I strongly oppose Bill 212…

I strongly oppose Bill 212 and the proposal to remove dedicated bike lanes in an attempt to "speed up automobile flow." This measure undermines both local governance and practical urban planning. Here are my primary concerns:
1. Adding Red Tape and Bureaucracy: This bill oversteps provincial boundaries by requiring that new bike lanes receive provincial approval. Decisions about bike lanes should remain a municipal responsibility, free from excessive provincial red tape and bureaucracy. Adding this level of oversight does not serve the city's best interests or address its unique transportation needs.
2. Everyday Transportation: As someone who relies on bike lanes daily, I can attest to the safety and peace of mind they provide. They allow cyclists like me to travel safely, separate from high-speed car traffic, offering a vital transportation option.
3. Perspective as a Driver: When I’m behind the wheel, I appreciate having cyclists protected by dedicated lanes. Keeping bike traffic separate enhances road safety for all users and promotes smoother traffic flow. Removing bike lanes would put cyclists and drivers alike at increased risk.
4. Reducing Car Congestion: The real solution to reducing car traffic lies in offering reliable, fast, and safe alternatives to driving. Protected bike lanes provide exactly that, helping to decrease dependency on cars by encouraging cycling as a viable option for short and medium distances.
5. Last-Mile Connectivity: Bike lanes are essential for last-mile connections to transit hubs, enabling seamless travel between public transit and final destinations. Reducing bike lane infrastructure would directly impact this critical link and discourage transit use overall.
Bill 212’s focus is misguided; dedicated bike lanes are not an obstacle to better traffic flow—they are an essential part of a well-rounded, efficient, and sustainable transportation network.