Key question: What if we’re…

Key question: What if we’re doing the math wrong…not thinking through potentially grave, unintended consequences for this province. (With apology for the very hasty writing. I learned of this opportunity too late. Also for the lack of clear structure. All formatting of numbering and bulleting of points was stripped away in pasting this into the submission form.)

This proposed bill takes as its starting point that the easy flow of the automobile is the number one criteria to be optimized in infrastructure planning. Opposition to this proposal often centres on environmental concerns (in the case of highways) and personal safety and preference in terms of built urban environments

For the purposes of this submission, I am focusing exclusively on the government’s plans to reduce bike lanes in the GTA, and would like to briefly raise three separate questions, that focus on potentially unintended but significant consequences of this decision, quite apart from the environmental impact, or the safety of riders.

CONTRIBUTING to future congestion, rather than diminishing it.

Will removing bike lanes actually work to deliver against intended goals: i.e. alleviate congestion -- or ultimately aggravate instead?

Let's say, to begin, that our only concern is the average commute time in and out of downtown Toronto, for those who live outside of the city. Congestion is high
Commuters are spending some between 1.5 and 4.4 minutes more commuting

The thinking is that If we remove bike lanes and add an additional lane for cars, traffic will move more quickly.

This is/would be true only if the volume of cars stays constant -- or at a minimum increases less than the new road capacity gained.

BUT the volume of cars will almost certainly increase owing to two effects

INDUCED DEMAND: If the relative convenience of cars is increased vs other modes of transport, car volume will increase

SUBSTITUTION EFFECT: At least some portion of existing bicycle traffic if forced to start driving more.
A huge customer of bike lanes at this point is deliver
Commuters

As a result, FEWER bike lanes is ultimately like to result in MORE cars on the roads, and MORE congestion, not less. And in surprisingly short order.

If we turn back the clock now on the impressive progress that the city has made in “inducing demand” for cycling as a mode of transport -- how will we accommodate the transportation needs of the anticipated growth in population of the GTA
The population growth of the next 25 years (3.5 million) is expected to be more than the last 25 years.
Yet, our capacity to build new roads within the GTA is severely constrained by a lack of vacant space -- esp in the downtown core.
We simply cannot rely on cars to connect us to work, play and each other: Cars

Designing a car-centric transportation strategy for Toronto risks big implications for other critical areas of public policy priorities in Ontario

CONTRIBUTING TO THE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY CRISIS

If residents own cars, new housing must accommodate them. Adding parking to new construction adds $100K+ to building costs which must then be added to purchase price.

Parking lots consumes an enormous amount of space that could and needs to be made available for housing and recreation.
In the highly sought after residential Danforth neighbourhood, for example, the G&M reported 1parking lots within a 1.5-kilometre stretch.

Siphoning limited household funds to car ownership, rather than allowing households to focus savings on housing.
The average Canadian who owns a car, spends $1387 MONTHLY on all car related expenses. This compares to $1759. Many of the people who are struggling most
Providing Ontarian with meaningful alternatives to a car can almost double the disposable income that a household is able to maintain

CONTRIBUTING TO OUT OF UNSUSTAINABLE HEALTHCARE SPENDING GROWTH

Two of the most significant sociological drivers of our escalating healthcare costs -- are drivers that have strong correlation with daily exercise (even just walking to, and taking transit) -- and NEGATIVE correlations with time spent in car commuting.

1. Obesity:

“Each additional hour spent in a car per day was associated with a 6% increase in the likelihood of obesity. Conversely, each additional kilometer walked per day was associated with a 4.8% reduction in the likelihood of obesity.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15261894/”

2. Addictions and Mental Health

Physical exercise -- basic daily movement -- is broadly acknowledged to be one of the most effective, and least costly tools to affect mental health outcomes.

As well: Direct system costs of car accidents -- to drivers, passengers, cyclists and pedestrians.

Healthcare costs in Ontario attributable to car-related accidents are estimated at $1.6 billion.
Less congestion = more speed. Speed kills (and injures
By focusing on a transportation and infrastructure that is balanced against all modes of transport: walking, cycling, transit and cars -- we can reduce these direct costs, and perhaps most importantly, the tremendous societal cost to individuals and families of these automobile related accidents.