House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1) 52 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Adjournment Debate Adjournment Debate Cyclist Safety CYCLIST SAFETY Ms SANDERSON House of Assembly Adelaide Ms SANDERSON (Adelaide) (17:05): I rise today to speak on issues that affect cyclists but, really, it could be argued that they affect us all. Primarily, I wish to talk about cyclist safety and encourage this government to show a real commitment to cyclist safety and bike lanes in the redevelopment of our transport corridors. More specifically, I would like to discuss the upgrade of two arterial roads, Churchill Road and Prospect Road, that are within the City of Prospect council area, although under the control of DTEI and, therefore, the state government. The Rann government developed a policy entitled, Safety in Numbers—A Cycling Strategy for South Australia 2006-2010, which recognised—and I quote: ...that many people choose not to cycle because they perceive cycling to be unsafe...Whether cycling for recreation or transport, safety is a barrier to getting more people to take up cycling. Despite this policy, DTEI has supported the Prospect Road Masterplan, including providing funding of $1.1 million to support the development of the Prospect Road Village Heart, which many cyclists feel is a development detrimental to cyclist safety. This year, five groups got together to promote Active Transport. They are: the Australian Local Government Association, the Bus Industry Confederation, the Cycling Promotion Fund, the Heart Foundation of Australia and the International Association of Public Transport. In a media release, the Active Transport group stated that 16,000 lives could be saved by positive active transportation measures. Major political parties have been urged to embrace Active Transport as part of the policy cure for the challenges of chronic disease, climate change, congestion and pollution. Prospect council appears to be out of step with its LGA in its upgrade design of arterial and freight route, Churchill Road. This will be so hazardous for cyclists that it will discourage sustainable transport of the bicycle and Active Transport. As a city, we want to encourage people to leave their car at home and cycle to work. Cycling as a form of transport is beneficial to an individual's health as well as their hip pocket and to the broader society; the environmental benefits are enormous. Increased uptake of cycling decreases congestion on roads and generally makes our city a greener and more inviting place to be. When we redevelop roads, we need to make sure that we include appropriate infrastructure that encourages, not discourages, cycling. Suggestions from other states include: coloured tracks, buffer zones, the use of candlesticks, bikes riding closest to the footpath with a buffer and then parked cars to provide more safety, and buses with bike racks on them. There are many other ideas that would encourage more cycling. We cannot lose the opportunity to have a fantastic example of a cycle-safe transport corridor on Churchill Road rather than wasting taxpayers' money on a bad design and having to re-do it later. It is my understanding through practical evidence supplied to me by my constituents that Churchill Road has become more dangerous for cyclists and does not follow Austroads' guidelines for cycling safety and infrastructure. Austroads 2009 states: Due to wind force exerted on cyclists from heavy vehicles, roads should be designed to provide satisfactory clearances between the cyclist envelope and the vehicle. The recommended minimum clearance in a 60 km/h area is one metre. Despite Churchill Road's primary use as a freight route, with an annual average daily traffic of approximately 22,000 at the Torrens Road entrance, increasing to 27,900 vehicles per day north of Regency Road, the road is being narrowed to allow for extended footpaths and indented car parking. There are 19 sections of the plan for the redevelopment of Churchill Road. The plan ambiguously states that the cycle lanes will generally be 1.5 metres in width. Looking at the plans, there are sections where there does not appear to be a bike lane present at all. The road is being narrowed to widths of 3.3 and 3.5 metres. Within this short width, trucks of up to 2.8 metres wide (including their side mirrors) will be required to fit. The reduction in the width of the road will mean that other road users will also be affected by the reduction in width. The most vulnerable of these road users are the cyclists. The coordinator decided to collect a cycling petition, and she first sought advice from the minister's office on the wording. The minister's office did not confirm the required wording and, unfortunately, a petition with over 3,433 signatures was collected but cannot be presented to this house because the wording is incorrect. What this does show is that there is a strong wave of support within the community for the need for greater bicycle safety and bicycle infrastructure when our roads are constructed and upgraded. Cycling and walking infrastructure is cheap, provides significant benefits for all communities and is ideal for getting to our local public transport trip. In closing, I encourage female members to join me in the Gear Up Girls bike ride this Sunday. I also remind the house that on Ride to Work Day this year a cyclist was killed on another freight route, that is, the Port Expressway. Will the upgraded freight route of Churchill Road be the next freight route where a cyclist dies?