Comment
In Ottawa, bike lanes on Laurier Ave and Metcalfe have protected cyclists and encouraged an increase in the share of cycling in transportation for the past several years, including pre pandemic.
The impacts have been minimal on traffic flow, because these lanes were used for parking outside of rush hour, and blocked by cars stopping for minutes at a time waiting for passengers during rush hour. On Metcalfe, before the bidirectional bike lane was installed, the lane was too narrow to accommodate traffic, thus it sat empty for all but the most courageous/reckless drivers. I was one of them who would navigate it, and saw it as my own personal speedway, but that is not a great excuse to remove the bike lane now.
Moreover, these lanes connect to other cycling infrastructure. Removing or moving them to side streets would introduce other bottlenecks for cars due to the need to redesign smaller intersections to protect cyclists, reduce the effectiveness of Ottawa's cycling network and reduce cycling's model share of transportation. All of this would increase traffic congestion.
I cannot comment on the issues allegedly caused by Toronto bike lanes, but in Ottawa, the impacts of them, if any, are minimal. Please do not refer to Ottawa municipal bike infrastructure as an example to support this legislation.
If none of this convinces you, then it doesn't really matter. Legislation such as this will cause induced demand and increase gridlock to such a degree that traffic will be safer to navigate by bicycle since most cars will be stationary or slow moving. I have lived in cities with pro car policies and in urban centres, traffic congestion has brought traffic to a standstill, without exception.
Cars cause traffic jams, not bike lanes.
Submitted October 24, 2024 7:27 PM
Comment on
Bill 212 - Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act, 2024 - Framework for bike lanes that require removal of a traffic lane.
ERO number
019-9266
Comment ID
105526
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status