While I will agree that…

While I will agree that reducing gridlock is an admirable goal, I am remained unconvinced that the measures proposed here would be effective and that the cost, fiscally and environmentally, would be greater than its return.

Concerning the push to build the 413, it is worthwhile examining the traffic situation in Los Angeles, where building more highways has only encouraged greater use of personal vehicles and resulted in greater congestion and gridlock. Comparatively, cities like Amsterdam or Washington D.C. that have developed reliable, affordable, and fast public transit systems, whether subways, light rail, or bus systems, have seen increased use of those systems and less personal vehicle traffic on their roadways. I also am very concerned about the proposal to exempt 413 lands from environmental assessment. These lands currently act as a natural floodplain and flood control measure, as well as being a carbon sink and an important habitat for native plants and animals. As we've seen this past year, flooding in the greater Toronto area is a growing concern, and developing these lands could have long term implications on this front. Seventy years ago devastating flooding from Hurricane Hazel washed away entire neighbourhoods that been built in floodplains and water shed areas. This catastrophic event led to major reforms in how and where development happened in Toronto, including the creation of greenbelts, and better protections for watersheds and riverways. Removing or even bypassing systems that were put in place to prevent another such event seems shortsighted and potentially dangerous.

I also have difficulty understanding why bike lanes are such a major traffic issue in Ontario that the province should need to micromanage municipalities over the installation of these bike lanes. How much actual benefit is there in taking this responsibility away from a group (the municipality) that holds close interest in creating a community that is thriving on multiple levels and that is keenly aware that community's unique challenges and needs be? And giving that responsibility to persons who are not intimately connected with that community will lead either to a one-size-fits-all approach or to unnecessary costs and delays in development simply due to unfamiliarity with the needs of that particular community. It's also worthwhile taking into account the many well proven benefits of having communities that are designed to be walkable and/or bikeable. Not only does it encourage healthier lifestyles (reducing load on our healthcare system), but it also removes cars from our congested roads.

In short, based on these particular concerns, I am strongly opposed to Bill 212 and I urge our provincial government to reconsider these proposals.