Facts matter in bike lane debate

It is fair to criticize the design and location of bike lanes. However, if you entirely disagree with the premise of adding bike lanes to Victoria, which is your prerogative, it does not make the proposed bike network a bad idea or a project that lacked consultation and engagement.

Let’s keep in mind the facts when we craft our critiques of the decision-making process:

- The network is predicated on the Official Community Plan, which included two and a half years of public consultation with more than 6,000 people.

• The initial engagement period was open for six weeks before the pandemic.

• Pop-up events were held in high traffic public spaces.

• The project summit, open to all, attracted more than 400 attendees.

• “Neighbourhood salons” were held in community centres and small businesses in the impacted neighbourhoods.

• The public was invited to provide feedback through an online survey. 1,745 surveys were collected.

• Thousands interacted with the project through social media channels.

• Print ads, online ads, stakeholder emails, postcards and posters were used to raise awareness and to promote engagement opportunities.

• The design review sessions include B.C. Transit, ICBC, Victoria Fire, and B.C. Emergency Health Services.

• The network planning involved a diverse technical advisory committee which, from the outset, evaluated development and provided guidance.

In total, at least 2,500 people participated in the public process. The purpose of an engagement process is not to gather unanimous support or consensus before proceeding.

If we held the government to this sort of direct democracy standard, nothing would ever get done and city infrastructure would be a disaster.

That you personally disagree with a decision does not mean that the process was flawed or needs to be repeated.

Jeremy Schmidt Victoria