It might be worth putting this up on the Cm site as an example of how to
lobby councils? There's heaps of great info in general too. Can't find
Alethea's email address - would obviously need to ask her first!

freewheeling,
Gabrielle


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Morison Alethea
> Sent: Tuesday, 14 April 1998 13:41
> To: Mason Chloe
> Subject: bicycle demand
>
> Chloe
> In the course of lobbying for the Artarmon-Chatswood bicycle route I have
> had to respond to the very low ABS cycling figures. As JTW figures only
> for Census day only, they are very limited and there are other ways too
> that transport data help keep cycling "invisible". Following is the first
> part of my/NSBG's submission re the Artarmon-Chatswood route which argues
> low cycling numbers as revealed in data are not the full story and, in any
> case, only go to show the need to improve facilities for cycling (as is
> the premise for new UK National Cycling Policy). There is quite a bit of
> text here (though there's also heaps more if you're interested!). It
> seemed to me all the points were relevant though you might be most
> interested in the last section included here, "Need for Facilities to Lead
> Demand", and in particular the discussion of the distortions in data
> collection as far as reflecting bicycle use.

Please call me if you want to discuss or if you want copies of any material
> referred to. Cheers
>
> Alethea
>
> Introduction
> This submission argues the importance of an Artarmon-Chatswood CBD bicycle
> route and the merits of the option via the Onyx Rd-Weedon Rd drainage
> easement and proposed signalised pedestrian crossing of Mowbray Rd. It
> also addresses concerns raised about the proposed route.
>
> The Need
> The issue of need is addressed in three parts:
> * The need for cycling itself
> * The need for safe and convenient bicycle routes to support cycling
> * The need specifically for the Artarmon-Chatswood CBD route.
>
> Need for cycling
> - Environment
> * International forums, individual countries around the world and
> governments at every level in Australia have recognised that motor vehicle
> use is having significant and increasing adverse impacts on the
> environment. From this recognition has followed commitment to a range of
> measures that will help reduce the growth in motor vehicle travel,
> including encouraging cycling.
> * Environmental impacts associated with motor vehicle use - and with
> the manufacture, disposal and provision of infrastructure for motor
> vehicles -  include traffic noise, impacts on air quality, impacts on
> water quality and quantity, loss of biodiversity (particularly associated
> with destruction and disturbance of habitat), waste products and the
> development of unsustainable land use patterns (associated with urban
> sprawl and the patterns of increasing car dependence and decreasing
> viability of walking, cycling and public transport.)
> * Most of these impacts are "externalities"; there is no direct
> requirement that users pay for them and therefore a lack of constraint on
> their continuation and growth. (Att A documents give an overview of
> externalities associated with transport.)
> * Air pollution is the environmental impact most commonly identified
> with the motor car. In the Sydney region motor vehicles are the major
> contributors of a range of pollutants. Their emissions have local,
> regional and global impacts which, particularly in the case of air toxics
> and photochemical smog, have serious implications for human health. The
> problem is growing with the EPA in 1997 recording the highest number of
> days of high pollution in 15 years and continuing to identify motor
> vehicles as the main threat to maintaining Sydney's air quality within
> health goals.
> * Some countries now integrate their transport and environmental
> planning:
> * The Netherlands' transport plan, in which strategies to support
> cycling are prominent, sits under its National Environment Protection
> Plan.
> * The major 1994 United Kingdom Royal Commission on Environmental
> Pollution (Transport and the Environment) identified objectives necessary
> to a sustainable transport policy, focussing on reducing the dominance of
> cars and "increasing the proportion of trips made by environmentally less
> damaging modes". In accordance with its recommendations, a national
> cycling strategy has been adopted to encourage cycling and national
> targets have been set for increasing bicycle use. A 1997 update report
> reinforces that long term investment commitments are necessary by
> governments to support alternative modes of transport.
> * On March 4 the NSW Government released its Air Quality Management
> Plan, Action for Air, its major plank being a 25 year transport plan aimed
> at reducing growth in motor vehicle use. The AQMP supports a wide range of
> measures to address the impacts of transport, including encouraging
> cycling. (Att. B)
> * Apart from providing travel choices in general other than the motor
> car, there are specific reasons to highlight cycling and walking in light
> of recent findings on motor vehicle use and emissions:
> * Cycling and walking are well suited to short distance trips (which
> are often difficult for public transport to accommodate because of the
> relatively greater proportion of time spent walking to and from nodes and
> waiting for transport). Short distance car trips are the most inefficient
> and, proportionately, the most polluting. Technologies are improving the
> emissions performance of operating vehicles but the cold-start/hot-soak at
> ar trip end points is becoming increasingly significant in terms of
> emissions: pressure will therefore increase to provide alternatives to the
> car for short distance trips.
> * Cycling and walking are popular/relied upon for non-journey to work
> and particularly weekend trips (which are again more difficult to
> accommodate efficiently by public transport than journey to work because
> of their distribution in time and place). Weekend trips and resultant
> emissions of the pollutants which contribute to photochemical smog now
> outstrip week-day trips (see Att C, excerpt from Metropolitan Air Quality
> Study). Encouragement of bicycles for weekend trips is therefore another
> area to target in order to make air quality gains.
> * Other trips that have contributed to the growth in motor vehicle
> travel include chained trips and chauffeuring trips, where for example a
> passenger is conveyed to one destination before the driver continues
> elsewhere, or the chauffeur drives the passenger to and from a destination
> (possibly driving home again in the meantime). Provision of safe
> facilities for walking and cycling to create opportunities for those of
> pre-driving age independently to reach such amenities as sportsgrounds,
> library or cinema, can eliminate multiple chauffeuring trips and a parent
> may be free to use public transport to work, for example, if they do not
> need to collect a child.
> * Provision for cycling and walking fall primarily within the
> responsibilities of local govenrment. (discussed, for example, in the SROC
> Manual for Local Government on Local Air Quality Management and the NSW
> Integrated Transport Strategy, see materials at Att. D). Planning for safe
> and convenient travel by foot and bicycle is a key way for local
> government to demonstrate a commitment to protecting environmental quality
> and human health.
> * Willoughby City Council's own local State of the Environment Report
> 1995 reflects its understanding and concerns relating to transport impacts
> on air quality and its commitment to measures to address this (Att E).
> Considerable emphasis is given to Council's commitment to implement its
> bike plan. The proposed route from Artarmon Reserve to Chatswood via the
> drainage easement and Tindale Rd-Devonshire St is published in the SOE
> Report. The report states:
> Willoughby Council is aiming to encourage residents to cycle, both
> for commuter and recreational purposes, in lieu of driving their car, by
> developing a safer and more extensive bicycle network. Willoughby's
> Bicycle Consultative Committee has been working to achieve this since
> 1991. To date 7 km of bikeway have been built and a further 33 km of
> bikeway will be built as budgetary situations allow (Figure 6). Council
> aims to have completed 90% of the bicycle network by 1999.
> * Council has also adopted other policies aimed at reducing dependance
> on motor vehicle travel, including its 1994 Housing Strategy and its
> policy on car parking requirements. Council's different policies need to
> reinforce one another in order to realise fully the desired travel demand
> management objectives. The bike plan, in conjunction with the availability
> of public transport services, will support Council's housing and parking
> policies by ensuring people have safe and convenient alternatives to using
> cars. The Review of Carparking Requirements report to Council (15 December
> 1997) adopted by Council, identifies "Encouraging cycling through the
> implementation of the Bike Plan" as one of the "Proactive measures in
> which Willoughby Council has been involved in the holistic approach to
> land use and transportation for environmental sustainability." (excerpt,
> Att. F).
>
> - Health and enjoyment
> * The rationale for creating environments that support cycling in
> order to promote health is presented fully in The British Medical
> Association's Cycling Towards Health and Safety (1992) and, for the
> Australian context, by Ian Roberts, Dr Harry Owen et al in Pedalling
> Health (1995).
> * Health professionals worldwide are acknowledging that car dependence
> poses significant health threats, not only through road trauma and
> pollution, but through diseases that are prevalent in a sedentary
> population, including coronary heart disease, stroke, obesity and
> maturity-onset diabetes. The significance of inactivity as a risk factor
> for heart attack is similar to smoking 20 cigarettes a day (Pedalling
> Health p.17). As well as reducing quality of life, these diseases
> represent a massive cost burden on the community.
> * Health researchers agree that, to support good health, physical
> activity needs to be moderate, frequent and maintained for a large
> proportion of people's lives. Walking, cycling and gardening are the forms
> of exercise identified as most likely to meet these requirements for the
> greatest part of the population. (Pedalling Health, p. v).
> * The perception that people do not have time to exercise can be
> addressed by ensuring the neighbourhoods where they live support walking
> and cycling, thereby bringing opportunities to exercise to them and
> empowering them to integrate walking and cycling into their daily
> activities.
> * To yield the greatest benefits, facilities are needed that
> simultaneously encourage walking and cycling by making them easy and
> attractive options and, at the same time, minimise exposure to traffic
> danger, fumes and noise.
> * Facilities for walking and cycling create exercise opportunities for
> many people who are not attracted to organised sport (another important
> constraint besides lack of time identified in surveys) but who remain in
> need of regular exercise. The elderly, women and the less able in the
> community are more likely to fall into this category.
> * The availability of walking and cycling to the great majority of the
> community, irrespective of age, gender and ability, contributes to their
> community health benefit and also means they can readily be enjoyed by
> anyone alone or by families or groups together, adding a social dimension
> to their value.
> * Studies suggest that physical activity induces a sense of well being
> which has a health benefit, even when isolated from actual physiological
> factors. (Pedalling Health, pp. 16-17).
> * The major trail investments currently being made in the US, under
> ISTEA (Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act), and  in the UK,
> through Sustrans (see Att G), reflect a growing community demand worldwide
> for open space corridors. They offer people a sense of freedom and the
> opportunity to travel and experience changing landscapes under their own
> power, overcoming the sense of alienation which people often feel from
> nature, history and even their own neighbourhoods due to increasing
> urbanisation and motorisation. Willoughby Council has been notified of
> this demand in the Willoughby community through focus groups involved in
> preparing its open space plans. It has attempted to respond by identifying
> access corridors for non-motorised transport, including the one supported
> in this submission.
> * A community desire for recreational access corridors emerged
> strongly from information sessions for NSBG/Council's joint Pathways for
> People project - the term "MURT" (Multi-Use Recreational Trails) was
> coined. The final report specifically supported the proposed route
> (excerpts at Att H).
> * A Department of Health evaluation of the Tracker Riley Cyclepath in
> Dubbo, undertaken by student nurses as a health promotion project, found
> that 60% of the path users had previously been sedentary, indicating that
> the path is a significant health asset. The study has won a Health
> Promotion Excellence Award, reflecting its value in demonstrating the
> importance of environments which support physical activity to the health
> of the general community. Contessa Hajinikitas of Cycle Planning who
> prepared the Dubbo Bike Plan which includes this route has also audited
> Willoughby's cycleroutes and considers the Dubbo route comparable with the
> Chatswood-Naremburn route: both link a city centre with major open space
> and recreational amenities.
> The video at the front of this submission formed Cycle Planning's
> presentation at the 1997 International Velo-City conference at Barcelona
> and depicts the multiple uses and benefits of a bicycle route network for
> transport, exercise and enjoyment. It presents a bicycle network as a
> major asset for the community  which owns it.
> * The benefits of walking and cycling to a wide cross-section of the
> Willoughby community has been specifically recognised by the Northern
> Sydney Area Health Service, which in 1996 awarded NSBG a grant of $5000 to
> audit and promote the bicycle route network for the full range of users,
> including pedestrians and disabled users. A copy of NSBG's successful
> grant application is Att I.
>
> The need for cycling facilities
> - Safe and equitable access
> * Cyclists and pedestrians, in NSW and overseas, are over-represented
> in road casualties. The International Conference on Traffic Safety held in
> New Delhi in 1991, adopted a declaration on "The Vulnerable Road User"
> (Att J). It states in part:
> The groups that are today the vulnerable road users are an important
> and desirable part of the entire transport system. Walking and bicycling
> in particular are to be encouraged and promoted by appropriate planning of
> the transport environment because of their low cost, negligible energy
> consumption, and environmental compatibility.
> * The development of bike plans, generally and for the Lower North
> Shore, acknowledges that, in the normal urban traffic environment of high
> traffic volumes and traffic speeds, cyclists require routes, not
> necessarily completely segregated from cars, but incorporating special
> safety treatments.
> * Reduced traffic speeds are critical in improving safety for
> pedestrians and cyclists but the lower speed limits of 50 km/h currently
> being piloted in NSW will go only part way to addressing safe cyclist and
> pedestrian access. A 30 or 40 km/h speed limit would be required and it
> would need to apply uniformly. The 50 km/h speed limit will only apply to
> residential streets, giving no assistance to cyclists or pedestrians
> attempting to cross main roads.
> * Vulnerable road users cannot rely on general traffic planning by the
> RTA or local governments to meet their safety and access requirements. The
> RTA focuses on improving traffic flows, which often results in reduced
> road space for cyclists and reduced crossing opportunities for cyclists
> and pedestrians. Local governments undertake LATM schemes which likewise
> have focussed on motor vehicle traffic. The emphasis in this case is on
> managing or slowing the traffic, but many of the devices used create
> dangerous squeeze- and conflict points for cyclists and obstacles to road
> crossing for pram and wheelchair users.
> * Since the early 1980s when the North Shore Bike Plan was developed
> and adopted, traffic trends have intensified the need for designated safe
> routes for cyclists. There has been a growth in motor traffic generally,
> with that growth being most pronounced in freight and commercial traffic.
> Heavy vehicles are over-represented in fatal cycling accidents statistics
> and travelling on or crossing roads used by heavy vehicles without special
> provision is particularly intimidating for cyclists. With passenger
> vehicles too there has been a trend towards use of four wheel drive
> vehicles in suburban areas, reducing the road space for cyclists, raising
> risks and making cycling less attractive.
> * Safe and equitable access for cyclists and other vulnerable road
> users needs to be specifically considered in the planning and design of
> access to trip generating locations and in providing local movement
> networks and links between them.
>
> - Need for facilities to lead demand
> * In Australia, demand for cycling facilities cannot be demonstrated
> using a traditional "predict and provide" model, where counts are taken of
> present traffic levels and extrapolated to determine demand. In any case
> this approach has reinforced car-dependence with the adverse consequences
> discussed initially. Governments now recognise the necessity of travel
> demand management approaches, seeking to reduce growth in car travel and
> tap the potential of more sustainable modes - public transport, cycling
> and walking.
> * On this basis, the necessity is to show, not specifically counts of
> cyclists and pedestrians, but the need for people in general to access an
> area's amenities. These people need to be offered a choice of attractive
> travel alternatives. Existing and predicted levels of parking required are
> among the indicators both of the demand for access and the need to supply
> access by alternatives to the car.
> A fundamental feature of any bicycle plan is the implementation of safe
> and convenient routes giving access to the main trip generators of the
> area, including town centres and sporting and leisure facilities. (Refer
> to AUSTROADS 14, Planning and Design Guidelines for the Bicycle, and Sign
> up for the bike - design manual for a cycle-friendly infrastructure, from
> the Netherlands Centre for Research and Contract Standardisation in Civil
> and Traffic Engineering.)
> * Not only bicycle planning policy requires the provision of bicycle
> and pedestrian access to an area's amenities. It is also mainstream policy
> in urban planning, transport and environmental protection. Refer, for
> example, to the NSW Government's Cities for the 21st Century and
> Integrated Transport Strategy. Note also that the UK has formalised this
> position in Policy Planning Guidances on Town Centres and Retail
> Developments (PPG6) and Transport (PPG13). PPG6 identifies "accessibility"
> as one of the measures of a town's "vitality and viability". Accessibility
> is defined as:
> the ease and convenience of access by a choice of means of travel,
> including the quality, quantity and type of car parking, the frequency and
> quality of public transport services, the range of customer origins served
> and the quality of provision for pedestrians and cyclists.
> The NSW Shaping Up Roads and Streets Task Force has developed principles
> for local government in preparing development control plans (See Att K -
> Integrating Transport and Land Use at the Local Level). The criteria
> identified for local movement networks include:
> Provide a network of footpaths and cycleroutes that accounts for:
> * walking and cycling
> * the range of likely users, including those of varying physical
> capabilities
> * opportunities to link open space networks ad community facilities
> (including public transport, local centres and schools); and
> * topography
> * Environmental policy, as adopted by many Sydney metropolitan
> councils which have developed local air quality management plans, also
> supports providing bicycle facilities. The SROC Manual for Local Air
> Quality Management (excerpt at Att D) states:
> People can be encouraged to walk and cycle more instead of driving a
> car, by providing safe accessible neighbourhoods and adequate pedestrian
> and cycling facilities.
> It further specifies:
> Bicycle plans and policies can be prepared to include the following:
> * Cycle routes that connect with a regional cycling network linking
> residents with commercial centres, public transport, open space, community
> facilities and industrial workplaces. Routes must be direct, consider
> topography and pass through open space areas where practical.
> This exactly describes the Naremburn-Chatswood route, with the
> proposed extension via the drainage easement.
> * Even if it were appropriate to apply the "predict and provide"
> approach to planning for bicycles, available data do not accurately show
> current levels of cycling:
> * Data focus on journey to work (JTW) whereas cycling (and walking)
> are most used for other kinds of journey. There are 38 non JTW bicycle
> trips for every JTW trip (Sydney Bikeplan) and non-JTW  trips make up 90%
> of all trips (RTA).
> * Cyclists may be missed statistically by not cycling on a particular
> day (census day) but occasional journeys are still valuable - e.g the NRMA
> Clean Air 2000 campaign promotes not driving to work one day a week
> * Cycling and walking journeys are eliminated from statistics when
> they form part only of the journey, based on a hierarchy of transport
> modes - the cycle or walk component of a "linked trip" does not count even
> if longer than the component by a motorised mode
> * Counts are taken at "peak times", when motor traffic is most
> prevalent and conditions least attractive for cycling and walking; cycling
> and walking are more favoured outside these times
> * Traditional counts and surveys do not identify latent demand: those
> who would benefit most from provision of designated bicycle and pedestrian
> facilities (the young, elderly, women, less able) are the least visible in
> the transport picture when such facilities are lacking. ("Imagine a rail
> system without tracks" has been the comparison used by Bicycle NSW)
> * In the UK low levels of current bicycle use have been recognised as
> an indicator of the need for cycling facilities. Refer again to Sustrans
> (Att G)and discussion of cycling by the UK Royal Commission, Policy
> Planning Guidance 13 on Transport and the National Cycling Strategy
> (excerpts at Att. L). PPG 13 states:
> The level of cycling in the UK is significantly lower than that in a
> number of neighbouring countries which have taken steps to make cycle use
> attractive as a day to day means of travel. Local plans should include
> policies that encourage the implementation of specific measures to assist
> people to use bicycles. (4.15)
> This has now become the basis for the Department of the Environment,
> Transport and the Regions' National Cycling Strategy in the UK, where
> conditions very closely parallel Australia (cycling figures of less than
> 2% of all trips but bicycle sales are buoyant and most trips are under 5
> km, indicating a significant potential for increased cycling):
> 1.1.1 Cycling accounts for less than 2% of trips in the UK. ...This
> contrasts to our European neighbours where deliberate programmes for
> action have successfully increased the share of trips by cycle. [NSBG's
> bolding]
> * The problem of expecting cycling numbers to furnish a "warrant" for
> providing bicycle facilities is also recognised in a recent pilot project
> at Castle Hill, as reported in "Shaping Up Roads and Streets", No 3
> (newsletter of the NSW inter-agency task force, Att M):
> What should come first - an increase in the number of cyclists to
> warrant cycleway facilities or the provision of cycleway facilities to
> ensure that the latent demand is addressed?
> The Castle Hill project will use facilities to lead demand. It
> Aims to raise the visual impact of bicycle facilities in the eyes of
> the entire community. This is achieved by providing a much more extensive
> network of cycleway connections... Residents will be constantly aware of
> the bike facilities thereby encouraging them to ride their bikes more
> frequently.
> * There is evidence from several experiences with providing bicycle
> facilities in Melbourne that an increase in cycling numbers will flow from
> the provision of such facilities (Ron Shepherd, "Build them and they will
> come", Australian Cyclist, December 1996-January 1997 - Att N)
> * Comparisons based on overseas experience support the conclusion that
> bicycle facilities increase bicycle use. Medium and large cities with high
> levels of bicycle commuting have 70% more bikeways per roadway mile, and
> six times more bike lanes per mile of arterial road than cities with low
> levels of bicycle commuting ("Case Study No 1.Reasons why bicycling and
> walking are not being used extensively as travel modes." in US Department
> of Transportation, The National Bicycling and Walking Study [1993])
> * The statistics used in developing bicycle policy in Australia are
> those which indicate, not current, but potential bicycle use. The most
> common indicators are:
> * bicycle ownership
> * households with bicycles are estimated at "as high as 50% across
> Australia [National Bicycle Strategy] and 40% in NSW [NSW Bikeplan]
> * 2 million bicycles owned in NSW [NSW Bikeplan taken from ABS Census
> 1991 and Transport Data Centre HIS 1991]
> * trip lengths of cyclable distance
> * one third of all car journeys are less than 3 km [National Bicycle
> Strategy]
> * 55% of car trips and 67% of car shopping trips in Sydney are less
> than 5 km;
> * 34% of Sydney journey to work trips are within a local government
> area [NSW Bikeplan taken from ABS Census 1991 and Transport Data Centre
> HIS 1991]
> * Overseas and Australian experts have identified that new methods of
> analysing demand are required, taking account of the potential also
> indicated by attitude surveys and behavioural studies. Rod Katz proposes a
> methodology
> that is not limited by relatively narrow engineering and economic
> approaches... Choice models show a significant potential to increase the
> use of bicycles and decrease autmobile use...many trips currently made by
> car are of a distance that people would be prepared to cycle...Substantial
> increases in use could be achieved if bikeways are provided. (Rod Katz,
> Demand for Bicycle Use in Urban NSW, in Velo Australis 1996 proceedings -
> p. 144, see Att O)
> * Behavioural studies have identified potential for increased cycling
> substituting for car travel e.g. travel diary studies by David Engwicht
> and the NRMA where households record their own vehicle use and identify
> trips where mode substitution would be possible (David Engwicht, The 49%
> Inefficiency Factor)
> * Attitude surveys have identified potential for increased cycling in
> Greater Metropolitan Sydney. The NRMA's "Monitor of public attitudes - Air
> quality and the car" (1997) found:
> Respondents expressed a stronger belief than previous years that
> individual action to reduce motor vehicle emissions is achievable,
> although the most popular actions continued to involve making small
> lifestyle changes, such as walking or cycling on short trips instead of
> driving (p. I)
> ...some 81% of respondents indicated that walking or cycling on
> short trips would be realistic (p. 13).
> * The substantial potential for bicycle trips to replace short
> distance car trips and contribute to more sustainable transport patterns
> has been examined in detail by Alan Parker. See Att P, "Cycling and Urban
> Travel: How much society could save by substituting bicycle trips for
> short car trips". Also included are graphs from Parker's analysis of
> unsustainable transport trends, in Australia generally and in metropolitan
> Sydney, showing the need for travel demand management rather than "predict
> and provide" models for transport planning.
> * It should be recognised that even modest shifts to bicycle use can
> bring important gains. The Keys Young report on Chatswood Town Cente
> Bicycle Issues, prepared for the Chatswood Town Centre Transport
> Study,(excerpts at Att Q) considers possible capital costs of parking to
> Council at $20,000 per space and states:
> If the increased mode split in favour of non-car travel also meant
> that a significant proportion of the population could exist without buying
> a car, or more realistically without households buying second and third
> cars, then the overall financial benefits of such policies could be quite
> significant.
> It is in this context that expenditure on bicycle facilities should
> be viewed. Too often the relatively small numbers of bicycle trips at
> present is reflected in equally small allocation of funding for bicycle
> facilities. (2.0)
> * Note that a particular distortion in the present study is that it
> focuses on the area of impact (i.e. where cycleway construction is
> proposed) at the expenseof other areas of demand along the full length of
> the route which, within the Willoughby LGA, would extend from Naremburn
> through Artarmon to Chatswood.
>
> Conclusion:
> It is not valid to attempt to assess demand for cycling facilities on the
> basis of current bicycle use. Demand for cycling facilities follows from
> more basic demand for access and the need - for health, environmental,
> equity and cost reasons -  to provide that access by other modes besides
> the car .
>
> Given bicycle ownership levels, and a growing willingness in the community
> to make modest changes in travel behaviour, facilities once implemented
> will attract users. Bicycles are best placed to substitute for short
> distance car journeys and non-JTW car trips and these are the trips that
> it is most important to replace in order to reduce total car trips and
> those trips which are most polluting.
>