Commentaire
I write as a citizen in my mid-60s who still regularly cycles, and who has been promoting cycling in my city for the past four decades. This has included forming a bicycle user group ("BUG") at my former large high-tech workplace and serving on the board of our local non-profit cycling advocacy organization.
The proposed Ontario Bill 212 represents a very short-sighted and risky direction for the future of people in Ontario's municipalities and in the world in general. By short-sighted, it puts the emphasis on the motor vehicle over a more sustainable means to travel--the bicycle. We have to put walking, transit and cycling above private auto transportation if there is to be any hope of blunting the effect of global warming and checking urban sprawl. The provincial government should thus be greatly increasing the funding of sustainable modes rather than wasting our tax dollars to rip up Toronto cycling infrastructure. Similarly, municipalities should be able to decide for themselves what to do with their road networks.
The proposed legislation is risky not only in what it could mean for our environment but also in how it jeopardizes personal safety for me and others who choose to cycle. Utilitarian cycling needs to be promoted, and that means replacing a car trip to do shopping and errands, and not just for commuting. If one cannot cycle safely to a business on a major street, which could be the result of Bill 212 in my own city--and is sure to be an outcome for several roads with bike lanes in Toronto--then how can we get people to leave the car at home? Of course, not everyone has a car, which leads to my next point.
Some Ontarians depend on cycling to get around, as they cannot afford a car. They may not even have the means to pay for transit. Equity is important. They still should have a right to safe mobility to destinations beyond the range of walking. Many of those destinations (shops, banks, libraries, community centres,...) would be situated on a thoroughfare such as a Yonge Street or a Bloor West.
Cities are still developing their cycling networks. There will naturally be gaps in the early stages, which limit the uptake in use until more of those networks are built out. You also cannot assume that future demand is not there if a bike lane looks empty at a certain time of the day.
In summary, this Bill is misdirected and regressive. It induces demand for more driving, just as recent Ontario changes made it easier and free to renew a plate sticker and now faster speeding is permitted on 400-series highways. Cycling is one of the solutions to gridlock. Invest in it! For sure, there is a need for motor vehicles to be used for specific tasks within cities. However, a large proportion of the auto traffic circulating at peak periods is composed of single-occupant private vehicles. More car lanes invite more cars.
Let municipalities roll out their transportation plans in the manner that recognizes sustainability and equity.
Soumis le 18 novembre 2024 10:45 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
116746
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire