I strongly oppose Bill 212…

I strongly oppose Bill 212.

Whereas the stated purpose of this act is to reduce gridlock, it encourages bike lane removal and discourages adding bike lanes. Yet, bike lanes reduce congestion by providing another form of transportation, increasing the efficiency of transportation. As well, bicycles take up much less space per person, especially as the majority of personal vehicles used by commuters are single-occupancy vehicles (SOV).

Encouraging more SOV on the roads means more car parking lots and space will be needed at the endpoints of journeys, taking up more area when compared to bicycle parking. This has a knockon effect of further increasing congestion.

As the province lacks a coordinated plan for building a bike network, thorough mapping with a bike lane transportation coordinator, giving the province oversight of these matters is highly inefficient, as municipalities have this work under their purview. If, for example, the Ontario government decided to create a department for cycling infrastructure under the MTO whose goal was to maintain and coordinate all bike lane infrastructure in the province, that would be a different matter. However, I doubt that the current provincial government is interested in funding a new initiative based on past actions. In such a case, I oppose this bill and prefer that municipalities remain in charge of bike lane infrastructure.

I support bike lane infrastructure.

"Better cycling infrastructure was the number one controllable reason Canadians cited for not cycling more." (https://www.caa.ca/news/lack-of-proper-infrastructure-a-key-barrier-to-…)

Some may argue that we have weather that is less conducive to cycling than, say, European countries. But this is becoming less true over time. Everyone has noticed how we no longer wrap kids in snowsuits underneath their Halloween costumes. People are waiting later and later each year to put on their winter tires, and we're getting less and less snowfall in March and April. March break used to be a reliable time to go for 'the last good ski' and instead it's turning to the first week for a bike ride. With the cycling season ever-expanding, building more bike lanes makes sense.

Bike lanes also encourage short to medium trips, boosting local, small businesses. Cycling creates a more vibrant, local community with these shorter trips, rather than everyone flocking to the same few stretches of large stores that must be driven to (or take a long time to get to by walking, or taking public transit).

With the introduction of separated bike lanes, I have seen kids back out cycling, similar to how it was decades ago, as these kids can now safely make short trips on their own using the bike lanes. Without bike lanes, the roads are simply too fast and full of vehicles for all but the most experienced of cyclists. And, as cycling on sidewalks is illegal, dangerous (for pedestruans and cyclists), and uncomfortable, that is not a viable alternative.

There are many other reasons to support cycling infrastructure, such as reducing carbon emissions. Since emissions need to be reduced by 45% by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050 to meet the Paris Agreement (https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/net-zero-coalition), growing cycling infrastructure (not reducing it) is a logical step in bringing the province in line with this agreement as well as United Nations 'Sustainable Development Goal 13: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts' (https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/climate-change/).

There is more I could write, but I will wrap up my comments by re-stating that I strongly oppose Bill 212, with some reasons described in this comment.