrously long time to wait for the results of a study on a known dangerous area, especially when more than 365 days have already passed since this problem area has been raised to crisis level concern. Isn't that a longer period just for waiting than the active time of the Open Streets program that creates a safe zone for vulnerable road users?)

I support doing all things necessary to implement the intent.

I don't support waiting.

Councillor Lukes loves to underscore the need to compromise to get things done. But there's compromise and then there's capitulation. It's beyond insulting to hear over and over again that avoiding the momentary inconvenience — we're talking seconds here — of drivers is a higher priority than safeguarding the lives of cyclists. When these are the considerations in balance, compromise on the side of the former is not "getting along to get things done." It's callous unconcern for human life. 

But let's get back to the positive.

Positive outcomes of implementation:

• a more pleasant neighbourhood for all residents
• a safer neighbourhood for all users
• the fact that despite initial opposition, a good plan implemented well usually vanquishes opposition after the fact. You just need to push through the negativity to get to the safety on the other side. Dead humans are much more of "a problem" than grumpy citizens. 
• the fact that you have a public service ready to jump on these plans and make them happen and adjust as feedback is taken into consideration. Temporary is good! I think you may have gotten the wrong impression from the cyclist community's resistance to paint as infrastructure. There's always some learning that results from implementation. There's always something that could have been done better. Let's stop hesitating to try things out. Don't jump straight to making things permanent. Paint and polyposts are fantastic for pilot phases to find out what works in real life. You don't have to make it perfect on paper and then pour concrete. Bring out the temporary pieces and let's work on this puzzle. 

these are all positives.

I'm focused on the positive here because I'm living in another world where cycling is safe. 

I'm staying in a sleepy little resort town where I hear the birds sing all day long because the only traffic on the road outside is bicycles and horses.

Okay, Winnipeg is a city, you say: we're busy and important, not a little rural outpost. 

But let me tell you more of this dream world I'm living in: From my sleepy little town, it's 11 km to reach the city centre where the train station is and I don't have a single metre of that journey that's not in a designated bike path. Not all of it is separated bike lane, but all of us it clearly marked for my right to be there on my bike and my need to be kept safe while I am.

I biked more than 70 km the other day, just roaming around on my rented omafiets like the slowest cyclist you've ever met, rolling past windmills and canals — and there was always a place for me. I always felt safe because the paths I traversed accounted for my presence on them. When I reached a major road to cross with bustling car traffic, an underpass opened up before me and I sailed safely through. (At every underpass — and there were multiple — I thought of the death pass between the Harte Trail and Headingly Grand Trunk Trail where one's choice is to play chicken with semis or travel 2 kms out of one's way to cross at an only slightly less dangerous spot. And I wished to pack up these underpasses and take them home with me.)

So I'm feeling positive. It is so possible to get around by bicycle. It can be possible in Winnipeg. It can be safe in Winnipeg. You've even got a plan: I support that you implement it...as soon as possible. 

Sincerely

A Winnipeg cyclist

PS People need “stuff” in the Netherlands too and they have far greater density constraints to deal with, and yet they manage to get everything where it's needed. Of course, not everything can be carried by bike. But not everything is best carried by 18 wheeler. There's a whole variety of ways of moving freight long and short distances. It's high time we got a little bit more creative with those options in Winnipeg.