I am submitting comments…

I am submitting comments today on the Framework for bike lanes that require removal of a traffic lane. I have a background in Engineering, work in technology, live in the City of Toronto, own a car and predominantly travel using the bicycle-sharing program in the City of Toronto. I am a survivor of road violence, having been hit by motor vehicles on three separate occasions while cycling and once while walking in a crosswalk. This commentary primarily expresses informed dismay at the proposed framework and planned provincial overreach, presenting information that is backed in studies, real-world data, and current thinking on the matter. Sources are left as an exercise, as I presume many other authors have been far more thorough in their collection and dissemination of evidence to support the very clear and evident facts of the matter. While this is true, I believe it is important that our voices be heard, which is why I have prepared a comment.

First, I believe it is a misnomer to refer to the removal of a traffic lane - bicycles are considered vehicles under the Highway Traffic Act, and therefore constitute traffic. Changing a shared lane into a diamond lane does not remove the ability for traffic to flow in the lane; it changes the types of traffic and the volume of traffic.

Second, the proposed removal of arterial diamond lanes reserved for bicycle traffic is incredibly short-sighted, dangerous, and will cost lives. It will save a negligible amount of time for the majority of road users, but will imperil the lives of vulnerable road users. Studies conducted by the City of Toronto have acknowledged as much. In fact, the Premier himself commented in a 2017 interview that it feels unsafe to ride without bike lanes. Putting lanes or redirecting bicycle traffic onto side streets disincentivizes riding a bicycle, as it’s inconvenient and unsafe to approach the arterial roads when there is no protection. Most trips taken for the purpose of transportation rather than fitness begin or end on arterial roads. Drivers of automobiles wouldn’t find a side-street approach reasonable for their trips, so why should cyclists have to settle for less?

Third, from an environmental perspective: creating further induced demand for motor vehicle traffic directly challenges the prevailing understanding presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that we must take direct and prompt action against climate change by changing user behaviours to switch from personal motor vehicles to more sustainable modes of travel, such as bicycles, public transportation, and walking. Removing bicycle lanes adds cars without decreasing the volume of traffic.

There is much more to be said about the matter than I care to write out, given the charade that this proposal review process is. I will be surprised if anybody actually reads any of this before the shovels are in the ground ripping up safe, well-used, clean, and efficient transportation infrastructure.

There are no other jurisdictions globally making this decision. I find it highly suspect that this provincial government knows better than every country, state, and city in the rest of the world when it comes to transportation policy.

Needless to say this policy decision will not be looked upon kindly in 5 years, let alone today. History will frown on today’s decision-makers who are allowing this to happen. Shame on the Premier. Shame on the Minister for Transport.