To the Ford Government, In a…

To the Ford Government,

In a city as large as Toronto, removing a few bike lanes on a few roads WILL NOT reduce traffic congestion. As most, it would open a few more lanes for motor vehicle traffic for a short time, only to be immediately backfilled by more motor vehicles.

The preponderance of evidence is that adding more lanes for motor vehicle traffic is only ever a temporary solution. Inevitably, the new lanes attract more traffic, something called induced demand, and we are back into gridlock.

As painful as it might be for some to admit to the obvious, the only solution to traffic congestion is to reduce the amount of motor vehicle traffic. But that means providing alternatives so that people can get around WITHOUT using them.

Thus, bicycle lanes are not the CAUSE of traffic congestion. They are the SOLUTION. As is public transit. When people take alternatives to motor vehicles, traffic congestion automatically decreases. For example, during the pandemic when people stayed home and there were fewer motor vehicles on the roads, congestion decreased.

In contrast, even a marked increase in bicycle use and transit use does not lead to traffic congestion as bicycles and public transit are more efficient at moving large volumes of people than personal motor vehicles.

After nearly a century of building roads that favour cars, we see the result - GRIDLOCK. The bicycle infrastructure that has been built so far in Toronto is still in its infancy. If allowed to develop into a well-connected grid, a mature bicycle network would alleviate traffic congestion (and pollution). But killing the network in its infancy is just short-sighted. If people who presently move around the city on bicycles are forced to revert back to driving their cars, we end up with more traffic congestion once again.

So, if anything, drivers should want MORE bicycle lanes, not LESS because every person riding their bike is NOT DRIVING their car.

And this is not even considering the expense of removing bike lanes that were only installed after municipalities carefully consulted all stakeholders in the first place.

And for a government that touts the benefits of LESS red tape, how will the application for bike lanes from ALL MUNICIPALITIES across the province REDUCE red tape? Perhaps the government needs to stay in its OWN lane and not overreach into municipal affairs.

As for building Highway 413 through the Greenbelt, once again the argument that adding more highways will alleviate Gridlock is fatally flawed. Even if taken to the extreme, and every square inch of green space within a hundred kilometres of Toronto city hall was paved over, we would still have gridlock. Cities cannot pave their way out of this situation. It is going to take a more rational approach.

As the saying goes, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. After 70 years of highway building in the Toronto area, have we not learned anything? First, the 401 is built to bypass Toronto, then the 407 to bypass the 401, and now you want to build the 413 to bypass the 407. In other words, a bypass to bypass the bypass. This is INSANE.

It's not like there aren't any other solutions being implemented around the world to combat traffic congestion. The implementation of congestion charges, though not popular, has reduced traffic in the core area of London UK. Copenhagen and Amsterdam do just fine with a vast bicycle network. Greater Tokyo, with a population of 41 million, quietly and efficiently moves people around with an efficient transit system.

So it can be done - if there is the political will.

To be honest, the rest of the world must be shaking its collective head in amazement at ONTARIO. Despite the evidence that the rest of the world is acting on and implementing for the long-term good of each city (not to mention the good of the planet), Bill 212 is leading the province backward. We will not be lauded, but instead be derided. You will make us a laughing stock, the butt of jokes, and generally looked down upon by clear-thinking people everywhere.

And not to be overlooked is the obvious backroom deals that benefit developers who are cozy with the Ford government, as pointed out by the Auditor General.

So, in conclusion, Bill 212 should not go forward.

Rushing it through just because the government has a majority doesn't make it right. In contrast, the right course of action is to pursue alternatives to motor vehicle usage. Though this might not be popular in the short run, it is the only logical solution in the LONG RUN. Only by reducing motor vehicle traffic will we truly REDUCE GRIDLOCK AND SAVE TIME.

Thank you.