ERO 025-1071 Bill 60 -…

ERO 025-1071 Bill 60 - Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 – Modern Transportation – Prohibiting Vehicle Lane Reduction for New Bicycle Lanes https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/025-1071

Schedule 5 of Bill 60 – The Highway Traffic Act:

Municipalities across Ontario recognize the benefits of building cycling infrastructure as part of an integrated multi-modal transportation system. Creating safe, interconnected cycling networks that include bike lanes will encourage more people to cycle for transportation. This can help address multiple societal challenges such as health (reduction of chronic diseases), air pollution (fewer motor vehicles on the road) and climate change (reduction of greenhouse gas emissions). Additionally, building bike lanes improves transportation equity. Automobile ownership is unaffordable for many, especially when considering the increasing costs of other necessities including housing and food. Cycling provides an affordable mode of transportation, particularly for those who do not drive cars due to age, income, or ability.

As such, we oppose amendments to the Highway Traffic Act that restricts from incorporating health-promoting and community-building bicycle lanes within their municipalities. Evidence shows that protected bicycle lanes improve air quality and road safety and reduce climate-damaging greenhouse gas emissions and transportation costs. (Protected Bicycle Lanes Protect the Climate – Measuring How Networks of Protected Bicycle Lanes Reduce Carbon Emissions, Transport Costs, and Premature Deaths. https://www.fiafoundation.org/)

We echo the comments and support the position of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), that: “Municipalities, relying on local knowledge and community input, are best positioned to balance traffic flow with active transportation, road safety, and community needs. Biking is a key tool for combating congestion; bike lanes are an essential element of multi-modal planning that removes cars from the road for short trips and transit connections, thus alleviating congestion, not causing it.” https://www.amo.on.ca/policy/land-use-planning-resources-and-climate-ch…

While we agree with the statement in the “Environmental Implications” section of the ERO posting that traffic is a major source of air pollution, the suggestion that creating more capacity on roads for vehicles and drivers can in any way address this, goes against all evidence on interventions to reduce traffic pollution and the serious health harms it causes, including over 1,200 deaths every year in Canada.

Regarding simplifying and standardizing official plans:

The new draft Ontario Public Health Standards (OPHS) direct public health units to support healthier built environments. Local public health units work closely with municipalities on this work. This includes developing land use policies that promote physical activity, prevent injuries, improve accessibility, provide greenspaces, protect the natural environment and support climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Planning Authority Changes in Bill 60. Bill 60 proposes streamlined official plans and expands the Minister’s authority to override municipal zoning and environmental protections. This could lead to developments that conflict with local health priorities, disrupt coordinated regional planning, and increase in land use compatibility issues. In addition, streamlining official plans would limit opportunities for public engagement and reduce the potential for underrepresented or marginalized populations to provide meaningful community input into the land use planning process. Streamlining official plans to speed development would lead to simplified plans that overlook unique community needs, cultural heritage, sustainability goals and equity principles.
Official plans are tools through which municipalities can direct planning and development to address local needs and priorities. Communities across Ontario are not homogeneous. There are unique needs across diverse settings including, but not limited to: urban, suburban and rural; north and south; agricultural and resource industry-based. Municipal staff and elected officials have knowledge and understanding of local contexts that can and should influence how development proceeds. Standardization of official plans reduces a municipality’s ability to tailor policies to meet local priorities, including health and wellbeing.

The proposed list of standard chapters for official plans has no mention of health or healthy communities. This omission fails to acknowledge the key role that the built environment plays in the health of residents and limits municipalities’ ability to include policies that mitigate negative impacts of built form on well-being in their communities.
Additionally, proposed restrictions on green roofs and sustainability standards reduce municipalities’ ability to integrate climate resilience and urban heat mitigation into planning. These efforts are often undertaken to address the increasing incidence of heatwaves, especially in urban environments. Removing a municipality’s ability to have green development standards will increase incidence of heat-related illness, and lead to poorer air quality and stormwater issues, with disproportionate impact to equity-denied groups. Municipal Green Development Standards and enhanced Building Code requirements support healthy, climate-resilient communities by promoting energy efficiency, sustainable design, and safety.