Right: Melbourne's bayside suburbs "Hell Ride"; once each week, scores and even hundreds of bike riders ride en masse along the southern beaches. Complaints from motorists are common and one elderly pedestrian was killed some years ago when a rider went through a red light..
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments against severely restricting cyclists' access to major roads
1. Cycling is an important means of reducing road congestion
Traffic congestion occurs when travel demand is greater than the capacity, or supply, of available road space. In other words, too many people try to drive on a specific section of road at the same time. The result is a distinctive set of characteristics collectively referred to as congestion: slow driving speeds, longer trip times, reduced travel time reliability, and increased queuing and delays. Increasing the number of commuters who regularly use bicycles rather than cars has been suggested as an important means of reducing traffic congestion.
The Revolve Bike Shop Internet site states, 'Traffic congestion is estimated by the European Union to cost 1.5% of GDP which would amount to roughly ?2billion annually in Ireland. Cycling is an excellent, flexible, autonomous transport mode for trips up to 7km and is time-competitive with cars in urban settings. In Ireland, 75% of car trips are over distances of less than 5 km, often at low speeds due to the congestion. Every day in Ireland, more than 200,000 people drive to work over distances 2-4km (of which 45,000 were less than 2km). Add in shopping trips and ferrying children to school and the situation becomes ridiculous. The 2006 census revealed that only 2.4% of children aged 13-18 used a bicycle to go to school and only 1.9% of commuters travelled by bike to work. In Copenhagen, 37% of commuter trips are by bicycle.' The Australian situation has been compared to that which pertains in Ireland, while the Copenhagen alternative has been seen as a model Australia might aspire to, especially within built up areas.
A spokesperson for the Cycling Promotion Fund (CPF), Mr Stephen Hodge, has noted, 'In the space it takes to accommodate 60 cars, cities can accommodate around sixteen buses or more than 600 bikes.'
The Greens Bicycle Action Plan for Victoria states, 'Bicycles reduce traffic congestion because they use road space more efficiently than cars. They also require less land for parking. In Melbourne, 53% of car trips are less than 5km and many of these trips could be made by bicycle instead.'
Encouraging commuters to bicycle rather than drive to work is seen in some jurisdictions as a viable means of reducing road congestion. Were cyclists prohibited from major roads, it would be virtually impossible to supply the sort of separate infrastructure provision that would allow them to use bicycles to reach all their specified destinations.
2. Promoting cycling is a valuable public health measure
Cycling has been recognised as an important means of promoting public health. Encouraging Australians to bicycle regularly, as those who cycle to work inevitably do, is thus a valuable public health measure. It has been claimed that restricting cyclists' access to roads would reduce the number of cyclists who use their bikes to commute and thus reduce public health.
Better Health Victoria has stated, 'Cycling is low-impact exercise that can be enjoyed by people of all ages. Regular cycling has many physical and mental health benefits. It is one of the best ways to reduce your risk of health problems such as stroke, heart attack, some cancers, depression, diabetes, obesity and arthritis.'
It has been estimated that it takes only two to four hours a week of regular cycling to achieve significant health benefits.
Among the detailed health benefits that Better Health Victoria has noted are 'increased cardiovascular fitness; increased muscle strength and flexibility; improved joint mobility; decreased stress levels; improved posture and coordination; strengthened bones; decreased body fat levels; prevention or management of disease and reduced anxiety and depression.'
Referring specifically to cardiovascular and respiratory fitness, Better Health Victoria has
Stated, 'Cycling strengthens your heart muscles, lowers resting pulse and reduces blood fat levels. Research also shows that people who cycle to work have two to three times less exposure to pollution than car commuters, so their lung function is improved. A Danish study conducted over 14 years with 30,000 people aged 20 to 93 years found that regular cycling protected people from heart disease.'
3. Cycling is growing in popularity
The increase in the number of cyclists in Australia has been seen as an argument for recognising them as a significant pressure group whose rights need to be respected rather than restricted.
The number of Australians riding bikes is steadily increasing in absolute terms and the Australian federal government, in setting the National Cycling Strategy, has established the goal of doubling the number of Australians cycling over the five year period between 2011 and 2016.
The National Cycling Strategy claims, 'Cycling is growing in significance as a legitimate mode of transport in Australia. For example, Australian Bicycle Council data showed a 47% increase in cycling on the top five commuter routes into capital city centres between 2005 and 2008.'
As a recreational pursuit, the results of the 2008 'Exercise, Recreation and Sport Survey' show that 1.93 million people cycled in 2008, representing a 21% increase in cycling participation since 2005 and a 34% increase since 2001. Cycling is now the fourth most popular physical activity behind walking, aerobics and swimming.
In terms of ownership, half of Australian households now own one or more bicycles, with the Australian Capital Territory the state with the highest ownership at over 65%. For the tenth consecutive year, bike sales exceeded motor vehicle sales in 2009.
As part of its attempt to further promote cycling, the National Cycling Strategy includes infrastructure recommendations such as bike trails and end-of-route depots where cyclists can store their bikes and take refreshment; however, it does not recommend prohibiting cyclists from certain routes. Its approach to safety in areas of shared use is better driver and cyclist education.
4. Improved laws, better law enforcement and further public education would reduce the risks
It has been argued that cyclists do not have to have predominantly separate provision made for them in order to be safe on the roads. There are a range of legal, law enforcement and public education measures which can be taken which would reduce the risks cyclists face.
According to research released in 2010 by the Monash University Accident Research Centre and The Amy Gillett Foundation, drivers were at fault in 87 per cent of incidents with cyclists and most did not realise they had behaved in a reckless or unsafe manner. Drivers changing lanes and turning left without indicating or looking were the cause of more than 70 per cent of the incidents.
It has been claimed that improved driver education would do much to address the perils cyclists face because of poor behaviour from motorists. A 2011 Monash University study titled, 'Cyclist safety: an investigation of how cyclists and drivers interact on the roads', concluded, 'Greater cyclist-related driver education and training are essential to improve cyclist safety.'
It has also been claimed that improved enforcement of laws intended to protect cyclists would serve to reduce the hazards they encounter. A New York Times report has recently stated that offences committed against cyclists are often inadequately prosecuted. The article revealed that in most United States states there were almost no consequences for causing a cyclist to die. It claimed, 'Unless you are driving drunk or completely recklessly, the punishment for killing a cyclist with your car often amounts to a slap on the wrist.'
Some Australian cyclist groups have claimed that the situation is similar here and that police often do not adequately enforce the law when a cyclist is injured by a motor vehicle. If laws designed to protect motorists were better enforced, they argue, the danger to cyclists would be reduced.
Finally, it has been claimed, there need to be some new laws introduced to offer cyclists greater protection. The recent change to the law in Queensland has been cited as legislation that should be adopted Australia-wide to reduce the risks cyclists confront.
New cycling laws introduced by the Queensland Government came into force on April 7, 2014, stipulating motorists must leave at least one metre when passing cyclists in a 60kmh or less speed zone. On roads faster than this, a passing distance of 1.5 metres is required. The new Queensland rules regarding safely overtaking cyclists will be trialled over the next two years and have already met with support from cycling lobby groups in other states.
5. Separate provision does not meet cyclists' needs
It has been claimed that for a variety of reasons, many cyclists reject separate provisions for them.
On August 14, 2013, the cyclists' quarterly Off the Beaten Path published an article on cyclists' generally negative reactions to separated cycle paths. The article states 'Many experienced cyclists don't want to ride on segregated cycle paths (except in the very rare instances where they actually make sense). For the most part, they prefer to share quiet streets with slow-moving cars, rather than ride on "protected" paths that put them in harm's way at each intersection. And if they have to ride on busy streets, they prefer on-street bike lanes that keep them visible and predictable to other traffic.'
Other concerns were expressed in an article published in the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain. Here the issue appears to be that separate provision will never be sufficiently widespread or flexible enough to meet the needs of a majority of cyclists.
The Cycling Embassy of Great Britain article states, 'Britain's large network of roads, and the nature of many of those roads - especially narrow residential streets and winding country lanes - make it impossible to construct cycle tracks on all roads, and this is...a problem for those who advocate their construction.'
Former New South Wales Minister for Roads, Carl Scully, has indicated his consternation at the lack of support he received from the cycling community when his government began to make separate provision for cyclists. Mr Scully has stated, 'Despite a massive increase in funding, policy and delivery, the bicycle lobby groups remained at best sceptical, and at worst disappointingly hostile.
Perhaps this was because I made it quite clear that I believed riding a bike on a road was profoundly unsafe and that where I could I would shift them to off road cycle ways.
I am still surprised as to how someone willingly gets on a bike and takes a huge risk with cars, trucks and buses, often travelling well over 80 km/h.'
Mr Scully was forced to recognise that the separate provision for cyclists his government was attempting to make did not meet many cyclists' preferences or perceived needs.