There are several major…

There are several major items that challenging with this proposed legislation that I disagree with and strongly recommend the Government take the time to consider in its drafting.

1. This proposal will increase congestion. Per the Bill's name "Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time" the proposal to remove existing infrastructure will fail to accomplish this, both for the numerous commuters who use the bike infrastructure AND the vehicle drivers who will be forced to wait through unnecessary construction for the removal. If this was a framework to consider where new bike lanes are placed that may work, but the premise that this will remove is like filling in a subway because the neighbours don't like the colour of the station. If the Province is committed to reducing congestion it should be focusing less on streets in the City of Toronto and more on wider transportation and economic linkages in the surrounding 905 that fuel a congested commute. The Gardiner and major arterials that are the source of congestion; the airport economic zone where traffic routinely standstill. If the Province is committed to building an urban area that is world class why is it trying to fix 'congestion' on Bloor where there has been little discernable impact to commute times pre/post bike lanes.

2. Use of resources. It is a significant waste of tax-payer dollars in removing existing, well-used, safety improving transportation infrastructure while it is trying to advance a transportation infrastructure plan writ large. If the Province believes subways will be more successful with more unrestricted drivers on the road it need only look at the increase in stunt driving, reckless driving on the Gardiner and highways, increased traffic-caused fatalities, and driving vandalism to municipal speed cameras as evidence. Creating linkages for people who do not drive to access transit improves transit.

3. Safety. Removal (even proposed) demonstrates that this Government does not value or care for the safety of the average citizen. Bike lanes have been shown beyond all doubt to improve the safety of residents/commuters who use them. This is especially true for children - the lane is safe for their use as well as a buffer from moving traffic. Replacing the lanes with parking even does not improve safety. Following through with removal is a clear sign that the Ministries of Transportation and Infrastructure, as well as the PMO, have lost the plot on their mandates and need to protect citizens.

4. Livability and affordability. Bike lanes provide a cost-effective, safe means of travel for individuals who cannot afford a car. In a time where the Province has not made housing available, has not created new transportation linkages, and is instead focusing on taking away a commuting/economic connectivity option it is a narrow and short-sighted plan.

This framework demonstrates a short-sightedness that requires it be rethought and reexamined. If there is no clear cost estimate, safety consideration, or consideration for its immediate construction impacts it fails all tests for good legislation. The majority of people impacted by this are not car-commuters along bike paths. The majority are users of this infrastructure who are being left-behind by an outdated, car-centric, Government who with the same breath is preaching affordability/transit/livability. Real facts and evidence is not "hogwash". Without it this is a bad business deal for the whole Province.