I write to express vehement…

I write to express vehement opposition to the proposed amendment to the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) under Bill 60, which would bar municipalities from reducing vehicle traffic lanes when installing new bicycle lanes.
Environmental Registry of Ontario

This move is reckless, irresponsible and utterly out of step with the urgent safety needs of cyclists, pedestrians and communities across Ontario.

1. Bike lanes are essential for safety.
Countless studies show that protected bike lanes and reduced vehicle lanes significantly lower collisions, injuries and fatalities for vulnerable road users. By removing the ability for municipalities to repurpose vehicular lanes into dedicated space for bikes, this amendment strips local governments of a critical tool to make streets safe.
To privilege uninterrupted car lanes over dedicated safe space for bike riders is to send a message that the lives of cyclists and pedestrians matter less.

2. The government is favouring dangerous driving.
By mandating that vehicle traffic lanes cannot be reduced, the provincial government is privileging higher vehicle speeds, greater traffic volume, and more aggressive driving behaviour. All of these are directly correlated with increased risk to non-motorized road users. Instead of curbing the danger, the province is doubling down on vehicular dominance.
This is especially egregious given urban streets and neighbourhoods where car-centric infrastructure has already caused disproportionate harm.

3. Municipalities know their local context best.
Local governments understand the unique layouts, traffic patterns and pedestrian/cyclist needs of their communities. To tie their hands with a blanket prohibition is anti-democratic and counterproductive. Municipalities must retain flexibility to adapt roads for the safety and mobility needs of everyone—not just motorists.

4. The framing of “keeping people and goods moving” ignores other road users and sustainability.
The proposal claims that the purpose is to “keep people and goods moving by creating more capacity on roads for vehicles and drivers”.
Environmental Registry of Ontario
This framing is deeply flawed: roads are not just for cars. They are shared public spaces. Prioritizing vehicles over people undermines equitable access, livability, healthy transportation and greenhouse-gas reduction goals.

5. The stakes are real.
Every time a city or town loses the ability to install or expand a bike lane—especially one that would require reducing vehicle lanes—it means someone’s safety is compromised. It means parents are less likely to let children ride to school, pedestrians feel less safe crossing streets, and active transportation becomes less viable.
And in a time when municipalities are rightly trying to reduce traffic volumes, promote cycling and walking, and improve the quality of life for residents, the province is pushing in the opposite direction.

6. This is not about “anti-car” politics—it’s about balance and safety.
No one is advocating for banning cars. But roads are finite public assets and the choice to allocate wide lanes solely to vehicles ignores the fact that bikes and pedestrians also need safe, separated space. The proposed regulatory change tilts the field so heavily toward motorists that it virtually forces all other users onto unsafe margins.

In summary:
This proposed amendment is a deliberate step by the provincial government to favour unsafe driving conditions, ignore the real safety needs of cyclists and pedestrians, and reduce the ability of municipalities to act in the best interest of their communities. I strongly urge you to reject this amendment, or at the very least to include robust exemptions and allow for lane-reductions for bike lanes where local councils deem it necessary for safety.

Thank you for your consideration.