Hello! I had lived in…

Hello!

I had lived in Ontario for 23 years and now live in British Columbia where I work. Since moving to BC (not on the coast) I have taken up cycling as a means of getting to and from work for most days that the weather permits. This commute takes just as much time as driving would, as traffic in my City, and congestion around traffic lights and pedestrian intersections on main roads, dramatically slows down road traffic. As such, I have taken to biking on a separate trail that keeps the pedestrian and cycling infrastructure relatively distinct from the car infrastructure. Not only is this type of movement more beneficial to my health, but in effect, having the option to move in a different way means I have the ability to a)get to work quicker b) get good exercise and stay healthy c) reduce the amount of cars on the road, and so too congestion during rush hour d) engage with the City at a human scale. e)Contribute to more considerate infrastructure for people to move, helping to create a stronger ecosystem of transit options that will not fail as easily if a major problem arises in one of its sectors (i.e - transit strikes, car accident on highway, road construction). People will use what is provided to them, and there is an induced demand to creating more or adapting existing infrastructure to be focused on the efficiency of movement of cars. If you make something more convenient, more people will use it. This is not to say that we ought to strive to make driving more inconvenient in allowing for bicycle infrastructure to be built, but rather that most people take the option of least resistance. The issue becomes, when you are stuck in gridlock on the QEW, and wasting 1000's of human hours each and every day to stagnation (i.e - QEW), we realize that many in Ontario do not have other options that are reasonable to move around. Cars take up space. We park them and leave them sitting most of the day. They need infrastructure to support their use (wide roads, gas stations, car dealerships, stoplights, parking lots- etc.). With the cost of land, and the sheer amount of people moving to Ontario - one would think the government would realize that their is a downstream cost to building for cars first. All of the supporting infrastructure takes up valuable space and uses needed tax revenue for upkeep and construction. Not only this, but the tax revenue recouped from a fast food joint and its gargantuan parking lot (minimum parking requirements) is going to be much lower than a shopping centre with minimal parking on the same footprint. An single underground car parking space alone costs several thousands of dollars - adding an immense cost to any new build that is just "presumed" in the midst of an extremely unaffordable standard life in Canada (I am an Architect, and so see this firsthand). It is an ethos of how we wish to design. If you design for the car first, you lose many of the elements that make a city livable for people on the street, as cars operate at a different scale of both size and speed than people. Not only this, but people do not generally interact in between cars, and if they do, it generally is not positive. Having people on foot or on bike means that we can interact as people were designed to. I am not against cars, but I am against short sighted thinking and scape goating. Bicycle infrastructure is needed as a choice in the tapestry of movement within a City. Subjecting its development to stringent government oversight will likely remove any incentive to build it, so too crippling ridership numbers (as bicycling is not safe or convenient if I cannot get from point a to b on infrastructure designed with the bicyclist in mind to any degree), and encouraging more people to continue using cars as the sole means of movement. Which means - more traffic. More justification to spend incessant amounts of tax money on "needed" highway or roadway infrastructure. Less people interacting with each other and their cities on the streets. And I would imagine, a much less healthy populace, and a healthcare system that continues to crumble under the weight of an increasingly unhealthy populace, that has little choice but to spend multiple hours of their day sat stagnant just to work. I disagree with many elements of this bill and hope it can be reformed. I find the language loaded and ignorant of what "could be", if we actually committed to making the Province more livable for people rather than wasting money tearing up what progress has been made. I know many do not want to, but look to countries like the Netherlands to see what has been, car-centric planning principles in the 60's and 70's leading to the death of many children in traffic, vs. now, some of the most livable and beautiful places to visit in the world. I hope you can reconsider, and I hope people can consider that there are different ways to design our cities. Traffic is very much a reality, but also a choice, if we choose to prioritize cars over people.