I write as an Ontarian and…

I write as an Ontarian and Torontonian who is concerned about the environmental, public health, safety, economic, and community impacts of Bill 212 and the “Framework for bike lanes that require removal of a traffic lane”. I urge the Ministry of Transportation to withdraw this irresponsible, misguided Bill in its entirety.

ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERNS

Active transportation, including cycling, is a key part of both the Province’s and the City of Toronto’s plans to meet their climate goals. Bill 212’s anti-bike lane framework is inconsistent with Ontario’s Climate Change Strategy, which notes that, at 35%, transportation emissions are the single-largest source of emissions in the province and acknowledges that “Ontario must transition as many existing drivers as possible to transit, cycling and walking.” The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report similarly highlights the importance of active transportation, including cycling, to reduce GHG emissions and improve health.

Not only does active transportation help reduce GHG emissions, it also helps reduce traffic-related air pollution. The City of Toronto has identified increasing active transportation as a key part of the City’s plans to reduce traffic-related air pollution – the largest source of air pollution emitted in Toronto.

The anti-bike lane framework is contrary to the Ministry of Transportation’s own Statement of Environmental Values, which states that the Ministry is focused on delivering specific priorities including:
• Promoting a multi-modal transportation network, including active transportation, that supports the efficient movement of goods and people.
• Promoting road safety and remaining one of the safest jurisdictions in North America.
• Integrating sustainability into the ministry’s decision making, programs, policies and operations.

Making it harder for municipalities to build bike lanes – and removing existing bike lane infrastructure – will increase reliance on motor vehicles which will increase GHG emissions and increase traffic-related air pollution.

The Ministry has offered no justification for acting with blatant disregard for its own Statement of Environmental Values and indeed demonstrates it has given no consideration to the environmental or public health impacts of this Bill whatsoever.

REDUCING MOBILITY OPTIONS AND INCREASING TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND GRIDLOCK

I live in Toronto with my family, which includes two children under the age of 5. We travel around the city by car, by bike, by transit, and on foot. About a year and a half ago, I started cycling as my primary mode of transportation around the city, because I found this was usually the most efficient mode of travel. My five-year-old also loves riding her bike, including biking to school. I am able to bike to school with her and then bike to work afterwards because of bike lanes on the major roads connecting our home, her school, and my office, including one of the bike lanes the Ministry wants to remove. Safe, protected bike lanes enable my family to make the efficient, healthy, environmentally friendly choice to travel by bike for some trips where otherwise we would likely need to rely on a car.

Removing the ability to travel safely by bicycle in Toronto removes choices for how to travel safely and efficiently around our growing city and will increase car trips, further increasing traffic congestion and gridlock.

SAFETY CONCERNS

The evidence is clear that protected bike lanes improve road safety for all road users – including cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers. Bike lanes are an essential part of the City of Toronto’s Vision Zero plan to improve road safety.

The anti-bike lane framework is harmful for all Ontarians, but especially for children. Children are the most vulnerable road users, and making roads less safe for children is inexcusable. As a parent, my greatest concern for the safety of my children is motor vehicle traffic. Every day, I see dangerous driving in my neighbourhood and across the city, from drivers who are careless, distracted, don’t understand the rules of the road or don’t think those rules should apply to them. The City is trying to make our roads safer and the Province is now trying to prevent them from doing so.

I will reiterate: bike lanes improve safety for all road users and they are a crucial part of Toronto’s attempts to make its roads safer. Preventing Toronto from expanding its safe cycling network, and removing existing safe cycling infrastructure, will make Toronto’s roads more dangerous and will lead to injuries and deaths of vulnerable road users.

ECONOMIC IMPACTS: RED TAPE, WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY, AND IMPACT ON SMALL BUSINESSES

The bureaucratic red tape and waste of time and money imposed by requiring municipalities to ask the Province for permission to install bike lanes on municipal roads is unconscionable. Further, ripping out existing, well-used, protected bike lanes in Toronto – without even the pretense of justifying this decision based on any evidence – is an egregious waste of taxpayer money. The City has estimated the cost of removing protected bike lanes on Bloor, Yonge and University at $48 million and the Province admits it has not even bothered to consider the costs of the bike lane removals. Whether the City or the Province ends up saddled with the costs of this wasteful project, it is the Ontario taxpayer who ultimately pays. The fiscal irresponsibility of this Bill is shocking.

Moreover, evidence shows bike lanes are good for the local economy, especially small businesses. The Bloor-Annex Business Improvement Association has collected evidence that shows that monthly customer spending and number of customers in the Bloor Annex increased after bike lanes were installed on Bloor Street. Removing bike lanes, and preventing the expansion of Toronto's bike lane network, will hurt small businesses.

NO EVIDENCE SUPPORTS THIS ANTI-BIKE LANE FRAMEWORK

The Ministry has not cited any evidence to support its bald assertion that reducing safe biking infrastructure would “reduce gridlock”. All available evidence – from the City of Toronto and municipalities worldwide, from transportation and planning experts, and from the Province’s own documents – demonstrates the precise opposite: that safe, protected cycling infrastructure is a key feature of a multi-modal transportation network that offers efficient travel options and reduces congestion and gridlock.

The Ministry has also offered no justification for prioritizing driving – the least efficient and environmentally friendly mode of transportation – over other modes of transportation. Why does the time and comfort of a person who chooses to travel by car matter more than a person who chooses to travel by foot, by bicycle, or by public transportation? Why does the Ministry want to prevent municipalities from considering the expertise of planners and engineers to design safe and efficient transportation systems that work well for the needs of the people who live there?

In summary, Bill 212 and the “Framework for bike lanes that require removal of a traffic lane” is an environmentally harmful, fiscally unsound proposal that will make transportation in cities like Toronto less efficient and less safe. It should be withdrawn in its entirety.