The proposed framework under…

The proposed framework under Bill 212, which prioritizes vehicular traffic by potentially removing bike lanes in dense urban environments, is fundamentally misguided. Cities around the world—from Copenhagen to Bogotá—have demonstrated the immense benefits of prioritizing active transportation like cycling. Yet Ontario seems intent on ignoring decades of research and global best practices, clinging to outdated car-centric policies that exacerbate gridlock rather than solve it.

It is well-documented that adding more traffic lanes simply induces greater demand for cars, worsening congestion over time. Conversely, investing in bike infrastructure reduces traffic, improves air quality, and boosts local economies. Cities that commit to robust cycling networks experience healthier residents, safer streets, and fewer emissions—benefits that ripple across entire communities. Why, then, would Ontario regress by removing bike lanes in favor of car traffic, especially in dense urban areas where space is at a premium and public transit and cycling are far more efficient?

Prioritizing cars in cities undermines environmental goals, ignores the needs of non-drivers, and disregards the economic evidence that shows bike lanes generate more revenue for local businesses than car-dominated streets. Moreover, urban residents are increasingly calling for greener, safer, and more equitable transportation options—not wider roads filled with cars.

Bill 212 is a step backward. In a world grappling with climate change and urban sustainability challenges, doubling down on car-centric infrastructure is not only shortsighted but irresponsible. Ontario must recognize that the future of urban mobility lies in reducing our reliance on cars, not perpetuating it.