Commentaire
I am very concerned about the implications of *prohibiting* vehicle lane reduction for new bike lanes. This amendment to HTA will limit introduction of new bikes lanes in municipalities across the province, hindering the munucipalities' ability to provide safer and accessible public spaces for every road users including pedestrians, cyclists and drivers.
The stated rational for prohibiting vehicle lane reduction for new bike lanes is "reducing gridlock". However, simply maintaining the number of vehicle lane will not reduce gridlock: by limiting what municipalities can do to implement safer bicycle infrastructure, it discourages the usage of different mode of transportation, leading more motor vehicles on the gridlocked roads. Therefore, vehicle lane reduction should be allowed for municipalities to address congestion issues. For example, in our neighboring province, Montreal has seen reduction of car modal share by introducing extensive network of bike lanes, reducing lanes where necessary.
Moreover, narrower roads are essential to achieving safety for all road users. For cyclists, protected and wide bicycle lanes provide physical separation from the motor traffic, reducing dangerous interactions with motor vehicles. For drivers, less lanes mean less conflict points with other motor vehicles and no interference with cyclists. For pedestrians, shorter crosswalk distance and vehicles that pay attention to them because the traffic movement is much more simplified.
Personally, I am a regular bike commuter and I spend a lot of time being a pedestrian to ride public transit. The largest safety hazard for me is when I have to cross a wide road. Although I have not been involved in an accident, I had several close calls, all happening on the roads with multiple lanes. Wide roads are safety hazard that needs to be addressed across the province, not maintained.
Finally, instead of putting effort into prohibiting installation of new bike lanes, I hope to see more efforts to address the *real* solution to gridlock: public transportation. For example, Long-delayed Eglinton Crosstown LRT still does not have a definite opening date after 14 years after beginning of this construction, despite its potential to promote reduction of motor vehicles on the road.
Documents justificatifs
Soumis le 5 novembre 2025 8:42 PM
Commentaire sur
Projet de loi 60 – Loi de 2025 visant à lutter contre les retards et à construire plus rapidement – Transport moderne – Interdire la réduction des voies des véhicules pour les nouvelles pistes cyclables
Numéro du REO
025-1071
Identifiant (ID) du commentaire
168943
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire