As a downtown Toronto…

As a downtown Toronto resident commuting by car to Markham each day, I understand the importance of improving traffic flow. While I support measures to reduce gridlock, I am concerned that the restrictions on bike lanes proposed in Bill 212 are driven more by ideology than by evidence-based urban planning, potentially harming both businesses and residents.

Recently, business owners in Toronto’s Annex neighborhood expressed strong support for maintaining Bloor Street bike lanes, emphasizing the positive impact they have on foot traffic and local commerce. Small businesses along Bloor Street report that bike lanes encourage more pedestrian and cycling traffic, which benefits local shops without increasing parking congestion or road use by cars. Their message to the government, as captured in a recent CityNews report, is clear: bike lanes are an economic asset that shouldn’t be removed without solid evidence proving otherwise​.

Bike lanes aren’t just beneficial to cyclists—they help drivers too. By encouraging some commuters to choose cycling for shorter trips, bike lanes reduce the number of cars on the road, which helps streamline traffic for drivers making longer commutes, like mine. This symbiosis between transportation methods is well-documented and backed by urban planning studies that link bike infrastructure with decreased congestion.

I urge the government to prioritize empirical data in its decisions and to avoid restricting bike lanes without solid evidence to support such changes. Decisions that don’t align with community and economic data will erode support for government initiatives that aim to reduce gridlock, especially if they ignore the contributions of existing infrastructure like bike lanes to an overall balanced traffic ecosystem.

Thank you for considering an evidence-driven approach to this issue.