Winnipeg

Differentiate between bike-lanes-in-streets vs recreational-paths:

Recreational-paths share single-moms with babies in strollers & toddlers running around them, inline-skates, bikes, unicycles, joggers, dreamy-eyed-lovers, etc...

The speed-limit should be low-enough that NO accidental cyclist-killing-surprise-toddler happens, which is probably 15km/h?

Depends on how closed/open the local terrain is, right?

And the crowding on that day/night, too.

Bike-lanes-in-streets, however, should be up around 25km/h limit, because crash-injury goes up with the SQUARE of the speed, and keeping cyclists from becoming nursing-home-inmates ( seen a couple of lives that earned that result, you don't want to: it's depressing ).

Ebikes, etc, should be limited, on parkways/roads/rural to 40km/h, because the distances are sooo much greater outside of core-city-streets...

This would both enable & protect, balancedly...

As a former winter-bike-courier, bike-lanes save lives, without any question.

Some lobbyists don't understand that having 3 collisions per week on a bike-lane-street that has 1000 cyclists through it per week is better, statistically, than having 1 collision per week on a street with no bike-lane and 10 cyclists through it per week.

They are adamant that 1 collision-per-week is better than 3, no matter what percentage of the cyclists-using-that-pavement that is.

The collisions per cyclist/mile statistic is what those activists don't understand/accept, and it they make it more-dangerous for us all, unfortunately.

Anyways, I hope the best-for-the-place solution is chosen, and the lives there benefit from the wonderful health available through cycling!

( :