I am a practicing…

I am a practicing professional transportation planner, road safety analyst and infrastructure designer who lives in Ottawa and practices all over Canada. The proposed requirement to obtain approval from the Ministry of Transportation before constructing new bike lanes that would reduce the number of lanes available for motor vehicle traffic is problematic for several reasons.

Undermining Local Autonomy
Firstly, the bill undermines local autonomy and expertise in transportation planning. Municipalities are best positioned to understand the unique needs and challenges of their communities. By centralizing the decision-making process, Bill 212 disregards the nuanced and context-specific knowledge that local planners bring to the table. This top-down approach could lead to decisions that do not adequately address local traffic patterns, safety concerns, or community preferences. Local governments have historically been responsible for making transportation decisions that reflect the specific needs of their residents, and this bill disrupts that balance.

Prioritizing Motor Vehicle Traffic
Secondly, Bill 212 prioritizes motor vehicle traffic over the safety and convenience of cyclists and pedestrians. The bill's emphasis on maintaining lanes for cars overlooks the benefits of bike lanes, which include improved safety for cyclists, reduced traffic congestion, and enhanced public health. Studies have shown that well-designed bike facilities can significantly reduce accidents and fatalities among cyclists. By making it more difficult to implement these bike lanes, the bill could discourage cycling, a sustainable and healthy mode of transportation. This is particularly concerning given the growing need for environmentally friendly transportation options to combat climate change.

Environmental Impact
Moreover, the bill's focus on reducing gridlock for cars fails to consider the broader benefits of bike lanes. Bike lanes can contribute to a more balanced and efficient transportation system by encouraging more people to cycle instead of drive. This shift can lead to reduced traffic congestion, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and improved air quality. In the context of the global climate crisis, promoting cycling and other forms of active transportation is more important than ever. Cities around the world, including in Ontario, are increasingly recognizing the importance of and reaping the benefits of creating inclusive and multi-modal transportation networks that accommodate cyclists, pedestrians, and public transit users.

Public Health and Quality of Life
Additionally, effective transportation planning should balance the needs of all road users, not just look at motorists. Bike lanes are not just about transportation; they are also about public health and quality of life. Encouraging cycling can lead to healthier lifestyles, reduced healthcare costs, and more vibrant communities. By making it harder to build bike lanes, Bill 212 could have negative repercussions for public health. Furthermore, bike lanes can enhance the livability of urban areas by reducing noise pollution, creating safer streets, and fostering a sense of community.

Economic Considerations
There are also economic considerations to take into account. Cities that invest in cycling infrastructure often see economic benefits, including increased property values, more vibrant local businesses, and reduced transportation costs for residents. By hindering the development of bike lanes, Bill 212 could stifle these economic opportunities. Moreover, the cost of maintaining roads for motor vehicles is significantly higher than for bike lanes, meaning that promoting cycling can lead to long-term savings for municipalities.

Conclusion
In summary, Bill 212 poses significant risks to local transportation planning, road safety, environmental sustainability, public health, and economic vitality. It represents a step backward in efforts to create safer, more sustainable, and more livable cities. It is essential to stop this legislation and advocate for policies that support comprehensive, inclusive transportation planning. By doing so, we can create communities that are not only more efficient and environmentally friendly but also healthier and more economically vibrant.