Government report undermines Ontario’s claims about value of bike lanes removal
An Ontario court has denied an injunction that sought to prevent the provincial government from ripping up bike lanes on Bloor Street, University Avenue, and Yonge Street until a pending legal challenge is heard in court. However, the judge agreed that the applicants’ case raises serious and valid concerns about potential harm the lane removals could cause to cyclists.
The injunction motion was brought by Cycle Toronto, along with individuals Eva Stanger-Ross and Narada Kiondo, the applicants behind a Charter challenge to a provision of Ontario’s Bill 212 — Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act, 2024. The applicants, are represented by lawyers from Ecojustice and Paliare Roland LLP, argue that the law’s mandated removal of Toronto’s bike lanes overrides municipal decision-making and will put lives at risk.
Diving into legal specifics of the decision
While this decision is disappointing, it doesn’t affect the applicants’ chances of success on the merits of the case. The injunction outcome was based on the “balance of convenience,” one component of a three-part test used by the Court to determine whether to grant an injunction. In cases like this one, where the applicants seek to suspend the operation of validly passed legislation, the Court presumes that the legislation is in the public interest and serves a valid purpose. The motion judge found that the applicants did not meet the high bar of displacing that presumption.
However, the motion judge found that the applicants’ case raises a serious issue and that there is a likelihood that cyclists will be exposed to greater risk of personal injury if the bike lanes are removed. A hearing on the merits of the case is scheduled for April 16.
New government documents reveal Ontario was aware of risks of bike lane removals
Documents released to the applicants just days before the injunction hearing, including internal ministry documents, reports, and emails, largely align with the evidence submitted by the applicants. They show Ontario was aware that the removal of bike lanes may not have a meaningful impact on congestion and could increase collisions for everyone on the roads.
A government-commissioned report from engineering firm CIMA estimated that removing critical bike lane infrastructure would increase collisions by 54 per cent and lead to an increase in cyclists using sidewalks, creating hazards for pedestrians. The documents also show the proposed removal of the three downtown Toronto bike lanes was unlikely to achieve Ontario’s goal of reducing congestion, a key claim used by the province to justify the legislation. The report also concluded that the province’s proposal of redirecting cyclists to secondary roads was not feasible.
Ontarians need investment in affordable transportations alternatives like bike lanes and public transit
Just mere weeks after a snap election that cost Ontario taxpayers approximately $189 million, the Ontario government remains committed to its plans to rip up protected bike lanes in Toronto. This irresponsible decision would cost Ontarians an additional $48 million, while failing to alleviate congestion, and directly putting lives at risk.
The recently released documents included a presentation on a legislative plan for a “pro-driver package.” In his election campaign, Premier Ford re-upped on a proposal to build a tunnel expressway under Highway 401, with a yet unknown price tag. As we continue to see the rising impact of climate change, Ontarians need reliable transportation alternatives like bike lanes and public transit, not policies that lock us into further car-dependence.
Michael Longfield, Cycle Toronto, a member-supported charity, said:
“From our perspective, nothing in the content of Ontario’s documents is a surprise. MTO and their experts confirm what Cycle Toronto, our experts, and countless groups opposed to this legislation have been saying all along that: 1) ripping out bike lanes won’t solve congestion and will make traffic worse, 2) there is no mythical network of secondary roads that could replace the target bike lanes, and 3) moving ahead with these removals will put people’s lives at risk.
“What perhaps is a surprise is that the province has known all of this all along and yet has continued to aggressively pursue this legislation and engage consultants like Stantec against the public interest of Ontarians. While we are disappointed in the outcome of the injunction, we look forward to a full examination of the evidence at the hearing on April 16.”
Bronwyn Roe, lawyer, Ecojustice said:
“Although the injunction was not granted, the judge agreed our client’s case raises a serious issue and that the removal of bike lanes will likely result in harm to those who depend on the bike lanes for safe, affordable and climate-friendly transportation. Rather than wasting Ontarian’s time and money with a costly false solution to traffic congestion, the Ontario government should be investing in safe, reliable active transit that is better for people and the planet.”
