Naming this Bill "Reducing…

Naming this Bill "Reducing Gridlock" and the subtext that this is about bike lanes is a clear bait and switch situation. Nothing in this bill will do anything to improve traffic flow, and will only add years of construction, at a cost of billions, which will only serve to add MORE gridlock and car congestion for the foreseeable future, at the cost of everyone in the province, including those who don't/can't drive.

In regards to Schedule 1 to 3:
The Province seems to want to fast track 'Priority projects' which are mainly more highways, while adding exemptions for potential development on Greenbelt land. Adding these open ended exemptions from Environmental Assessment is shady business!

Schedule 1 outlines building broadband, which suggests that highway 413 will be tolled, and we know from the 407, with its 99 year lease, that this cost to taxpayers was a BAD DEAL! This will not give anything back to the province, only developers will profit from this. Giving the province these exemptions is very worrying tactic, as the Province will be able to call anything they want a 'Priority project' in the future, with these exemptions already in place. These 'Priority projects' will do nothing to serve people struggling in our cities, people who don't/can't drive. Adding more concrete and removing green land will only exacerbate the climate emergency, which is what Environmental Assessment aims to protect. We don't need another toll highway!

Regarding Schedule 4:
The fact that this is a very small section, and has been tacked onto the title, seemingly only serves to get people divided, pitting drivers against people who cycle, and distracting from the serious consequences of Schedules 1-3.

We know from MANY global studies (one recent one linked below) that adding more lanes on roads/highways will do nothing to improve traffic, it will only just get more people in cars to fill those extra lanes. This will also dissuade the huge uptick of new people on bikes that these new lanes have encouraged to cycle, who will now go back to their cars. Not to mention confident cyclists who will now need to 'take the lane' for their own safety.

Our city streets are already congested as is, and removing bike lanes will come at an unnecessary cost to the city (48 million estimated for Toronto), and will also add gridlock by closing lanes for road work. This city is much more than drivers and cyclists, many of us don't/can't drive, we take transit, and/or walk in our walkable neighborhoods. Removing bike lanes will only serve to make our roads less safe for vulnerable road users, and cost small businesses their foot traffic. Reducing car dependency should be the priority, not getting more people in cars, which is what's causing traffic.

This past weekend we had a day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims, and unfortunately this is all due to the prioritization of cars. Fatalities in our city are at record numbers, especially for people on bikes. More bikes on the roads means less people in cars. Bike lanes make our roads safer for EVERYONE, including pedestrians and people on mobility devices, some who also use bike lanes, who are safer with less cars at slower speeds. Walking and cycling, when possible, are better for our environment, our health, and it would serve everyone in our communities if we can feel safe when choosing these alternatives.

In conclusion, I believe that prioritizing highways (especially tolled), and exempting Environmental Assessment, does not serve our cities, who overwhelmingly are asking for transit improvements, and safer streets. Road infrastructure decisions should remain in the hands of municipalities and city councils, who understand their streets best because we live here, have access to the latest local data, personally know people who have been affected by road violence, and that our streets will not feel safer for vulnerable road users, and those who choose cleaner/better alternative forms of transportations.

Thank you.