Blind persons are still forced to take their lives in their hands when they try to take the bus in downtown Victoria, five years after city council was made to understand the dangers of the floating bus stops next to bike lanes. While those bike lanes are making cyclists safer, they are risking the lives of people who cannot use bicycles or motor vehicles, and who depend on buses to get around.

It is shocking to see the city reducing access for the people most in need of bus services.

After experiencing blatant indifference for our safety from then-mayor Lisa Helps and Victoria city council, members of the Canadian Federation of the Blind (CFB) felt compelled to file a human rights case. The issue concerned the dangerous access to new “floating bus stops” on Pandora and Wharf Streets. To expect blind transit users to attempt to dodge speeding silent cyclists to access or exit a bus stop is dangerous and unreasonable. The BC Human Rights Tribunal (BCHRT) confirmed that such stops were discriminatory.

However, instead of protecting blind transit users, the presiding Tribunal Member, Mr. Norman Trerise, failed to support his “cease and desist order” in legitimizing the dangerous infrastructure that allows the discrimination to remain. Simply adding a push-button audible flashing light announcing, “cross with caution vehicles may not stop”, does not remove the discriminatory barrier. Blind transit users cannot rely on a cyclist’s courtesy to avoid a collision. The blind witnesses were not consulted about the efficacy of the audible flashing light. The Tribunal Member also refused to hear from a blind victim who had suffered trauma when attempting to use the first audible push-button lights at Wharf and Yates Streets.

Our members decided to withdraw from this case absent of any beneficial outcome and have settled with the city in order to ensure our lawyers do at least receive some payment for their efforts.

Nevertheless, we expect qualified and discerning public servants to maintain consistency of infrastructure utilizing a variety of safeguards as incorporated in the seven principles of universal design. Civil engineers have a responsibility to create barrier-free infrastructure, such as with bus stops, intersections, and curbs, etc. These vital safeguards are necessary to help improve equity and prevent injury. If these principles had been applied, the “floating bus stop” concept would never have been approved. The resistance of the city to acknowledge the error in “floating bus stops” and the persistent “best practices” engineering policies are what allowed the construction of this dangerous public infrastructure.

Cycling is a privileged choice. Safe location of bus stops is essential. Instructing the city to return the stops to the curb would have been more in line with a meaningful accommodation. While we feel that minimizing a cyclist’s risk of injury is a noble goal, doing so should not impact blind transit users. Blind citizens should never be constantly expected to police public infrastructure.

There now seems to be a public debate over such discriminatory stops. There is something sinister about attempting to coerce blind citizens into participating in debating our safety with others who are not undergoing a form of persecution.

This high-profile case should have been a precedent with regards to the construction of equitable public infrastructure. Unfortunately, the Tribunal has instead created widespread confusion with blind citizens who are once again attempting to defend our legal rights.