Lorne Gunter: Province should butt out of decision-making on bike lanes
Article content
But the province should butt out of cities' decisions to build them, in the same vein they insist they feds should butt out of provincial matters.
Article content
Article content
First, a clarification. Bike lanes are carved out of existing vehicle lanes or, in residential neighbourhoods, by taking away on-street parking for residents. They are not, in most cases, separate bike trails.
Article content
Article content
I have no quibble with bike trails or bike paths, except in those instances (such as Edmonton's 132 Avenue) where traffic lanes are being removed and roadways narrowed to make way for parallel bike paths. Where bike trails are stealing capacity from an existing roadway nearby, they are the same irritant as bike lanes on those streets themselves.
Article content
Article content
Cycle-commuting groups insist that far from adding to congestion, bike lanes are easing traffic by creating safe cycling zones that encourage more 'active transportation.'
Article content
That's the theory, but in practice it's not working. The latest from Statistics Canada, released in June, shows that just six per cent of Canadian adults walk or ride bikes to work or school. And that is split to about four per cent walkers and about two per cent cyclists.
Article content
Article content
In most of Canada, there is a significant drop off in cycling numbers during winter months.
Article content
Article content
The biking-est cities in the country are Victoria (18.7 per cent) and Halifax (12.3 per cent), which StatsCan attributes to those two being 'smaller in size and with milder climates.'
Article content
But in big, sprawling cities originally built for cars — like Edmonton and Calgary — councillors can dream all they want and approve bike lanes until they're blue in the face (along with the hundreds of millions of tax dollars needed to set them apart) and the needle barely moves.
Article content
Edmonton's overall cycle commuting statistics have barely increased in 10 years. Certainly, they've not increased enough to reduce congestion on the roads even though bike-lane advocates in city administration keep insisting 'active transportation' is reducing vehicle traffic. (The opposite it true — the percentage of Edmontonians driving to work or school in personal vehicles has actually increased since before the pandemic.)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Toronto Star
2 days ago
- Toronto Star
EVs have become a litmus test for whether we're still America's buddy — or ready to be a global Canada
By Joanna Kyriazis and Trevor Melanson Contributors Joanna Kyriazis is the director of public affairs and Trevor Melanson is the director of communications at Clean Energy Canada, a think tank at Simon Fraser University. There are few Canadian markets more integrated with the U.S. than vehicles. And not just the cars we build in Ontario, but the ones we drive across this country. We rely on U.S. safety standards that effectively determine which cars end up on dealership lots, align our tailpipe emission standards and when the U.S. under Biden erected a 100 per cent tariff wall on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs), did Canada look to Europe's much lower tariff or the U.K.'s lack of one? No, we put up a 100 per cent tariff wall too. Opinion articles are based on the author's interpretations and judgments of facts, data and events. More details
Edmonton Journal
4 days ago
- Edmonton Journal
Lorne Gunter: Province should butt out of decision-making on bike lanes
I get it. Bike lanes can be a gigantic pain in the saddle, not to mention an expensive, pretentious sop to cycle commuters and environmentalists. Article content But the province should butt out of cities' decisions to build them, in the same vein they insist they feds should butt out of provincial matters. Article content Article content First, a clarification. Bike lanes are carved out of existing vehicle lanes or, in residential neighbourhoods, by taking away on-street parking for residents. They are not, in most cases, separate bike trails. Article content Article content I have no quibble with bike trails or bike paths, except in those instances (such as Edmonton's 132 Avenue) where traffic lanes are being removed and roadways narrowed to make way for parallel bike paths. Where bike trails are stealing capacity from an existing roadway nearby, they are the same irritant as bike lanes on those streets themselves. Article content Article content Cycle-commuting groups insist that far from adding to congestion, bike lanes are easing traffic by creating safe cycling zones that encourage more 'active transportation.' Article content That's the theory, but in practice it's not working. The latest from Statistics Canada, released in June, shows that just six per cent of Canadian adults walk or ride bikes to work or school. And that is split to about four per cent walkers and about two per cent cyclists. Article content Article content In most of Canada, there is a significant drop off in cycling numbers during winter months. Article content Article content The biking-est cities in the country are Victoria (18.7 per cent) and Halifax (12.3 per cent), which StatsCan attributes to those two being 'smaller in size and with milder climates.' Article content But in big, sprawling cities originally built for cars — like Edmonton and Calgary — councillors can dream all they want and approve bike lanes until they're blue in the face (along with the hundreds of millions of tax dollars needed to set them apart) and the needle barely moves. Article content Edmonton's overall cycle commuting statistics have barely increased in 10 years. Certainly, they've not increased enough to reduce congestion on the roads even though bike-lane advocates in city administration keep insisting 'active transportation' is reducing vehicle traffic. (The opposite it true — the percentage of Edmontonians driving to work or school in personal vehicles has actually increased since before the pandemic.)
4 days ago
Here's a timeline of Trump's tariffs on Canada
It's down to the wire on U.S. President Donald Trump's threat to raise his tariff on Canadian goods entering the United States to 35 per cent, up from the 25 per cent rate that he imposed soon after taking office. Trump set Aug. 1 as the deadline for Canada to reach a trade deal or face the tariff increase. Here's a brief timeline of the key tariffs on Canada. Feb. 1 Trump signs an executive order (new window) levying tariffs on Canadian exports to the U.S. at 25 per cent on all products, except energy, critical minerals and potash, which are hit with a rate of 10 per cent. The order justifies the tariffs as a way to address the flow of illicit drugs across our northern border, citing fentanyl as a threat to national security. Trump later announces the tariffs will take effect March 4 (new window) . WATCH | What a trade war with the U.S. would mean for Canada: March 6 Just two days after Trump's tariffs on Canada come into force, Trump amends his executive order (new window) , giving an exemption for products that comply with the terms of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). The exemption covers nearly 90 per cent (new window) of Canadian exports to the U.S., which means the vast bulk of products can cross the border tariff-free. Trump pausing tariffs on some Canadian goods until April 2 (new window) WATCH | What you need to know about Trump's tariffs on Canada: April 29 After threatening to impose a 25 per cent tariff on automobiles and auto parts from outside the U.S., Trump waters down (new window) the levy, so it only applies to parts that aren't CUSMA-compliant (new window) and the non-U.S. portion of assembled vehicles. Still, the tariffs have an impact on Canada's auto sector and bite into the profits of North American automakers. WATCH | Here's where things stand with Trump's auto tariffs: May 6 Prime Minister Mark Carney, just days after leading his Liberal Party to a minority election win, meets Trump at the White House. Carney presses Canada's case for the removal of tariffs, and while Trump speaks highly of his guest, the president gives no sign he's changing his mind on the issue. WATCH | How Carney reacts to Trump's 'never say never' comments: June 3 Separately from the tariffs on Canadian goods, Trump doubles his tariff on steel and aluminum imports from all countries, to 50 per cent. Canada is the top supplier of both products to the U.S. WATCH | How Canada's steel producers are reacting to Trump's latest tariff threat: July 10 Trump threatens in a letter posted on his Truth Social platform (new window) to boost the tariff on Canadian goods to 35 per cent, effective Aug. 1. If Canada works with me to stop the flow of Fentanyl, we will, perhaps, consider an adjustment to this letter, Trump writes. WATCH | Here's what a deal by Trump's deadline could cost Canada: July 11 Goods that comply with CUSMA will continue to be exempt from the tariff even if the rate rises on Aug. 1, according to a White House official. WATCH | Why most Canadian exports still get into the U.S. tariff-free: July 25 One day after Canada's top negotiators downplay the prospects of getting a deal by Trump's deadline, the U.S. president also throws cold water on Canada's chances. We haven't really had a lot of luck with Canada, he tells reporters at the White House. I think Canada could be one [country] where there's just a tariff, not really a negotiation. U.S. and Canada might not reach trade deal, Trump says (new window) WATCH | 'We haven't really had a lot of luck with Canada,' Trump says: July 30 Prime Minister Mark Carney says Canada's negotiating team is back in Washington for trade talks but gives his clearest indication yet that Canada might not land a deal by Trump's Aug. 1 deadline. Then shortly after midnight, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform (new window) , Wow! Canada has just announced that it is backing statehood for Palestine. That will make it very hard for us to make a Trade Deal with them. WATCH | As Trump's deadline nears, Carney says deal may not happen in time: Mike Crawley (new window) · CBC News · Senior reporter Mike Crawley has covered Ontario politics for CBC News since 2009. He began his career as a newspaper reporter in B.C., spent six years as a freelance journalist in various parts of Africa, then joined the CBC in 2005. Mike was born and raised in Saint John, N.B. Follow Mike Crawley on Twitter (new window)
