I’m writing in opposition to…

I’m writing in opposition to the proposed Bill 212, another omnibus piece of legislation that is ostensibly intended to alleviate vehicular traffic by expanding the road network according to the government. Experience has shown that the expanding roads does not solve traffic; rather, it induces more people to drive until traffic has returned to the previous levels. This applies to two parts of the bill I will focus on.

1. Highway 413 / EA exemption

I work as a consultant in the mining industry and understand firsthand how EA’s are conducted and importance of doing them. By skipping this critical step, the project risks permanent damage to habitat and species. There are at least 15 at-risk species that would be impacted by this project. We have a responsibility as stewards to protect the environment and should be doing whatever it takes to mitigate our impact. Exempting an EA also prevents adequate consultation with stakeholders. In short, by doing this, the government is ensuring that a less than optimum outcome.

To consider taking on the risk to forego an EA should at a minimum have a very strong reason to do so. However the facts are that the Highway would be built at a cost of $8B and would ultimately save drivers an estimated 30 seconds according to an expert panel. There are viable alternatives that would cost less and serve more people, for example investing in public transit or subsidizing 407 tolls for commercial trucks. Has the government considered all alternatives?

2. Bike Lanes

The proposal to replace bike lanes with traffic lanes removes protections to keep bike users safe. This law will result in more people dying, full stop. I use the Bloor and University bike lanes on a daily basis for my commute. I ride with my children on these bike lanes. To force us to share the lane with vehicles puts all of us at risk of getting hurt or worse. Bike lanes should be on major roads. These places where we are biking to tend to be on major roads. There are no viable alternatives to replace these routes. I say it again for good measure; this bill, if enacted will kill people.

Secondly, the entire premise of this law is to benefit car drivers at the expense of everyone else. It is especially inconsiderate in the downtown core where more residents bike and fewer drive. Turning my neighborhood into a highway for out-of-town commuters is a slap in the face. Furthermore, there is simply not enough space for every person to drive, especially as this city continues to grow, particularly around the transit corridors that this government has pushed for and where these bike lanes already exist.

Thirdly, for a government that prides itself on cutting red tape and fiscal prudence, this bill does the opposite. Local roads are municipal jurisdiction. The existing bike lanes followed years of consultation and improvements. For this government to insert itself and overturn a democratic and equitable procedure, tear out completed infrastructure and replace the road, and then presumably redo the whole process on side streets that the province deems acceptable, is the height of hypocrisy. Add to this the irony that the previous Conservative government downloaded these very roads to the city to manage and that the Minister of Transportation formerly was the Minister of Red Tape Reduction, is shameful and embarrassing.

Lastly, this legislation is not even compatible with other laws passed by this very government. Bill 185 has resulted in fewer parking spaces in new builds while bike parking has expanded, especially near major arterial roads. Similarly, the intensification of density surrounding transit corridors, another Provincial objective, is at odds with this bill.

3. Bad governance

The last point I wish to make is that this is another example in a long list of bad governance from this government. It is now the second time the government has exempted themselves from an EA (see Ontario Place). Any other major infrastructure project by a private company is expected to perform an EA. It’s unfair and dooms us to causing irreparable harm by not doing bare minimum in understanding the impact to the environment.

The government has claimed that any new bike lane must be reviewed by the province with studies to prove no adverse impact to vehicle travel times. Yet before even finalizing the bill, the government comes out and says Bloor, Yonge, and University will be removed, studies be damned. The government justifies their bill by stating that 1% of residents bike (a fact from a 1991 report that included the entire GRA, rural and suburban areas) and that bike lanes are affecting emergency responders (a lie that has been thoroughly debunked by Toronto responders). The City prepares a report with a cost estimate to remove the bike lanes, and it is dismissed by the Premier and the Minister of Transportation without providing their own cost or rationale for why the City is wrong. All this suggests the government has no interest in facts or evidence. They are pushing an agenda that suits them and their benefactors. The residents that live in these neighborhoods are being willfully ignored and it’s disgraceful.

The government has moved to limit debate because of a long summer recess. A long summer recess they gave themselves. Again, shameful that the government sees fit to limit democracy because they gave themselves a longer vacation. But par for the course for a government that sees opposition, alternative viewpoints, or constructive criticism as a hindrance rather than opportunities for improvement.

In closing, I am pleading that the government reconsider this poorly considered piece of legislation. It has been demonstrated over and over again that building more lanes and more roads will not reduce congestion. The government should be investing in alternatives to vehicular traffic like high-speed rail, dedicated bus ways, light rail, subways, etc. These can move more people for less capital cost while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Don’t just take my word for it; this bill has been roundly criticized by numerous groups including the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers, the Ontario Traffic Council, and BIAs located along the potentially affected bike lanes.

Finally, this bill and particularly the fast-tracking of Highway 413 remain mired in the corruption scandal around the Greenbelt land swap last year, which this government remains under investigation for. The government has not been cleared of wrongdoing, and yet are aggressively pushing a bill that will primarily benefit the very same landowners that were credibly unduly influencing the governments decision making then. The same folks that contribute heavily to the governing party, attend the Premier’s family weddings, and have secret rendezvous in Las Vegas. This bill should not be carried forward until the Greenbelt investigations have concluded.