I am writing to express…

I am writing to express strong opposition to Bill 60, the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act. The Bill would prohibit municipalities from reallocating road space for cycling infrastructure and other non-automobile uses. This approach contradicts decades of transportation research in Ontario, across Canada, and internationally.

Evidence based transportation planning consistently shows that the only effective way to reduce congestion is to provide viable alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles. Studies from Metrolinx, Toronto Public Health, and multiple Ontario municipalities show that shifting even a small percentage of trips to walking, cycling, and transit significantly reduces traffic congestion, improves safety, and lowers transportation costs for households. Research from jurisdictions such as the Netherlands, Denmark, and several United States cities demonstrates that protected cycling infrastructure increases mode share, reduces collisions, and improves travel times for people who continue to drive.

Favouring car traffic does not reduce congestion. It increases it. Toronto already has some of the worst gridlock in North America. Preventing municipalities from expanding viable non-car options will force more residents into cars, which will worsen congestion for everyone, including drivers.

Bill 60 also represents an inappropriate overreach into municipal authority. Municipal governments are best placed to understand local needs, land use patterns, demographic realities, and safety priorities. A province-wide prohibition on reallocating road space imposes a one-size-fits-all policy that is neither effective nor responsive to the residents who rely on municipal governments to plan safe and accessible streets.

Equity concerns are also central. Many Ontario residents, including myself, choose not to own a car because of cost, sustainability goals, or disability related needs. Many autistic people and other disabled residents rely on walking or cycling because cars and public transit can be inaccessible or overwhelming. Car-dependent policies exclude these residents from safe mobility and limit their participation in community life. Cycling infrastructure is one of the most cost-effective ways to provide equitable transportation access.

Environmental and health evidence is equally clear. Reducing car dependency improves air quality, supports climate commitments, and increases opportunities for daily physical activity. These benefits reduce health system costs and contribute to more livable, resilient communities.

Bill 60 would block planned projects such as Parkside Drive, Dupont Street, and the Danforth Avenue extension, each of which has undergone public consultation and technical review. These projects are essential for safety, mobility, and climate goals. The broad wording in the Bill could also prevent bus priority lanes, school streets, patios, and other public realm improvements that make communities healthier and more economically vibrant.

The evidence is not ambiguous. Favouring car traffic produces more car traffic. Restricting municipalities from reallocating street space will make congestion worse, reduce safety for all road users, and undermine long-term sustainability. The proposed policies are regressive and contradict the entire body of contemporary urban planning research.

I urge the Government of Ontario to withdraw the sections of Bill 60 that restrict municipalities from reallocating road space and to permit evidence based, locally informed transportation planning to continue.

Thank you for considering this comment.