Comment
Removing bike lanes will generally not improve gridlock as it will push cyclists toward one of two likely outcomes:
(1) Cyclists will continue to use their bicycles on the road rather than within a dedicated bike lane, thereby slowing traffic and increasing the rate of vehicle-bicycle accidents.
(2) Cyclists will opt to drive vehicles, thereby increasing traffic and worsening gridlock. Note that this aligns with the principal of induced demand: as driving a vehicle is made easier, the roadways will fill with traffic until they are saturated.
My recommendation is to not proceed with this bill. Rather, the best long-term strategy for reducing gridlock is to reallocate funding to improve public transit. By making transit more available and accessible, you will reduce the number of vehicles on the road.
An alternative approach which has been employed in some cities around the world is to additionally make driving a car into a congested inner city more expensive; this can be done by charging tolls for vehicles entering/exiting specific zones, and by levying a tax on parking. This is unlikely to be a popular option, but it has the effect of pushing more people toward taking public transit. (Perhaps the funds procured in this manner could then be funneled into improving public transit and so forth.)
Submitted October 27, 2024 9:47 AM
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
107089
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status