I strongly disagree with and…

I strongly disagree with and do not support this bill. My greatest concerns are:

-If the province plans to monopolize the planning of how public right-of-ways are used, how does it plan to protect road users besides motor vehicle drivers? Specifically, how does the province plan to concretely prevent drivers from passing cyclists with little or no space (knowingly or unknowingly), prevent drivers from using their vehicles to threaten and harass cyclists (i.e.: "penalty passing", "brake checking"), and to generally prevent injurious and deadly collisions? These are things that are universally and regularly experienced by people who cycle in mixed traffic, no matter how they conduct themselves nor how regularly they cycle. Bike lanes provide a reliable and (sometimes literal) concrete refuge from these issues by creating a barrier between cyclists and drivers who subscribe to the extremely aggressive, overly opportunistic, and entitled driving culture that is common in the Golden Horseshoe.

What alternatives to bike lanes does the province plan to use to ensure motor vehicles operate at slower, less dangerous speeds? Does it plan to provision more funds or OPP officers to provide more traffic enforcement? Does it plan to install more automated traffic enforcement? Does the province plan to install CCTV systems to monitor driver behaviour? Does it plan to provide alternative physical means (like textured pavement, speed bumps, bollards, etc.,)? Or a combination of all of these options? Many of these are more expensive or complex than the current solutions that the city has adopted.

What viable alternatives to bike lanes does the province plan to use to separate cycling traffic from motor vehicle traffic? Will it expropriate land and demolish houses to create new bike highways adjacent to Bloor, Yonge, University, and other corridors?

-If the province plans to continue its trend of altering and overriding municipal affairs (e.g.: reducing Toronto city council via Notwithstanding clause, MZO's, this current proposal), what role do municipal politicians have in representing their constituents? How can municipal governments provide unique solutions for their distinct communities if the province continues to veto their decisions? This does not promote trust in government, especially in this case where there has been decades of advocacy and hundreds of thousands of votes for city councilors and mayors who supported the installation of these lanes.

-How does the province plan to create, retain, and expand the vibrance of urban areas? What criteria will it use to decide what areas are allowed to become "revitalized" in the future? This legislation creates unnecessary red tape for municipalities whose residents want to create more human scale spaces or more pedestrianized areas within their cities. Pedestrian friendly areas that have seen booming popularity like Roncesvalles and the Harbourfront in Toronto, which were both 4 lane throughfares until 2009 and 2015, will be harder for municipalities to recreate going forward. This limits opportunities for business, tourism, real estate, and tax base growth, never mind the livability and community these areas foster.

While biking, I'm tired of being made to feel like I'm going to die just because someone in a car is in a bad mood or is on their phone. It's frustrating and disheartening that I may lose the ability to avoid that ostensibly due to trivial motivations. This is not the city of the 70's and 80's that my parents grew up in and left. I hope that the livability and vibrance of a city and the safety of its residents takes precedence over a mild potential increase in convenience for a specific method of transportation.