To whom it may concern, The…

To whom it may concern,

The title of Bill 212 proposes that this bill is about "reducing gridlock" and "saving you time". Don't be fooled. This is about forcing people into cars and pandering to special interests, all the while interfering with municipal affairs to settle scores and make life miserable for local politicians and activists.

Most of us have experienced the frustration of being stuck in traffic, inching forward bit by bit while cyclists zip by in the bike lane. This is not the vision of freedom that car commercials promise. We're supposed to be conquering steep hills in the woods and burning rubber on the open road, right? Well, obviously the solution is to build a few more lanes and take more space away from cyclists and pedestrians, isn't it? NOPE.

Building more car infrastructure quickly bumps up against the problem of "induced demand" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand). The fact is, the more car infrastructure we build, the more car trips people are going to make, leading to more vehicle traffic. After a road widening, gridlock is only lessened for a short time at best, and traffic ends up being just as terrible, or potentially even worse than before within a short time (after significant cost to the taxpayer, one might add). In addition, the resulting multi-lane roadways end up being hostile to anyone outside of a vehicle, essentially forcing everyone to use a car even for short trips, which is one of the reasons for congestion in the first place.

Bill 212 aims to remove bike lanes that have already been installed in Toronto while slowing the construction of bike lanes in all of Ontario by requiring review by the Province whenever a bike lane takes any space away from cars. Cars just so happen to be one of the least space efficient means of transportation ever devised. If I were to bike up a main street with a 2 meter by 4 meter wooden frame attached to my bike, car drivers would be incensed. Why is it that we don't bat an eye when a massive SUV zips by with only one person in it, taking up excessive space on our roads? Trying to "fix" motor vehicle traffic by building one more lane (or by taking back lanes given over to more space-efficient alternatives) is a fool's errand.

The good news is that induced demand can be harnessed to promote other forms of transportation as well. If we build bike lanes, more people will feel safe leaving the car at home for their commute or to do errands around town. And in effect, this actually leads to less congestion in the vehicle lanes because every person cycling means there is ONE LESS CAR taking up space on the road.

In fact, our cities should be taking more motor vehicle lanes away from cars in favour of more space efficient forms of transportation such as cycling and public transit (dedicated buses can move up to about five times the number of people per hour in the same space as personal motor vehicles can, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passengers_per_hour_per_direction). Bill 212 would tie the hands of our Ontario municipalities and require them to lobby the provincial government for permission to do such things (which could rightly be considered government overreach, a concept that the provincial government claims to despise).

In the fight against gridlock, a wondrous corollary to induced demand is the idea that TRAFFIC FLOWS ONLY AS FAST AS THE BEST ALTERNATIVE MODE OF TRANSPORTATION (this is known as the Downs-Thomson paradox, https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RQY6WGOoYis). For example, if buses are given dedicated lanes and end up moving people faster than driving, then some (but not all) drivers will choose to take the bus, leading to freer flowing traffic for everyone. This equilibrium effect can be harnessed to improve the average speed of transportation around our cities when these more space efficient means of transportation are emphasized!

So, what should we do instead of enacting Bill 212? We should STOP this government overreach and let cities decide when and where to build their bike lanes. We should base our transportation planning on the best available science and prioritize the most space efficient modes of transportation such as walking, cycling, and public transit. We should reassure business owners that bike lanes and transit routes can actually INCREASE SALES, even when paired with the removal of vehicle lanes or on-street parking. And we should stop trying to pander to crony capitalists in Toronto, as well as the auto and fossil fuel industries by forcing everyone who wants to move around our cities to buy a car and fill it up with gas.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this misguided proposal.