Commentaire
I strongly disagree with Bill 60's blanket ban on removing vehicular lanes to make way for sustainable modes of transportation, be they surface routes for transit or protected routes for active transportation (bikes, ebikes, scooters, mobility devices etc). Good transportation planning responds to local conditions and the changing needs of communities, and it may well be the case that the best planning solution in a given situation is to remove a vehicular lane. In other cases it may not be. These decisions are best left up to expert staff guided by policies created by local municipal councillors. Let them do their jobs.
The argument that this measure is required by the need to improve air quality by reducing traffic and congestion is utterly nonsensical and not supported by your own expert evidence, nor research commissioned by the Board of Trade. Providing safe, reliable and efficient alternatives to driving will reduce congestion more effectively, and setting up barriers to these alternatives - effectively forcing people to drive - will just lock urban residents down tighter in gridlock. Please abandon this bill in its entirety.
Soumis le 6 novembre 2025 10:18 AM
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
169238
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire