In the end I decided to go the first meeting of the newly christened Toronto Cycling Advisory Committee(TCAC). It was an ominous sign when I arrived to find the only bike parking for City Hall in a dark hole.
Attending Toronto Cycling Committee(TCC) meetings in the past was quite painful, they could drone on forever about nothing. To Councillor Heaps credit he kept the meeting going at a very good pace. With past TCC meetings you spent a lot of time sleeping only to wake up to find them talking about the same thing.
I will cover some of the more interesting points made last night. Ya ya before you ask. There will not be 27 kms of bike lanes this year as promised. You would not believe how much verbal diarrhea you had to listen to to figure that out. It was the most distasteful display all night, sadly no one decided to take Heaps to task for his promise of 27 kms of bike lanes.
A questionable stat was produced, it claims that three times as many cyclists do not commute because of distance to ride than those who do not ride because of safety issues. Very curious, it would be more relevant if the question related how far a cyclist had to commute to their answers. A cyclist having to commute 20 kms might see distance as a bigger obstacle than one who only rides three kilometres. I am willing to bet that once you factor in distance concerns the issue of safety will be much greater. What concerns a cyclist most who only has to ride a few kilometres? It is hard to go anywhere without hearing a cyclist complain about whack jobs in cars, the only person I hear complain about distances is myself. It seems that the City is gearing up to use this stat an excuse to drift away from safety issues.
Talked about a great sounding bike camp for kids. Had to wonder about its effectiveness though in a City of over 2 million people as it only serves eighty children a year. Another stat produced showed that the 10 yro to 19 yro age group was at the greatest risk of injury when cycling. Seems like the bike camp and other programs like it would be of great benefit to cycling in general.
An interesting tid bit of information was shared by Heaps concerning a bike lane on Bloor. The Bloor Yorkville BIA does not want a bike lane on Bloor because they fear it will attract cyclists to the area who would want to lock their bikes outside retailer’s doors. How much uglier could you have it than having bicycles parked outside your door? I guess even more troublesome is having cyclists shop in your store.
The new members of TCAC were testing the waters and did a fine job. Margaret Hasting-James, Tammy Thorne, and Fred Sztabinski all cautiously but firmly served notice that they were not going to take a back seat. Sonia Khan, whom I know nothing about, will be another one to watch out for. She seems very able to look at issues in a different way than we are used to.
Heaps brought attention to the workings of the TCC and how they would go willy-nilly when it came to asking for money for the cycling budget. He is right, one would say they needed $3 million, another would chime in saying we needed $3.5 million, then the next would ask for $4 million and so on and so on without any justification. It was comical. We get it, he was right, but time to move on to the next issue. If he is going to use the old TCC as whipping posts he should not forget Giambrone was their leader… and put him over his knee too.
Heaps wanted the next meeting deferred later into the month and this is where his “father knows best” tact appeared and began to rub people the wrong way. He was expecting to tell the committee that the date was changed and that they should follow. He said the original date would result in a short meeting because he could not provide any budget details. Quite cunning. What about other concerns cyclist might want to have seen dealt with? Sadly no one picked up on this as Heaps kept them focused on the budget. He should remember, once bitten twice shy. His approach will be a flash point in the meetings to come.
It might be too early to focus on the fact that Heaps did not allow, save one from Hamish Wilson, questions from the small public presence. This could turn into a real concern and serious one to boot really quick if he continues to disallow public involvement, even in a limited form. TCAC is there to represent cyclist’s interests, should they not get to speak to their representatives where and when it matters? While it would be easy to say they could approach any member to voice their concerns it is never the same as a first person presentation, especially if the member from whom they asked for help from does not agree with them. Heaps quickly falls into this position. In the members defence they do not have all the time in the world to listen to cyclists concerns, they have day jobs, etc. etc. to tend to. (NOTE: No contact info for the members is provided to the public) Besides, unlike the parking committee people, they do not get paid to be on the TCAC.
I got shit for saying this to someone else, it is time to start attending TCAC meetings. I predict fireworks shortly… though the lights were on when I went to get my bike to go home.
