Per the government proposal:…

Per the government proposal: “ ​Environmental Implications
The proposed changes are intended to keep people and goods moving by creating more capacity on roads for vehicles and drivers. Traffic and congestion are a major source of air pollution especially in urban areas.”

This statement runs opposite of all evidence-based research in curbing pollution and causing traffic jams.

Instead of prohibiting alternate modes of transportation (bicycles aren’t just for recreation!) and meddling in municipal affairs, the provincial government should have been focusing on financing and building public transportation and encouraging citizens to use existing and future public transportation instead of forcing people to drive in high-density centres which by their historical nature cannot support any more single-occupant vehicles than are on the roads at the moment.

Regarding moving goods in an efficient manner, the government could have issued congestion pricing or found a way to discourage private vehicle use during certain hours of the day to improve delivery for commercial vehicles.

The cognitive dissonance of this government bill is just astounding.