The provincial government’s proposed actions to limit bike lanes are unlikely to have much of an impact in Greater Sudbury.
That said, the legislation is ambiguously written, making it unclear whether it might delay the creation of future bike lanes.
At issue is Bill 212, called the “Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act,” which recently received second reading and is in the public comments stage (consultation closes Nov. 20).
The legislation, if passed, would require municipalities to obtain government approval before adding bike lanes where vehicle lanes are removed. Bike lanes built in the past five years would also be evaluated by the province.
It also cites three major arterial roads in Toronto as having problematic bike lanes which would be removed.
Drawing from past and ongoing bike lane projects, city Linear Infrastructure Services director Joe Rocca told Sudbury.com the City of Greater Sudbury wouldn’t have much of an issue with Bill 212 in the event it were to pass.
That said, applying to the province for future bike lanes might create some additional work.
In recent years, two bike lane projects resulted in a reduction of vehicle lanes,
The first was a stretch of Elm Street in Sudbury from Ethelbert Street to Regent Street, which narrowed vehicle lanes from four to three and added bike lanes on both sides.
Constructed in 2018, Rocca noted that it’s outside the five-year window the province is looking at, but offers a good example of what the province is looking at nonetheless.
“If it was in that five-year window, we would anticipate that the province would ask us to show that vehicle traffic wasn’t ‘unduly diminishing the orderly movement of motor vehicle traffic,’” he said, citing the proposed legislation.
“When you convert a four-lane cross-section to a three-lane cross-section, that third lane is a centre left-turn lane, which adds a lot of capacity to the road,” he said, adding that from a vehicle congestion perspective, it’s a net benefit for vehicular traffic.
The other local example is the city’s ongoing new design for Larch Street in Downtown Sudbury, which is being narrowed from two vehicular lanes to one, plus bike lanes.
The street was originally designed during a time in which there was a lot more traffic downtown, he said, and current traffic volumes no longer justify two lanes.
As such, he’s confident the Larch Street project will meet the province’s requirements, should Bill 212 come into effect.
Other major bike lane projects in Greater Sudbury, such as the Paris-Notre Dame BIkeway, aren’t taking away any lanes of traffic so wouldn’t be under the province’s microscope.
In the event Bill 212 does come into effect, Rocca said the City of Greater Sudbury would have the in-house staff required to submit bike lane applications to the province, but that it might cause an issue for those smaller municipalities without the staff power.
“When you look at the proposed bill, it’s not very clear; the language is very general, so it creates a bit of uncertainty about what, exactly, will be needed in the future,” he said.
Sudbury.com reached out to Premier Doug Ford’s office last week with questions regarding the implications of the bike lane legislation in Greater Sudbury.
A spokesperson from Transportation Minister Prabmeet Sarkaria’s office issued a written response which spoke in generalities and did not specifically address Greater Sudbury.
“With the worst travel times in North America, gridlock in Ontario is at a tipping point, and we need to ensure that we keep our busiest roads moving,” the statement began.
“We support a common-sense approach when it comes to bike lanes, which does not include removing a lane of traffic on some of our busiest roads.
“We will be reviewing information from municipalities across the province regarding bike lanes that have been installed in the past five years.”
Although local advocacy group Bike Sudbury is currently on hiatus and chair Rachelle Niemela hasn’t dug into Bill 212 too deeply, she told Sudbury.com it’s at least safe to say the new legislation won’t help cyclists.
“It’s not going to assist in building additional much-needed infrastructure that’s needed for safety, and will again put a priority on cars over more-vulnerable road users like cyclists and pedestrians.”
The Association of Municipalities of Ontario issued a statement last month which called the province’s actions “a significant overreach into municipal jurisdiction,” calling it “micromanaging.”
“Based on local knowledge and community input, municipalities develop transportation plans that balance traffic flow with planning priorities like active transportation, multimodal transportation and environmental and health protection,” the statement added.
“AMO is not aware of any consultation with municipalities regarding bicycle lanes or of the evidence the province considered in its decision.”
Tyler Clarke covers city hall and political affairs for Sudbury.com.
