Cyclists in Toronto are preparing to defend their hard-fought victory in a legal battle over bike lanes at Ontario's highest court this Wednesday. This group, which includes both a bike courier and a university student, successfully challenged the provincial government's controversial initiative to dismantle three key sections of the city’s protected bike lanes.
At the heart of this case is a significant argument: the cyclists contend that the province's unproven plan—aimed at enhancing traffic flow by removing these bike lanes—poses an unconstitutional threat to their safety. On Wednesday, the Ontario Court of Appeal will hear the provincial government’s appeal against the lower court's ruling that favored the cyclists.
The province argues that the earlier decision would effectively establish a legal right to bike lanes, a claim that was dismissed by Justice Paul Schabas of the Superior Court last July. Justice Schabas found that despite advice from both government advisers and external experts indicating that the plan would likely fail to reduce traffic congestion—and might even exacerbate it—the government persisted. He highlighted that the potential harm inflicted on cyclists by removing or altering the bike lanes far outweighed any minor time savings for drivers.
Schabas emphasized that reconfiguring the bike lanes to make them less safe would lead to increased accidents, injuries, and fatalities among cyclists. Notably, the government's own actions spoke volumes; they included an immunity clause in the legislation to protect themselves from liability, which the judge pointed out during his ruling.
In 2024, Premier Doug Ford's administration enacted legislation targeting the removal of 19 kilometers of protected bike lanes along major routes, including Bloor Street, Yonge Street, and University Avenue. Research indicated that cyclists face nearly nine times the risk of injury on streets filled with parked cars and devoid of cycling infrastructure, compared to those with protected lanes. Moreover, a report revealed that over the past decade, 28 cycling fatalities and 380 severe injuries occurred in Toronto, predominantly on streets lacking safe bike lanes.
Justice Schabas also criticized the province for its attempts to amend legislation mid-case, changing the language from "removal" to "reconfiguration" of bike lanes as a way to sidestep his judgment. He stated that as long as the government aimed to dismantle separated bike lanes to increase vehicle traffic, the fundamental issue remained unchanged.
As part of its appeal, the province asserts that Schabas made a mistake in ruling that the removal of bike lanes infringes upon the right to life, liberty, and security. They argue that this legal section was never meant to subject safety-related legislation to judicial review.
Premier Ford has dismissed the lower court's decision as absurd and driven by ideology, even using it as a talking point in critiques against elected judges. He claims not to oppose bike lanes, but prefers their placement away from main roads and onto less-trafficked secondary streets. However, evidence presented during the trial suggested that many of the targeted bike lanes lacked safe alternative routes on secondary roads, raising concerns about creating disconnected and more hazardous paths for cyclists.
A representative for Toronto's Mayor Olivia Chow stated that she is collaborating with the provincial government to find mutually beneficial solutions that would accommodate both vehicular traffic and protected bike lanes.
Previously, the city estimated that dismantling the bike lanes could cost around $48 million. Although the province’s transportation minister initially questioned this estimate, he did not provide an alternative figure.
In October, Minister Prabmeet Sarkaria announced plans to restore vehicle lanes while retaining a short segment of bike lanes on Bloor Street, involving barriers and bollards at a projected cost of $750,000. Mayor Chow described this as a positive compromise, while Michael Longfield from Cycle Toronto, the advocacy group leading the legal challenge, expressed cautious optimism but raised concerns regarding whether this solution would be effective for all the bike lanes affected by the province's actions.
As the hearing approaches, Longfield underscores that this case is fundamentally about holding the government accountable to the rule of law. He stated, "The Ford government is squandering both time and public funds on a misguided culture war, contrary to the advice of its own experts, during a period when Ontarians need genuine leadership directed toward resolving real challenges."
