This bill is dangerous and I…

Commentaire

This bill is dangerous and I don't believe it is based in actual data. Many studies - and actual experiences in other cities - have shown that bike lanes actually reduce congestion, because they provide an alternative to cars. I am ceratin that other commenters have linked to these data. An effective approach to reducing gridlock in Ontario would be improvements to public transit, so that people can choose not to take a car. Particularly in Ottawa, where I live, I have seen people revert to using a car because they can't trust the transit system to be on time and reliable. This is something that could be fixed: a lot of people would prefer to be on a bus or train but just can't afford the uncertainty. Fixing that system would reduce gridlock far more than removing a bike lane.

Bike lanes also save lives, by reducing the conflicts between cars and bikes. As a cyclist is allowed to take the full lane if it is safer for them to do so, this bill would put even more bikes in front of cars, rather than beside them in a separate lane where they don't obstruct traffic. And also - the increased proximity between people on bikes and people in cars will - not might, will - lead to increased deaths and injuries on our roads.

Finally, I'm begging the designers of this bill to look at the concept of "induced demand." Any time a road is widened, it might improve things for a short time, but as more people start to use the new infrastructiure, it clogs right back up again. This has been demonstrated over and over.