Every bike on road means one less car

Re. “Why not clog up all downtown streets?,” Letters, Sept. 4

Jim Holowchak worries a proposed 109 Street bike lane would “(cripple) motorized traffic beyond belief in order for a couple hundred bikes daily to dawdle back and forth.”

Let’s set aside the dubious assertion that 109 Street lacks adequate capacity to accommodate a bike lane, or that daily bike traffic on that route amounts to “a couple hundred” (in fact, thousands of bikes traverse the High Level Bridge each day in the summer, and several hundred in the winter).

My problem is with the word “dawdle.” Mr. Holowchak implies my choice of transport is somehow less legitimate than his, and therefore less worthy of a safe share of the roadway.

Yesterday, my bike and I dawdled to the Misericordia Hospital (a 21-kilometre round trip). This morning we dawdled downtown to the dentist. Later, we may dawdle to the store for groceries.

I’ll be burning calories instead of gasoline, while enjoying fresh air and sunshine.

In many cases, I will arrive more quickly than I could by car.

Each of those trips meant one less car competing for road space and parking. Next time you’re stuck in rushhour traffic, ask yourself: are the bikes slowing me down, or is it all these cars? Scott Rollans, Edmonton