Bill 60 should not be passed…

Bill 60 should not be passed. It claims to be helping with traffic congestion by prohibiting car lane reduction as part of construction of new bike lanes. But this is flawed on many different levels.

Firstly, it removes power from the municipal level to make decisions on its own infrastructure, regardless of what the research supports and what those actually living in those cities want. Different cities have different requirements, and the province is overlooking that.

It also demonstrates a car-first philosophy towards city planning, which is not a philosophy we should be supporting. This goes beyond bike lanes, as the wording of Bill 60 also threatens transit priority, safe crossings, patios, curbside access, and school streets. A significant number of values we should be trying to protect are negatively impacted when these other uses of the road are ignored in lieu of prioritizing car lanes.
1) Environment
Bill 60 claims that reduced congestion will benefit the environment, but a car-first philosophy is more likely to harm the environment than anything else. More people using bikes and public transport will have a bigger environmental impact than faster traffic.

2) Equity
A city built around cars assumes that all citizens have easy access to cars, but that is simply not true. Those who are already disadvantaged struggle even more when there is not proper support for alternative options.

3) Safety
Not building protected bike lanes results in more collisions. A report done for the province said that removing some bike lanes in Toronto could result in as high as 54% more collisions. Passing this bill will result in more injuries and deaths, and add additional stress to our already overwhelmed health industry. Further, more collisions will also increase congestion as the traffic is stopped and slowed more frequently. It has been established in research that greater average daily traffic (ADT) results in a greater number of collisions per million vehicle miles. It is clear that protected bike lanes are incredibly important for ensuring the protection of everybody on the road.

4) Public health
Being able to bike is extremely beneficial for both mental and physical health.

This is all known and accepted as the courts themselves, when preventing the removal of bike lanes said that:
"The Canadian Public Health Association describes separated cycling infrastructure as 'an essential public health intervention' that reduces the risk of injury and death, encourages physical activity, improves mental health, and increases equity by reducing transportation barriers faced by those who face structural disadvantage.”

That brings me to the last, and most important flaw of Bill 60. Even if the province of Ontario wanted to solve issues to do with congestion via increased support for cars, the proposed solution will not work. There is significant evidence that more car lanes simply encourage more drivers to use the road until the level of congestion is comparable to where it started. The true fix has repeatedly been shown to get drivers off the road. The better the available walking, biking, and public transport, the more likely people are to use other options, reducing the amount of traffic and benefiting both drivers and people using alternative transportation methods. The worst case scenario is not a lessening of congestion at the cost of other beneficial infrastructure, it is locking our province into car-dependent street designs without solving or even lessening the original problem.

These are not new facts. The government's own research reflects this, as was demonstrated when last year's Bill 212 sought to remove bike lanes in Toronto, and was struck down by the courts using that research. The government is now trying again to attack bike lanes, but this time it will hurt the entire province, undermine municipal authority, and put other non-car lane usages of the road at risk as well.

We must protect our safety, our environment, our cities, and our futures. We must not allow Bill 60 to pass.