Whether Toronto, New York – or now Sydney, the pattern is clear: whenever the central cities decide to make decisive moves to seriously support alternative transportation options (like separated bike routes) or constrain the car (through congestion pricing), the suburbs react – typically through senior governments who know where the votes are.
Latest up, from the Sydney Morning Herald (March 8):
THE completion of Sydney’s planned network of separated cycleways hangs in the balance after the Premier, Barry O’Farrell, announced plans for new laws to curb the City of Sydney’s role in transport decisions.
Announcing plans for a government-controlled Central Sydney Traffic and Transport Committee, Mr O’Farrell said the government disagreed with the council on transport issues, such as extending bikeways, speed limits and expansion of low-speed zones for cars and pedestrians. …
The Lord Mayor, Clover Moore, says her transport initiatives, including plans for a 55-kilometre network of separated cycleways, are designed to make Sydney a global city, but Mr O’Farrell disputed this and said she was planning for residents and not for the 800,000 people who entered the city each day.
.
.
(As an example of balanced reporting, count the number of cyclists interviewed versus the critics. I’ll give it this: every possible objection is raised, regardless of merit.)













Yikes.
Highlights the value of having a supportive local government, that’s for sure.
You have to consider the source. The “Ten” network competes with channels 9 and 7 to be the most like Fox in the USA. I wonder if the ABC has done a piece on it — that would be more cycle-friendly. Sydney’s narrow, potholed, traffic-choked roads are terrible for cyclists. It’s amazing how few you see given the favorable climate.
And here I thought that Sydney was looking at getting bike share. A commuter can enter the city on public transit and then use bike share.