Commentaire
Removing bike lanes will generally not improve gridlock as it will push cyclists toward one of two likely outcomes:
(1) Cyclists will continue to use their bicycles on the road rather than within a dedicated bike lane, thereby slowing traffic and increasing the rate of vehicle-bicycle accidents.
(2) Cyclists will opt to drive vehicles, thereby increasing traffic and worsening gridlock. Note that this aligns with the principal of induced demand: as driving a vehicle is made easier, the roadways will fill with traffic until they are saturated.
My recommendation is to not proceed with this bill. Rather, the best long-term strategy for reducing gridlock is to reallocate funding to improve public transit. By making transit more available and accessible, you will reduce the number of vehicles on the road.
An alternative approach which has been employed in some cities around the world is to additionally make driving a car into a congested inner city more expensive; this can be done by charging tolls for vehicles entering/exiting specific zones, and by levying a tax on parking. This is unlikely to be a popular option, but it has the effect of pushing more people toward taking public transit. (Perhaps the funds procured in this manner could then be funneled into improving public transit and so forth.)
Soumis le 27 octobre 2024 9:47 AM
Commentaire sur
Projets de loi 212 – Loi de 2024 sur le désengorgement du réseau routier et le gain de temps - Cadre en matière de pistes cyclables nécessitant le retrait d’une voie de circulation.
Numéro du REO
019-9266
Identifiant (ID) du commentaire
107089
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire