I would like to voice, in…

I would like to voice, in the strongest possible terms, my opposition to this bill.

Firstly, this bill adds unnecessary bureaucracy and “red tape” to a job that is, ultimately, up to municipalities. Cities know their transportation networks and needs best; not the province. Adding a higher-tier of decision making to this process undermines my faith in a government that’s stated values are austerity and “small government.”

Secondly, bike lanes are essential transportation infrastructure like sidewalks and roads. They guarantee a basic standard of traffic flow, safety, and navigation for road users outside of a car. This point is twofold: when I drive, especially on main roads, I would much rather cyclists be out of my way in their own bike lanes wherein I do not have to worry about passing or yielding to them. Getting rid of lanes on streets like Yonge, University, and Bloor will not stop cyclists from biking on them; it will only make their cycle commute (and just as well a drivers’ commute) more treacherous.

Thirdly, bike lanes on main roads support the massive transit investments that our province has been making recently. From the TTC, GO Transit, the ION LRT and the O-Train, rail expansions are already underway. Cycling infrastructure on main roads makes stations more accessible, boosting farebox revenues and increasing ridership; supporting and making back the province’s worthy investments into these systems.

Finally, myself and a growing number of people across this province cycle on a daily basis. Historically and statistically, bike lanes on main roads which take away a lane of vehicle traffic do not increase car congestion but in fact help to alleviate it. Detouring cyclists down winding side roads, put simply, is not enough to promote cycling as a viable commute option. Having the bike lanes on main roads cuts cycle commutes and puts the lanes where people want and need to go; therefore making cycling a compelling option. More cyclists means less drivers; less drivers means easing car congestion. The opposite is also true: if another vehicle lane of traffic is introduced, it ultimately creates more space for cars which will inevitably be filled due to inducing traffic demand (Rand Europe, CIVITAS, Le Parisien). The Premier and Transportation Minister’s comments that this plan will reduce gridlock, which were made without credible sources, feel anecdotal at best and like misinformation at worst.

In conclusion, I strongly oppose this bill due to its adding of increased bureaucracy to municipal processes, its taking away of an essential road safety measure, its counter-productive nature with regard to current provincial transit investments, and finally, because it, in fact, does not "reduce gridlock" and "save time;" it very much serves to do the opposite.