As I’m sure I don’t have to…

As I’m sure I don’t have to tell you, this is such backwards thinking and regressive policy. There are countless examples of where bike lanes have contributed to reduced congestion, rather than the opposite. Especially when you consider that e-assist bikes are the fastest growing electric transportation in North America.

Some proof points:

Reduces congestion: Cities like New York saw a 14% traffic reduction on streets with protected bike lanes. Shifting more people to bikes means fewer cars and less gridlock (NACTO Report).

Increases road capacity: Copenhagen found that bike lanes move 5 times more people than car lanes in the same space. Bikes require less road area, allowing for more efficient use of space (Copenhagenize).

Faster short trips: Studies show that in cities like Paris, bikes are faster than cars for trips under 5 kilometers due to avoided traffic and easy parking (Transport & Environment).

Health and environmental benefits: Bike lanes contribute to lower emissions and air pollution. Bogotá’s cycling network helps save 350,000 tons of CO2 emissions annually, reducing traffic while improving air quality (ITDP Report).

Cost-effective: Building bike lanes is significantly cheaper than car lanes. In Portland, every mile of bike infrastructure costs just $300,000, compared to $60 million for a mile of freeway (City of Portland Study).

Improves safety: London’s introduction of separated bike lanes led to a 40% reduction in cyclist injuries, showing safer infrastructure reduces accidents and improves traffic flow (Transport for London).