Commentaire
It is evident that this bill is being pushed through on the basis cruelty. Cyclists are being sacrificed, politically and physically, in order to appeal to drivers. Facts show that removing bike lanes, especially along the busiest bike corridors in Toronto, will objectively make traffic worse by (1) enticing some cyclists to switch to driving, putting more cars on the road, and (2) cause cyclists like myself to occupy the entire live lane of traffic at the 10-30 km/hour speed to the detriment of the drivers behind.
Bill 212 will pit drivers against cyclists and cause an uptick in violence and death. For example, a majority of Toronto hospital workers live nearby and use the University Avenue bike lane to get to work - they could be killed at any point by a distracted driver or an enraged driver.
Business Improvement Areas on Bloor, Yonge, and University all say that the instillation of bike lanes resulted in an uptick in revenue for businesses. Toronto Fire says that emergency times have not increased (in fact, cycle tracks can be used by emergency vehicles to bypass traffic as cyclists can more easily clear the way for them). The City of Toronto has also reported that the removal of bike lanes will only result in a marginal increase in traffic speeds.
Bike lanes objectively improve traffic by removing cars from the road - it is simple geometry. If reducing congestion was actually a priority, the TTC and GO could be greatly funded to remove slow zones, improve frequency, and fast track expansion.
I invite the premier across the street to the University of Toronto to actually talk to experts and explore the great amount of research that exists on bike lanes, their benefits, and how to actually "reduce gridlock and save you time".
Soumis le 14 novembre 2024 1:40 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
115537
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire