I wholeheartedly oppose Bill…

I wholeheartedly oppose Bill 212. Removing bike lanes to address gridlock is a misguided approach that prioritizes short-term convenience over long-term safety, sustainability, and effective urban planning. While I share the goal of reducing congestion, this bill overlooks the essential role of bike lanes in fostering a balanced and efficient transportation system.

From the Perspective of a Biker:

Safety is Essential: Dedicated bike lanes provide a safer space for cyclists, reducing the risk of collisions with vehicles. Removing bike lanes forces cyclists into mixed traffic, which can discourage active transportation or put lives at risk.
Cycling Alleviates Gridlock: Biking reduces the number of cars on the road. Removing bike lanes might push people back into cars, worsening traffic congestion rather than alleviating it. Investing in cycling infrastructure encourages more people to use bikes for short trips, which is essential in urban areas.
Sustainability and Livability: Promoting cycling is a key component of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and building healthier, more sustainable cities. Removing bike lanes sends the wrong message about Ontario’s priorities in addressing climate change and fostering livable communities.
From the Perspective of a Driver:

Gridlock is Complex: Traffic congestion is influenced by factors like poor public transit, urban sprawl, and insufficient transportation alternatives. Simply removing bike lanes won’t solve these issues and might make congestion worse as fewer people bike.
Road Design Should Be Inclusive: Roads are public spaces that need to accommodate all users—drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians alike. Removing bike lanes prioritizes cars at the expense of a balanced transportation network.
Shared Benefits of Bike Lanes: Bike lanes can reduce vehicle delays by ensuring predictable, separated traffic flow. Removing them could lead to unpredictable interactions between cars and bikes, slowing traffic and increasing frustration for everyone.
Constructive Alternatives:

Rather than removing bike lanes, I encourage exploring solutions that genuinely address gridlock while preserving safety and inclusivity:

Invest in Public Transit: Improved transit options reduce car dependency, easing congestion.
Optimize Traffic Flow: Implement smarter traffic signal systems and better road design.
Promote Active Transportation: Expanding—not removing—cycling infrastructure encourages sustainable travel and decreases reliance on cars.
Bill 212 reflects a real concern, but the solution lies in creating a transportation system that works for everyone—not one that pits drivers against cyclists. Removing bike lanes will only undermine safety and progress while failing to meaningfully reduce gridlock.