RE: Bill 212 – An Act to…

RE: Bill 212 – An Act to enact two Acts and amend various Acts with respect to highways,
broadband-related expropriation, and other transportation-related matters (“Reducing
Gridlock, Saving You Time Act”)

I am writing to request the reconsideration of Bill 212. My concerns relate to the provincial
oversight and restrictions on the installation of cycling infrastructure (i.e., bike lanes). There are
five areas of benefit that bike lanes provide: (1) improved safety for all road users 1 (including
decreased dooring collisions, sideswipe, and rear end collisions) 2 , (2) increased economic
outcomes for local businesses 3 and governments 4 , (3) reduced greenhouse gas emissions 5 , (4)
decreased access gap for equity-seeking populations 6 , and (5) improved physical and mental
health. 7 I will now focus on the health, equity, and safety implications of providing protected
bike lanes.

First, physical activity is a key factor in reducing numerous chronic health conditions and
improving individuals’ mental wellbeing. 8 , 9 Physical activity, such as through active
transportation – walking, cycling, or other active modes of travel – is an effective way to meet
the 24-hour movement guidelines that show increases to health, well-being, and fitness.
Specifically, bike lanes can increase the total distance traveled by cyclists and the overall
ridership of residents. 10 By replacing some car trips with cycling, research indicates that people
can gain an additional nine life-years. 11 Moreover, by not incorporating physical activity into
Canadians’ lifestyles, the healthcare system is estimated to spend $6.8 billion per year due to
the impact physical inactivity has on chronic diseases. 7

Second, prioritizing private vehicle use disproportionately impacts equity-deserving populations
such as racialized persons, people living on low incomes, persons with disabilities, women, and
Indigenous peoples. For example, lower income neighbourhoods have historically been poorly
designed with increased safety and health risks. However, when active transportation is
included into the neighbourhood design (i.e., sidewalks, bike lanes, public transit, roadways)
social and health inequities are reduced. 6 Given transportation options, individuals can select
the affordable and safe travel mode to participate in the workforce, access grocery stores,
recreational facilities, and healthcare services. 12 This research is not unique as researchers and
governments globally have identified that high-quality multi-modal infrastructure increases the
use of active transportation, and its’ associated social and health benefits. 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 Additionally,
when individuals have affordable transportation options, they have more money to spend on
necessities such as food and rent, or extras such as goods from local business. 7

Third, safety of all roadway users increases with the installation of bike lanes. As outlined by the
Canadian Paediatric Society 17 , cycling infrastructure that is well-connected (‘cycle tracks’) has a
halo effect where collisions involving motorists, pedestrians, and cyclists decreased in a 500m
surrounding area. Additionally, protected bike lanes are the safest option for all roadway users
compared to painted lines, protected right of ways, and elevated lanes. 18

High-quality active transportation infrastructure leads to more people walking and cycling.
Active travel has many proven physical and mental health benefits and impacts chronic disease
prevalence. These investments need to be distributed equitably so that every community
member can enjoy the benefits of active transportation.

It is important to know that:

-Mayor Chow and Toronto City Council formally expressed their opposition to Bill 212, and asked the province to withdraw the proposed amendments and work collaboratively with cities to address congestion and road safety.

-Association of Municipalities of Ontario, Ontario Professional Planners Institute, Ontario Society of Professional Engineers, and Ontario Traffic Council have all come out against Bill 212?
120 physicians and researchers wrote a joint letter opposing Bill 212.

-The words “safety” and “health” do not appear anywhere in the bike lane sections of Bill 212, and the only consideration to approve or remove bike lanes would be “the orderly movement of motor vehicle traffic."

-It is false that only 1.2% of people bike to work in Toronto, and according to the province’s still confidential data nearly 10% of all trips in the city that end in downtown Toronto are taken by bike or other micromobility vehicle.

For bike lanes on Bloor, University, and Yonge, there are no feasible parallel alternate routes that wouldn’t also result in the conversion of motor vehicle lanes.

-The estimated financial impact is $48 million in additional costs to provincial taxpayers for the removal of bike lanes on Bloor, University, and Yonge.

Please, for the sake of financial, environmental, health and equity well-being of Ontarians, abolish this bill.

1 Ministry of Transportation Ontario. (2022). Ontario road safety annual report. Road Safety Research Office, Safety Policy, and Education Branch.
2 City of Toronto. (2017). Bloor Street West Bike Lane Pilot Project Evaluation.
3 Arancibia, D., Farber, S., Savan, B., Verlinden, Y., Smith Lea, N., Allen, J., & Vernich, L. (2019). Measuring the Local Economic Impacts of Replacing On-Street Parking with Bike Lanes: A Toronto (Canada) Case Study. Journal of the American Planning Association, 85(4), 463–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2019.1638816.
4 Transport Canada. (2011). Active Transportation in Canada. A resource and planning guide.
5 Sallis, J.R., Spoon, C., Cavill, N., et al. (2015). Co-benefits of designing communities for active living: an exploration of literature. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 12, 30.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0188-2.
6 Rothman, L., Cloutier. M-S., Manaugh, K., Howard, A.W., Macpherson, A.K., Macarthur, C. (2020). Spatial distribution of roadway environment features related to child pedestrian safety by census tract income in Toronto, Canada. Injury Prevention, 26(3), 229-233. https://doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2018-043125.
7 Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE). (2021). Active Travel Background Document.
8 Bingham, P.B. (2009). Physical activity and mental health literature review. Minding Our Bodies.
9 Hamer, M. & Chida, Y. (2008). Active commuting and cardiovascular risk: A meta-analytic review. Preventive medicine, 46. 9-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.03.006.
10 Pedroso, F. E., Angriman, F., Bellows, A. L., & Taylor, K. (2016). Bicycle Use and Cyclist Safety Following Boston's Bicycle Infrastructure Expansion, 2009-2012. American journal of public health, 106(12), 2171–2177.
https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2016.303454.
11 Daniel, K. & Perrotta, K. (March 2017). Prescribing Active Travel for Healthy People and a Healthy Planet: A Toolkit for Health Professionals. Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE).
12 Laberee, K, Zanotto, M., Funk, A., Kirk, S. F. L., Moore, S. A., & Winters, M. (2023). All Ages and Abilities: exploring the language of municipal cycling policies. Urban, Planning and Transport Research, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2023.2264365.
13 Buehler, R. & Dill, J. (2015). Bikeway networks: A review of effects on cycling. Transport Reviews, 36(1), 9-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2015.1069908
14 Pucher, J., & Buehler, R. (2021). Cycling for Sustainable Cities (pp. 20-27). MIT Press.
https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262542029/cycling-for-sustainable-cities/
15 Buehler, J. & Pucher, J. (2012). Cycling to work in 90 large American cities: New evidence on the role of bike paths and lanes, Transportation, 39(2), pp. 409-432. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11116-011-9355-8
16 Graystone, M., Mitra, R., & Hess, P. M. (2022). Gendered perceptions of cycling safety and on-street bicycle infrastructure: bridging the gap. Transportation research part D: transport and environment, 105, 103237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103237
17 Canadian Paediatric Society. (2024). Improving cycling safety for children and youth. Paediatric Child Health, 29(5), 324-328. https://doi.org/10.1093/pch/pxae035.
18 Cicchino, J. B., McCarthy, M. L., Newgard, C. D., Wall, S. P., DiMaggio, C. J., Kulie, P. E., Arnold, B. N., & Zuby, D. S. (2020). Not all protected bike lanes are the same: Infrastructure and risk of cyclist collisions and falls leading to emergency department visits in three U.S. cities. Accident; analysis and prevention, 141, 105490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105490.