Commentaire
Hello,
I recently learned about the proposed Bill 212, and I am strongly in favour of it for two key reasons.
For years, I relied on transit and cycling for local travel, only using my car for longer trips. However, this changed when I became a father. My children attend two different schools with similar start times, which also coincide with my work hours. Taking transit for these cross-town trips would add an entire hour to my commute, making it 1.5 hours in total, whereas I can complete the same route by car in about 20 minutes. However, when vehicle lanes were removed to add a bike lane, this trip went from one of consistent speed with few stops to several areas of stop-and-go traffic. What also concerns me is that in these high-congestion areas, there are more instances of pedestrians crossing between stopped vehicles, making these spaces feel less safe (as I’ve observed in Hamilton).
Additionally, most bike routes I encounter seem to be designed for experienced cyclists like myself, rather than for children. In several locations with new bike infrastructure, I find myself having my kids ride on the sidewalk because many of the designs are too complex for young riders. Features like lane neck-downs often push cars into the bike lane or cyclists into the car lane, creating risky situations. Many designs require concentration, yet when in motion, road features should allow for quick, intuitive decisions.
I feel that some bike advocacy groups take an overly anti-car stance. I am pro-bike and support expanding bike infrastructure, but I also recognize the many situations where people genuinely need a car. This includes parents like myself, as well as individuals with physical disabilities who rely on assistive devices in their vehicles, making transit challenging and cycling unfeasible. I support adding bike infrastructure, but not if it penalizes those who need a car to get around.
Furthermore, cycling cannot be considered a sustainable mode of transport if it creates congestion. Bill 212 is well-aligned with the need to ensure genuine equity and to make certain that sustainable travel methods are not inadvertently worsening congestion and emissions.
I fully support expanding our infrastructure, but when congestion builds, it doesn't make families like mine suddenly decide to ride the bike or bus- it only pushes otherwise patient drivers to make decisions out of frustration, often cutting through neighbourhood streets. This creates additional hazards for families like mine who are cycling to parks or schools. Bill 212 will help prevent this from continuing.
Thank you for considering this perspective.
Soumis le 28 octobre 2024 9:02 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
107386
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire