Comment
I am a longtime resident of Toronto. I get around the city by many means: bike, public transit, foot and car. I do not think the proposed legislation is sound for many reasons.
1. Municipalities know their needs best so decisions regarding bike lanes should remain a municipal government responsibility not a provincial one.
2. Bike lanes provide a safer way for residents to get around the city by bike/e-bike/e-scooter/hover board and roller blade resulting in fewer cars on the road. Thereby bike lanes reduce rather than contribute to gridlock.
3. Bike lanes save lives and minimize accidents. Their removal would result in more serious injuries and deaths.
4. Studies show that bike lanes do not contribute to gridlock even when a car lane has had to be removed to allow for the creation of a bike lane. This is evidence-based.
5. Bike lanes allow residents to travel without getting in a car thereby reducing carbon emissions from cars. Bike lanes contribute to better air quality. This is evidence-based.
6. Bike lanes are a boon to business as they encourage people to stop and shop. This is evidence-based.
6. Bike lanes provide a healthy alternative and improve users’ health and the city’s livability.
If the intent is to reduce gridlock then the answer lies in investing in public transit and more bike lanes. I oppose the proposed legislation. Thank you for the opportunity to submit my comments which I hope have an impact.
Submitted October 31, 2024 10:53 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
108738
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status