I am writing to express my…

I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed legislation that would require municipalities to seek provincial approval before implementing new bicycle lanes that remove existing traffic lanes. While I understand the intent of this proposal is to address gridlock and improve traffic flow for drivers, I believe it fails to consider the broader, long-term benefits of cycling infrastructure, public health, and sustainability, which are essential for the future of Ontario’s urban environments. I urge you to reconsider or modify aspects of this framework in order to ensure that Ontario’s transportation future is both equitable and sustainable.

1. Striking a Balance Between All Modes of Transportation
The premise that removing bike lanes to make room for more car lanes will alleviate gridlock and improve travel times is short-sighted. It overlooks the fact that gridlock is often a result of an over-reliance on single-occupancy vehicles, which contribute to traffic congestion, air pollution, and reduced quality of life for all residents. Cars will always be a part of transportation infrastructure but other modes of transport such as cycling are also essential and can work in tandem with cars to best serve our communities. Each of these modes of infrastructure transport deserve their own and by investing in things such as bike lanes, we can reduce the number of cars on the road, improve overall traffic flow, and make our cities more livable for everyone. Prioritizing cars over cycling infrastructure sends the wrong message at a time when many Ontarians are looking for cleaner, more efficient alternatives to driving.

2. Prioritizing Road Safety for All Users
The removal of bike lanes, especially on busy streets like Bloor Street, Yonge Street, and University Avenue, would undermine road safety for all users—cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers alike. Bike lanes are essential in reducing the risk of accidents by providing dedicated, protected spaces for cyclists. Without these lanes, cyclists are forced to share the road with motor vehicles, which increases the likelihood of dangerous interactions. Studies show that cities with well-designed cycling infrastructure, including protected bike lanes, experience fewer cyclist injuries and fatalities.

Removing bike lanes would not only make cycling more dangerous, but it could also compromise the safety of pedestrians and drivers. When cyclists are forced to ride in vehicle lanes, both cyclists and drivers must navigate around each other, leading to increased tensions and a higher risk of collisions. By keeping and expanding bike lanes, we create safer streets for everyone, including drivers who are less likely to encounter cyclists in the same lanes of traffic, and pedestrians who benefit from fewer vehicles on the road.

Rather than removing bike lanes, the focus should be on creating more safe, integrated transportation networks that prioritize safety for all road users. This includes adding infrastructure that accommodates cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers, rather than favoring one group at the expense of others. By improving road safety through bike lanes, we encourage active transportation while also reducing the strain on emergency services, hospitals, and the healthcare system.

3. Impact on Local Communities and Businesses
Bike lanes are not only an asset for cyclists—they are an economic driver for local communities. Studies have shown that areas with well-designed cycling infrastructure see increased foot traffic and higher sales for businesses as highlighted by the Bloor-Annex BIA data around increased customers and revenue since the bike lane installation. Removing bike lanes from streets like Bloor Street, Yonge Street, and University Avenue could harm these local economies by reducing accessibility for cyclists, many of whom stop at shops and cafes along the way. Encouraging more people to cycle rather than drive also helps reduce the need for expensive parking infrastructure, which is often a significant burden for businesses and municipalities alike.

4. The Importance of Long-Term Planning
The proposed framework fails to recognize the long-term, strategic benefits of cycling infrastructure. In cities around the world, from Copenhagen to Portland, investment in cycling infrastructure has not only improved mobility but has also helped cities become more resilient to climate change, reduced urban heat island effects, and supported a higher quality of life. Rather than dismantling bike lanes, Ontario should be looking for ways to expand and improve them to support a growing population that will require more sustainable transportation options. This is especially true in Toronto, which continues to see population growth and increased density. We must invest in future-proof infrastructure that encourages people to use public transportation, walk, and bike, rather than maintaining an over-reliance on cars.

5. Local Autonomy and Consultation
The decision to remove bike lanes should not rest with the province and overstepping into municipal jurisdiction only serves to add red tape and bureaucracy to an already complicated process. Municipalities are best positioned to assess local needs and determine the most effective solutions for their unique transportation challenges. Local consultation, including input from cyclists, residents, and businesses, should be at the heart of decisions about cycling infrastructure. By imposing top-down regulations without robust local consultation, the province risks undermining trust in the decision-making process and ignoring the needs of those who rely on these bike lanes as an integral part of their daily lives.

6. Lack of Consideration for the Future of Transportation
This legislation overlooks emerging trends in transportation and urban planning. Many cities worldwide are moving toward "15-minute neighborhoods" where essential services, including transportation options, are accessible within a short walk or bike ride. In Ontario, expanding bike lanes is part of a broader vision for more connected, sustainable, and resilient cities. By discouraging the development of bike infrastructure, this legislation could limit Ontario’s ability to modernize its transportation systems and meet the mobility needs of future generations.

Conclusion
While the intent behind the proposed legislation to remove bike lanes may be to reduce traffic congestion, I believe that a more comprehensive and forward-thinking approach is needed. Rather than dismantling bike lanes, Ontario should be looking at ways to integrate cycling infrastructure into a multi-modal transportation system that provides residents with more sustainable, affordable, and healthy options for getting around. I urge you to reconsider this proposal and focus on solutions that will benefit all Ontarians, both today and in the future.