This bill is either…

This bill is either misguided or willfully not interested in reducing traffic gridlock, for the following reasons. The most efficient way of reducing traffic is to decrease the number of cars on the road. Removing bike lanes will push some of the people who currently commute and travel by bike to driving instead, counter-productively increasing the number of cars on the roads. Conversely, creating new and maintaining existing bike lanes increases the number of people choosing to cycle, convincing those who would otherwise be uncomfortable cycling in the city. This, again, decreases the total number of cars on the road, helping to alleviate gridlock. But perhaps worse, this bill does not consider the severely harmful effects that it will bring on if approved, besides being ineffective against its goal. Protected bike lanes save lives, safeguarding Toronto cyclist residents against the passing traffic or the traffic turning right. Just recently, a young woman was killed right in front of the ROM, on a cycling route I myself take regularly. It is incredibly distressing to me that the Province doesn't seem to care whether I, and thousands of others, would survive our commute to work. Importantly, bike lanes on Bloor and University that are proposed to be removed are ones of the few protected bike lanes in the city. Removing bike lanes will take away the only mode of transportation from and isolate many people, e.g. those disabled or from a lower economic class. Removing bike lanes will cost a whooping estimated $48M, money that could certainly be better spent on many pressing issues in our city. This expense would be in addition to the money spent building those bike lanes in the first place, and not that long ago, making that expenditure being absolutely in vain. Finally, removing bike lanes is in direct contradiction with all goals aimed at reducing the effects of climate change and reducing emissions. It would be an enormous mistake and a big step back to approve this bill and it would certainly be widely opposed and provoke an even bigger outrage than it already has.