This post is a special submission from Daniel Rotsztain, a student of Urban Geography at McGill University. Also see his previous post on Spacing Montreal entitled Natural Paths.
With just a light dusting of snow this January and February, our ability to rationally negotiate Montreal’s bike paths seems to be completely paralyzed. While I acknowledge that some bike paths become legally void during the winter months, this year an absence of snowbanks that typically deter winter cycling has meant that an onslaught of cyclists have hit the streets, and end up sharing the same routes as pedestrians. These hazardous conditions are direct consequences of a lack of clear demarcation, winter bike path maintenance and flexibility.
Two examples come to mind: at Ave du Parc and Rachel, where the bike path typically bends east in the summer months, cyclists have been forced to continue north toward ave Mont Royal, sharing a cramped path with pedestrians whose vision is considerably hindered by their furry parkas. Another mix-up occurs just south, at Parc and Pins: where the bike path and sidewalk weave in and out, sometimes separate and other times apparently merged.
Despite these confusions, this year’s relatively mild winter has shown us that winter biking in Montreal is indeed a reality. And clear, flexible cycling bylaws throughout the year would lead to increased usership and the increase the adoption of cycling as a viable, year-round transportation alternative, rather than merely a recreational summer activity.
The confusion seems most extreme along rue Rachel. As I was cycling east along on a sunny Saturday morning, I noticed that elements of the signage that formerly denoted a bylaw stipulating the bike path’s existence from 1 April to 1 November had been removed. Whether officially by the city, or illegally by the public, I don’t know, (though I’ll assume it’s the latter, as the metal poles that typically separate bikers from the traffic in the summer were absent, removed by the city at the beginning of the winter season).
Either way, uncertainty has ensued. For many blocks, cars respect the path, parking several metres away from the curb. But on other blocks cars park directly beside the curb, forcing cyclists to swerve off the path into oncoming traffic. Stretches of Rachel that feature a concrete divider as opposed to metal poles serve as a much safer way to alleviate the confusion, perhaps representing the most effective design.
The bike path on Rachel is technically closed for winter. Hoewver, on some blocks, drivers spontaneously chose to respect the bike path while on others, cars were parked next to the curb.
Nevertheless, concrete barriers, such as those along downtown’s Boulevard de Maisonneuve are major, rigid investments. Acknowledging that the mildness of this winter is not representative of more typical years, (other winters proving that snow-biking is not always this easy), exposes the need for Montréal’s urban design to be clearer, and above all, more flexible.
What I interpret as an organic (as opposed to legally enforced) respect for the Rachel bike path shows that many Montrers are able to negotiate the law in a sensible manner, flexibly reacting to the weather to best accommodate our transportation needs. A city does not have to be so rigid in its urban form. If Montreal invested in clearly demarcated flexible bike paths that could adapt to mild winters, more people would be inclined to use them, leading to better circumstances for cyclists and ultimately, more functional urban space.