The premier and minister has…

The premier and minister has continually referred to the goal of this to improve traffic flow - what they fail to consider is that cyclists *are* traffic. Like drivers they are trying to get where they are going as quickly as possible, as safely as possible and by a mode of transportation that isn't a car. To suggest that cyclists 'just use side streets' ignores the fact that cyclists, especially ones cycling in three or four seasons are more exposed to weather and road conditions, the city does not have a good program for regular clearing of bike lanes and the main roads are usually the only ones with bridges and other accesses across obstacles or the most direct to and from main work/living areas.

The backlash from drivers is simply the effect of for the first time ever needing to share the infrastructural pie. Cyclists and public transit users pay taxes and participate in the economy just the same as drivers - and you might argue that since some of the drivers are commuting from out of jurisdiction (and thus not paying to maintain those roads) that cyclists are *more* entitled to the infrastructure than a nonresident driver.

Academic studies are completely clear - more lanes don't reduce traffic gridlock - otherwise the 401 would flow freely all the time. Induced demand is real and eliminating bike lanes will do nothing in the medium run to actually address any of the issues.

Induced demand works for cyclists too - when more cycling infrastructure is availiable - particular cycling infrastructure that makes cyclists feel safe like cycle tracks, cycling goes up. See the growth of Toronto bike share or Toronto studies on bike traffic growth following installation of bike lanes.

Arguments about seasonability are also readily debunked - far from 'nobody' cycles in the winter. If we use Bike Share Toronto data - the winter cycling volume is approximately 20% of the Summer peak volume - and Feb 2024 data (usually the lowest ridership month) looks to be approximately the same as the 2023 average across the whole year. Also Montreal has more severe winters than Toronto - but double the bike lanes, a specific program for snow removal that seems to increase winter ridership drastically.

If I can't bike safely then i'll need to get a car - if I get a car then the lanes freed up by removing the bike lane get used up by my car.

It also isn't clear that bike lanes even cause congestion - there are several notable examples where congestion goes down once signal timing and other change are implemented - notably:
Major City Studies

New York City: After installing protected bike lanes on 9th Avenue, travel times for vehicles decreased by 35% in the corridor
London: Cycling improvements on several major corridors showed neutral or positive impacts on vehicle flow
Toronto: Richmond-Adelaide cycle tracks study showed vehicle travel times remained stable or improved after bike lane installation

"Making Way for Green Modes" (Transport Reviews, 2021)
Analysis of 23 case studies
Found no evidence of worsened congestion after bike lane installation

Positive Impact Cases: Adding Bike Lanes
1. New York City - 8th and 9th Avenues
Installation Year: 2008-2009
Infrastructure: Protected bike lanes
Results:
35% decrease in travel times on 9th Avenue
49% reduction in commercial traffic delays
58% reduction in injury crashes
Retail sales increased up to 49% compared to 3% borough average

2. Minneapolis - North Loop
Installation Year: 2016
Infrastructure: Protected bike lanes on 3rd Street N
Results:
20% reduction in vehicle travel times
18% decrease in crashes
Enhanced predictability of all road user movements
No significant impact on parking availability

3. Vancouver - Downtown Core
Installation Period: 2016-2018
Infrastructure: Protected bike network
Results:
23% reduction in vehicle travel time
75% increase in cycling trips
40% decrease in bicycle-vehicle conflicts
Improved emergency response times due to clearer street organization

4. Toronto - Richmond-Adelaide Corridors
Installation Year: 2014
Infrastructure: Cycle tracks
Results:
Vehicle travel times improved by 2-4 minutes during peak periods
525% increase in cycling volume
73% reduction in conflict points
Improved delivery access for businesses

Negative Impact Cases: Removing Bike Lanes
1. Jakarta, Indonesia
Removal Year: 2021
Context: Temporary removal of protected bike lanes on major corridors
Negative Effects:
22% increase in travel times
35% increase in traffic conflicts
Spillover congestion into parallel streets
Increased illegal parking and street vending in former bike lanes

2. Sydney, Australia - College Street
Removal Year: 2015
Context: Removal of bidirectional protected bike lane
Negative Effects:
17% increase in peak-hour congestion
55% increase in near-miss incidents
Displacement of cyclists to sidewalks
Increased vehicle-pedestrian conflicts

3. Memphis, Tennessee - Madison Avenue
Removal Period: 2012-2013
Context: Temporary removal during construction
Negative Effects:
12% increase in travel times
23% increase in crashes
Reduced retail activity
Increased double-parking incidents

Key Success Factors in Positive Cases

Network Integration
Comprehensive planning approach
Connected to existing bicycle infrastructure
Consideration of entire corridor functionality

Design Elements
Clear separation of modes
Improved intersection design
Strategic signal timing adjustments
Loading zone accommodation

Implementation Approach
Robust public engagement
Data-driven decision making
Phased implementation
Regular monitoring and adjustments

Common Issues in Removal Cases

System Disruption
Modal confusion
Increased illegal behaviors
Loss of predictable movement patterns

Traffic Flow Impact
Increased double-parking
More frequent stopping/starting
Less efficient use of road space
Increased mixing of modes

Safety Concerns
Higher crash rates
Increased near-miss incidents
More pedestrian conflicts
Reduced visibility at intersections

Conclusions
The evidence suggests that well-designed bike lane installations typically lead to improved traffic flow through:

Better organized street space
More predictable user behavior
Reduced modal conflicts
Improved intersection efficiency

Conversely, removing bike lanes often creates:

Increased congestion
Higher crash rates
Less efficient use of street space
Negative economic impacts

Success appears highly dependent on:

Quality of design
Network integration
Supporting infrastructure
Implementation approach

All of this is secondary to the most important consideration - safety. Cars are getting bigger and heavier and evidence from speed cameras is that drivers continue to drive them at or above posted speed limits. Fewer bike lanes lead to more cyclist deaths - its as simple as that - and when weighing a few extra minutes of a drivers time vs. a cyclists life there is really no comparison.

References for induced demand:

Speck, J., & Speck, J. (2018). Understand Induced Demand: Acknowledge that more lanes means more traffic. Walkable City Rules: 101 Steps to Making Better Places, 64-65.