Space in a downtown urban…

Space in a downtown urban environment is precious. The people of Toronto enjoy a wealth of spatial variety, from its rich green spaces and parks, to its economically active corridors and thriving intersection of culture and business in the downtown and surrounding areas. Changes in any shape and format must consider costs compared to the benefits they propose.

The city has grown considerably in a few short years, and is projected (and planned) to do so for more years to come. Moving people around to where they need to be—for work, for study, for recreation and socializing—is critical for such growth to be prosperous. These methods of mobility in a city such as Toronto must consider a variety of distances and route offerings.

For something like mass transit, we have the subway system, surface transport such as bus and streetcar networks, and (soon) the LRTs. Form follows function here, and so large amounts of people are moved in a general fashion, with the last mile predominantly coming from BRT, walking, and bicycling.

However, the adoption and expansion of the bike lane network specifically in Toronto on key corridors has allowed for an incredible amount of accessibility along them. Paired with lanes for traffic and transit (both surface and underground), these corridors offer commuters options. If we are to assume the GTA region grows as it has been for the foreseeable future, then we must consider the balance of space to accommodate many options for moving people around on a mass scale.

The amount of space a single bike occupies compared to a single car is significant, and allows for considerable savings in the form of monetary cost (maintenance, fuel, infrastructure), air quality, and noise, at a small cost of perhaps comfort on a few particularly cold days of the year. Cars often predicate a lane not only for movement, but parking as well, requiring additional space on-street as it currently stands. Under the concept of induced demand, an additional lane for cars nudges commuters to consider driving more than they do, just as a bike lane encourages riders to cycle. The primary difference is that the stickiness for riders is greater, meaning that removing a bike lane does not remove the riders using it to the same extent that reducing a lane for car traffic discourages car use (again going back to the space issue). This incurs costs particularly in the realm of safety. By removing a physical design barrier between motor vehicles and bikes, the likelihood of collisions goes up, meaning people come to harm more frequently. This is antithetical to former mayor Tory's-led Vision Zero.

I strongly urge you to rescind this part of Bill 212, for the betterment of Ontarians in consideration of our future growth. Thank you for your time and consideration.