Comment
I use the bike lanes in Toronto every day. I remember cycling the same routes before bike lanes were added, and I feel much safer in a separated bike lane than I do taking the lane.
I disagree profoundly with this Bill. There is no evidence that it will do what it purports to do (that is, get cars moving more efficiently). Cycling is by far the most efficient way to travel around the city of Toronto, and easing traffic congestion is about giving people more transportation options, not fewer. Much has been made of the fact that bikes frequently represent fewer cars on the road; this point obscures the truth that many of us cannot now, nor have ever been able to, afford to run and park a car in the city (especially now that cost-of-living increases over the past few years are biting hard.) Cyclists are more vulnerable than drivers when travelling (we're not encased in mobile steel boxes) and we need and deserve the protection that bike lane infrastructure affords.
Cycling is good for the environment, good for public and personal health, and good for local businesses, whether they rely on foot traffic or bike delivery services.
Furthermore, Bill 212 represents significant provincial overreach and ignores the fact that municipalities are in a far better position to determine the needs of the people who reside in them. On November 14, 2024, Toronto City Council passed a motion expressing opposition to "proposed amendments to Part XII of the Highway Traffic Act contained in Bill 212, and any related proposed regulations, both of which contradict the stated purpose of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, to allow the City to determine what is in the public interest of the city."
Submitted November 19, 2024 5:20 PM
Comment on
Bill 212 - Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act, 2024 - Framework for bike lanes that require removal of a traffic lane.
ERO number
019-9266
Comment ID
118283
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status