This bill - when pertaining…

This bill - when pertaining specifically to bike lanes - does not follow the majority of the research and studies done that focus around the social and economic impact of bike lanes and cyclists. The bill wants to make it harder for municipalities to self govern and plans to upload those duties to the provincial government when deciding how to implement bike lanes if a traffic lane will be impacted. When bike lanes are added there is an economic increase in the surrounding businesses as it is much easier to hop off a bike and into a shop than it is to find parking and then find your way to the same shop. This also has the ability to take motor vehicles off the road to help reduce gridlock.

In a year (2024) where we have had more cyclist fatalities than the past three years combined (2021-2023), does it make sense to reduce or eliminate protected bike lanes and cycle tracks that separate not only cars and cyclists, but also cyclists and pedestrians. Allowing Ontarians to have options when deciding how they want to traverse the cities they live in.

Getting rid of bike lanes will just put bikes in the regular lanes and be a part of traffic causing more congestion as motor vehicles must give one meter space (measured from the extreme right of the motor vehicle to the extreme left of the bicycle) to pass safely according to the Highway Safety Act (Section 148 sub-section 6.1) which will turn the right most lane into a pseudo bicycle lane as cars would have to bob and weave around cyclists leading to increased potential for accidents with motor vehicles and cyclists but also motor vehicles and other motor vehicles.

As for the inclusion of the Highway 413 parts of the bill, they seem to be placed in there as the real reason for Bill 212 while the bike lane is deflecting and preying on the divide of cyclists, pedestrians, and motor vehicles to garner support. While at the same time allowing Highway 413 to be built with minimal restrictions including the lack of the democratic process outlined in Part II in the Environmental Bill of Rights "despite the proposal being a type of proposal for an instrument that is classified by a regulation made under that Act (Environmental Bill of Rights)." - Bill 212, Schedule 3, Section 13. Suppressing the voice of Ontarians and how they can shape their communities.

And, as I read this, this provision would allow unlimited expansion of Highway 413 and no part will require the Environmental Bill of Rights Part II to be recognized. Allowing no recourse for Ontarians to have their voices heard if Highway 413 gets extended and impacts more of the Greenbelt and farmland than what is outlined currently. Reducing farm land when the cost of living crisis including groceries does not help Ontarians support each other by buying from local farmers and Ontarians will be forced to shop at large grocery retailers that will have to bring in food from all over the world and creating gridlock in the way of trucks moving all of those goods from shipping yards to warehouses and then to grocery stores.