A hearty ‘thank you’ to all contributors thus far to our discussion. As stated previously, we seek to canvass the broadest range of views and to generate some real debate amongst residents, council(lors) and ratepayers. Hopefully, this is only the start of the debate!

We would also hope that this Draft Strategy represents only a start, and not a conclusion. Given the range of opinions already expressed, it is clear that the draft should be seen as a beginning to ongoing analyses and discussion – the first step in a process far from complete. From your comments there are many unresolved questions that need to be addressed. These include:

• Are ratepayers getting value for money with this draft?
• Are safety issues adequately addressed?
• Will health improve?
• How does the strategy fit in with overall traffic/transport management in Glen Eira?

 Value for money

If we’re about to spend millions, then how do we know we’re getting our pennies worth? The report relies almost exclusively on state  government surveys. Where is the local, homegrown analysis and evaluation?.  Some contributors to this debate have argued that it will only cost ratepayers up to $4 or $6 dollars per annum. Even one dollar is too much to waste if it achieves very little and there are other methods of attaining the desired results.

Safety

Cyclists deserve to feel safe on our roads. There’s no argument about that. But so do pedestrians! There is absolutely no comment in this draft about speed limits for cyclists, nor the policing of helmets, lights and bells. Kingston for example has produced a ‘cycling and walking’ policy that highlights the connection between the two. Port Phillip goes even further with their Road User Hierarchy – ie. Walking – Cycling – Public transport – Freight – Single Occupancy Vehicles – Multiple Occupancy Vehicles. And where is the evidence that narrowing already narrow car lanes will in fact improve riders’ safety as the draft proposes to do in numerous locations?

Transport and Traffic management

Nothing in this draft strategy investigates overall traffic management issues within Glen Eira- again in stark opposition to neighbouring councils. Port Phillip’s vision includes the following:

“The sustainable Transport Framework highlights four principles and defines a road user hierarchy to improve decision making in regards to sustainable transport policy and practice within the City of Port Phillip. The goals, strategies and initiatives of the Cycle Plan are based on the road user hierarchy and the four principles. (p.10)”.

As far as overall Transport/Traffic issues, Glen Eira is silent. It is even incapable of HOSTING a Metropolitan Transport Forum as shown in the latest minutes where the motion by Hyams and Pilling was defeated! What does this say about Glen Eira’s agenda and philosophy on this matter? Don’t Glen Eira residents and traders deserve a Forum where our local problems are outlined, views are canvassed, Councillors express their opinions, and solutions are formed for the future. What we know about our Councillors views is just through voting on proposals by administration or consultants. Is that good enough? Even the terms of reference for Reports do not seem to be governed by our politician Councillors. Strange.

Instead the draft is full of dubious claims and statistics. For example: “Given approximately 11% of households in the City of Glen Eira do not have a vehicle9, there is a good case for making cycling accessible to all residents.” (page 8)

Is this the kind of analysis that we’re paying good money for?  Is this an example upon which policy is created and millions invested? Even the most neophyte of statisticians would immediately ask: Who are these 11%? What are their age groups? Do they even want bicycles or would they prefer electric wheelchairs?

Health

All are in agreement that cycling can contribute to increased fitness and general improvements in health and hence should be encouraged. This includes both on and off road cycling. Yet, where are the statistics in the published report which vindicate the conclusion that providing all these new on and off road paths will (eventually) lead to a massive uptake in cycling? Very few of the actual figures provided are the result of careful monitoring by the municipality itself. We’re currently spending heaps of money  in Caulfield Park. How many cyclists currently use the park for this purpose? On what bases are the supposedly increased cycling numbers based? Where is the evidence?

As a document designed to plan the future, it is short on facts, short on logic, and tragically, short on an integrated vision. At best the document can only be the starting point for further investigation, discussion and debate. Thus far, there has been none of this!

The current Draft Bicycle Strategy recently released by Council proposes to spend $2.4 million over the next few years. Whilst well written, the recommendations are extravagant, piecemeal and unjustifiable. .  A thorough debate of the proposals must occur. Other considerations and priorities must also be examined, especially in light of a scarce Glen Eira budget and heavy borrowings. Any bicycle strategy must be viewed in the broadest context. The issue isn’t solely about bikes – it’s about Sustainable Transport as a whole. Cycling is only a very small part of a much larger issue and problem.

Here are the facts taken straight from the draft report and from enumerated ABS statistics of the 2001 and 2006 Census. Things to note are:

•  An expected increase in cyclists of only 500 in the next 5 years
• The heavy reliance on both private cars and trains
• Cycling is only the 8^th most popular activity in Glen Eira parks – walking the most popular

 The most telling statistics however are listed below:

The other data of interest are key On Road results:

• About 16% cyclists go to work within Glen Eira;
• About 23% of Glen Eira cyclists go to Melbourne to work, but none are coming to Glen Eira;
• About 65% go to surrounding Councils or further;
• Only 19% cyclists from other Councils come to Glen Eira to work.

So what does this all mean?

Ratepayer and taxpayer dollars, in this case $2.4m, must have benefits that are worthwhile and seen to be worthwhile. The key benefits of cycling are in terms of environment i.e. reduction in carbon pollution, and health of cyclists. Let’s examine those 2 benefits in light of the figures provided. The fundamental basis for comparisons must be the increase of population, which for the statistical period covered was 4.16% i.e. 5,000 additional souls.

 The on road bike increase (which includes motorcycles) is very small, just 0.7% with 250 more bikers. Say we double the increase of cyclists on the road for the next 10 years, which will cost nearly $500 per year per additional cyclist. This seems extravagant. Will it reduce carbon pollution in Glen Eira? NO. Not unless there is a decrease of cars on the road. The increase of cars on the road was 4 times greater than the increase of cyclists. Will the expense improve health of cyclists? Probably, but $240k per year expenditure can be used in many ways to improve both environment and the health of more than just 500 people. It is clear that there is no pre-condition in Glen Eira to have such a large expenditure for on the road cycling.

 The outstanding result is the increase in Public Train patronage by nearly 15%. That contributes to reduced environment pollution and health of those using Public Transport. Unfortunately, even here the overall impact is not encouraging. The train benefits are mainly due to its off road advantages. The off-road traffic is only about 21%, whereas the on-road (mainly cars) is 79%. And the increase of train patronage is only slightly better than car increase. As long as there is an increase of cars on the roads the net benefit on environment and health will be negative.

 Can Governments, particularly Glen Eira do something about the critical issue of cars on the roads? Let’s assume that we spend an equivalent $500 per additional person per year on improving environment and health. That amounts to $25 million just for Glen Eira. With 30 Councils in the metropolitan area that becomes a substantial sum. Regardless of the money available, the focus for measurably reducing the carbon pollution and improving health requires reducing on road traffic and pollution, increasing off-road traffic and actively shifting On-Road traffic to Off-Road traffic. Does the strategy address any of these issues? NO!

 And how do you see this transport issue and how would you spend $500 per person per year in Glen Eira to improve environment and health?

 Over to you.

Should Glen Eira Council establish a Sustainable Transport Strategy before or after spending money on bicycle road lanes?online survey