FINAL survey results!

Well, I've waited long enough, so here are the final results. If late responses come in I'll update this post, so come back to it just before you tick your preferred candidates!

Firstly, the statistics. Of the 61 Mayoral/Council candidates polled about their support of cycling initiatives, here are the group percentages:

• 38% are Enthusiastic advocates
• 42% are Generally in favour
• 5% are Ambivalent
• 0% are Not in favour
• 15% Didn't respond

So a pretty good response rate, and I'm delighted that so many candidates are in favour of improving facilities for cyclists. I'm looking forward to our new Council really making a difference.

So who's in which group? I'll list names below, and add comments where appropriate. Again, if any candidate thinks I've got it wrong, please contact me or leave a comment against this post, and I'll put it right.

Enthusiastic advocates

If you want to see a real focus on improved facilities for cyclists, tick these candidates first:

Michael BLAKE

Anthony BUNTING

Peter BURN

Trevor COURTIER

John CREWS

Chris DARBY

Don GRAHAM

Dianne HALE

Ann HARTLEY

Jack HENDERSON

Nick KEARNEY

Norman KEARNEY

Margaret MILES

Brian NICOLLE

Jan O'CONNOR

Umesh PERINPANAYAGAM

Elaine POLLOCK

Andrew RILEY

Marge SCOTT

Tahau THOMPSON

Richard TONG

Adrian TYLER

Peter WHITE

Generally in favour

These candidates should be supportive, but may not always back cycling initiatives, particularly if there are opposing interests. They may require a bit of persuading:

Derek BARRATT-BOYES

Warwick BARRINGTON-NASH

Joy BRETT

Stuart BROOME

Heather BROWN

Don CAMPBELL

Laurie CONDER

Ross DUDLEY

Grant GILLON

Tony HOLMAN

Gary HOLMES

Arran MacDonald HUNT

Vivienne KEOHANE

Martin LAWES (Preferred Clearway to Cycle lane on Kitchener Rd – see post)

Katy MARRIOTT

Stephen MARTIN

John McLEAN

Derek NORMAN

Julia PARFITT

Lyle ROSSITER

David THORNTON

Dave WATT

Lindsay WAUGH

Dan WHITE

Andrew WILLIAMS (Preferred Clearway to Cycle lane on Kitchener Rd – see post)

Lisa WHYTE

Ambivalent

These candidates don't have strong views either way, and say they will judge each case on its merits. They may require a lot of persuading:

Aileen AUSTIN

Chris MARSHALL

Ken McKAY

Did not respond

Despite a phone call or repeat emails, these candidates didn't bother responding:

Mary-Anne BENSON-COOPER

Callum BLAIR

Ivan DUNN (Did not support Kitchener Rd cycle lanes – see post)

Tofilau Karl GATOLOAI

Alan McCULLOCH

Bob POPE

Kevin SCHWASS (Did not support Kitchener Rd cycle lanes – see post)

John VAN LIEROP

George WOOD

Once the election is over, I'll do an analysis of who the elected Councillors are, and see what percentage of the Council is cycle-friendly.

I call on all cyclists, potential cyclists and those who want a more people-friendly community to help maximise the percentage.

The Kitchener Rd debacle

As I receive feedback from candidates it's surprising quite a few know nothing about the Kitchener Rd issue.

From my perspective here's the story that unfolded in mid-2005.

Council has an excellent Cycling Strategy that anyone can read at http://www.northshorecity.govt.nz/?src=/transport_and_roads/cycle-strategy/default.htm. On that page you'll see a map of popular cycling routes, including the Lake Pupuke route marked in light blue. A key component of that route is Kitchener Rd/Hurstmere Rd between Milford and Takapuna on the north-eastern side of the lake.

This is a popular route for cyclists and runners alike, as it provides an easy terrain 6km loop around the lake, served by cycle lanes in places. Further, Kitchener Rd links the northern bays to Takapuna and the ferry terminals to the south. When I was living in Browns Bay I commuted Kitchener Rd frequently on my way to and from the Devonport ferry, and continue to use it now to get to work in Takapuna by taking a wide arc from Birkenhead.

Now the difficulty with Kitchener Rd is that it is wide enough to support a single lane of traffic in each direction, plus car parking for some of its length. There are pinch points at places where parking is already restricted to aid the flow of traffic.

The problem for cyclists is that we are frequently forced to pull out in to the traffic stream to avoid parked cars, around which we must take a wide berth to guard against inattentive door openers. As you can see from my previous post, cycle vs motor vehicle accidents are occurring on this stretch of road.

Identifying this as a busy arterial road putting cyclists at risk, noting that this route is a key component of the NSCC Cycling Strategy, and noting Council's responsibilities under the Land Transport Management Act 2003, Council planners and engineers proposed marking cycle lanes on each side of the road to improve safety and traffic flow, with the attendant loss of some (not all) parking spaces.

Well, what a fuss the residents kicked up! Why should we lose “our” parking spaces for the sake of a few sweaty cyclists? Who's going to compensate us for the loss of value of our properties? Where are visitors going to park?

Now these are no “ordinary” residents. Living in their million dollar homes overlooking the lake or Gulf, they form a wealthy and influential clique. Led by resident Tim Turner, they initiated a petition and forced the Council to call a public meeting to air their views, and followed up with letters to the local North Shore Times and concerted lobbying. Having attended the public meeting and listened to and read their self-serving assertions, I was compelled to write a letter of my own to the North Shore Times:

Click on the letter to see an enlarged view.

A cyclist petition followed, and despite it completely overwhelming the residents' one, guess where we are now over two years later in 2007?

You got it – no progress whatsoever. Residents 1, Cyclists 0.

So where were our Councillors when we needed them? Who succumbed to the residents' lobbying and stalled the initiative? Sadly I have to put Kevin Schwass, Ivan Dunn, Andrew Williams and Martin Lawes in this group.

Now Martin has contacted me and says that he is generally in favour of cycling initiatives, but sided with the residents in this case. He thinks perhaps a clearway may be a good compromise solution.

Similarly Andrew, a keen recreational cyclist and generally in favour of cycling initiatives, also sided with the residents due to their limited parking options, and proposed a southbound clearway.

As I see it, the difficulty with a clearway is that it facilitates two narrow lanes of southbound traffic rather than one, whether lanes are marked or not. This is nowhere near as safe for cyclists. Most cyclists find cycle lanes navigable at any speed as separation from traffic is reasonably assured. Cyclists mixing it with cars and buses in a clearway zone need to be exceptionally fast and skilful as there is no margin for error, and no room for motorists to overtake. Believe me, it is quite intimidating for cyclists to have cars or buses trying to overtake them within the confines of a single narrow lane. It happens.

Not surprisingly, Council planners and engineers rejected the clearway option.

The other two candidates (Kevin Schwass and Ivan Dunn) who supported the residents have neither responded to my initial survey, nor responded to my specific request to discuss this issue. Read in to that what you will. [Candidates – if I have misrepresented you, your opinions, or actions, please contact me or leave a message on this post and I'll be happy to put it right.]

And my opinion?

I believe that Council's planners and engineers got it right the first time, and I'm hoping that a more cycle-friendly set of Councillors will be able to drive this initiative through. Shore residents who live on arterial roads (and I'm one of them living in Birkenhead Ave) must understand that their private property rights do not extend to public roads, where the focus has to be on the safe and efficient movement of traffic.

Where are Shore cyclists getting hurt?

Courtesy of Land Transport NZ, this map shows the location of cycle vs motor vehicle injury accidents since 2002. Click on the map to get a bigger view. A few interesting observations:

- the loop around Lake Pupuke extending to Anzac St is dotted with accidents, including Kitchener Rd (more on Kitchener Rd in another post soon). This is a concern given the number of schools in the area, and the popularity of Takapuna and the lake environs

- the Glenfield Rd/Wairau Rd/Sunset Rd area is clearly a danger zone

- East Coast Rd from Constellation Drive to Sunset Rd is dangerous – a worry given the proximity of Rangitoto College

- Accident clusters occur further north on East Coast Rd as well

- Sadly a fatality has occurred on Browns Bay Rd at Rothesay Bay.

Looking at the map, it's clear that most of the accidents are occurring on our major arterials. Many cyclists use their bikes to commute or take extended loops for exercise. Arterial roads are the obvious choices as residential streets just don't link up to where cyclists want to go.

I'd like Council's traffic engineers to really focus on these accident clusters, and see what improvements to roadway design, including the provision of cycle lanes, could be made to reduce the risk to cyclists.

I'd like our incoming Councillors to back initiatives to remove these black spots and make the Shore a safer place for its most vulnerable road users.

And in particular, I'd like motorists and the cycling community to take extra care in these areas until something is done. There are few enough cyclists out there already.

Interim results are in!

[This post is now out of date - please refer to the FINAL Results post.]

Voting papers are being delivered now, so it's time to post feedback received so far. I'll continue to update this list as candidates contact me.

Response stats:

- 61 Mayoral/Council candidates contacted (sorry – I didn't have time to do all the Community Boards too). Of all candidates polled:

- 80% have responded (or in some cases their ticket leader has responded on their behalf)

- 36% are Enthusiastic advocates of cycling initiatives

- 39% are Generally in favour

- 5% are Ambivalent

- None are Not in favour or want cyclists off the road!

I'm delighted that so many candidates are in favour – this augurs well for a more rapid implementation of Council's cycling strategies.

Note that there are still quite a number of candidates who haven't contacted me. Don't assume at this stage they are cycle-unfriendly. Some I've contacted late and won't yet have had a chance to respond. I'll progressively update this list as more responses come in. I just wanted to get this published now for people who have to vote early.

Candidates – if I or your leader has misrepresented you, or you otherwise want to comment, please leave a post so I can update you next time.

Shore voters – if like me you want to see a more people-friendly city, where lifestyle, the environment, and community health predominate, support those candidates who support cyclists!

Enthusiastic advocates of cycling initiatives

Michael BLAKE

Anthony BUNTING

Trevor COURTIER

John CREWS

Chris DARBY

Don GRAHAM

Dianne HALE

Ann HARTLEY

Jack HENDERSON

Nick KEARNEY

Norman KEARNEY

Margaret MILES

Brian NICOLLE

Jan O'CONNOR

Umesh PERINPANAYAGAM

Elaine POLLOCK

Andrew RILEY

Marge SCOTT

Tahau THOMPSON

Richard TONG

Adrian TYLER

Peter WHITE

Generally in favour

Derek BARRATT-BOYES

Warwick BARRINGTON-NASH

Joy BRETT

Stuart BROOME

Don CAMPBELL

Laurie CONDER

Ross DUDLEY

Grant GILLON

Tony HOLMAN

Gary HOLMES

Arran MacDonald HUNT

Vivienne KEOHANE

Martin LAWES

Katy MARRIOTT

Stephen MARTIN

John McLEAN

Derek NORMAN

Julia PARFITT

Lyle ROSSITER

David THORNTON

Dave WATT

Lindsay WAUGH

Dan WHITE

Lisa WHYTE

Ambivalent

Aileen AUSTIN

Chris MARSHALL

Ken McKAY

Non-respondents to date:

Mary-Anne BENSON-COOPER

Callum BLAIR

Heather BROWN

Peter BURN

Ivan DUNN

Tofilau Karl GATOLOAI

Alan McCULLOCH

Bob POPE

Kevin SCHWASS

John VAN LIEROP

Andrew WILLIAMS

George WOOD

Perceptions of cyclists

It's ironic that in choosing the most efficient and environmentally friendly mode of transportation on the planet cyclists are often scorned, abused, intimidated and discounted. Why is this? Why do we attract so much antipathy?

We have as much right to the road as motorists, but are frequently bullied off it as vehicles pass ridiculously close, and drivers “don't see us” at intersections. You'd think we should engender so much respect for choosing to leave our cars at home that motorists would give us a wide berth and a friendly wave as they carefully passed. Dream on...

Of course I'm a motorist too – most adult cyclists are. I'm happy to pause a few seconds while the cyclist in front of me clears a line of parked cars until it's safe to pass, but sadly in our busy society where every second is precious, most motorists don't extend the same courtesy, and cyclists are seen as impediments.

Yes I get annoyed when as a motorist I see cyclists doing stupid things – dangerous manoeuvres, running red lights, excessively wide pelotons. Even though cyclists are putting themselves at risk primarily, it's unfortunate that these actions provide ammunition to those who don't favour cycling initiatives.

Somehow the logic goes: “I don't like the way cyclists annoy me therefore I'm not going to support cycling initiatives”. Makes about as much sense as “I don't like the way hoons indulge in burnouts and street racing therefore I'm not going to build streets”.

So my appeal to cyclists and motorists alike is to follow the rules, be courteous, and give each other a friendly wave. As more facilities are provided for cyclists to ride with reduced risk, and more motorists leave their cars at home and hop on a bike, and more kids are riding to school instead of Mum and Dad dropping them off, then those who have to take their car will get a dream run. And everyone wins.

All I need is the air that I breathe

This Hollies refrain pops in to my head as I see yet another burst of dirty exhaust smoke as cars and trucks accelerate away. We keep on hearing statistics on how pollutants from motor vehicles are killing hundreds of us a year, and more recently reports that those in the vicinity of busy roads are most at risk.

And the recommendation arising from the boffins behind the reports? Get unprotected people off the roads and footpaths! Excuse me??

What about some concerted action to tackle the problem at source?

How about we actually introduce stringent emission controls on vehicles? The present sop put in place by the Labour government is as effective as a slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket.

How about initiatives to reduce the many small trips that don’t actually require an engine? Pollutants are at their worst when engines are cold.

Although we’re blessed living in Auckland on a narrow isthmus where the prevailing winds blow our pollutants on to the lucky residents of Waiheke Island, we still have a significant problem here.

It should be possible for cyclists to ride on busy roads without sucking in lung-fulls of pollutants. It should similarly be possible for runners to pound the adjacent footpaths. It should be possible for parents and kids to enjoy a safe walk/ride down to the shops without being intimidated by vehicles and their exhaust fumes.

Don’t we want to live in a people-friendly city where we can breathe in a lung-full of air without worrying about carcinogens taking up residence in our bodies?

Addendum - a day after I made this post the Weekend Herald ran a story entitled "Toxic road fumes causing children's health problems". Read about it at

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=281&objectid=10465368

- excerpts in the Comments.

We're not all the same...

As I receive feedback from candidates, some are making assumptions as to what cyclists need. From my perspective, I see four different groups of cyclists that need to be catered for:

The commuter cyclist, who generally travels quickly in rush hour along major arterials to and from major centres or ferry terminals, needing:
- Cycle lanes along arterial roads
- Removal of potholes and remediation of dangerous drainage sumps
- Regular street sweeping to remove the broken glass from litter bugs and over-full recycling bins
- Hand rails and improved intersection design

School kids who need to get to and from school as safely as possible, who need:
- Off-road or wide "Share with care" footpaths
- Traffic calming measures and reduced vehicle speeds near schools

Recreational cyclists and families who travel at slower speeds to and around our magnificent parks, lakes and beaches who need:
- Continuous linked paths through parks and beaches incorporating quiet back streets
- "Share with care" facilities
- Reduced vehicle speeds

Latent cyclists - the biggest group of all. These are the folk who want to cycle or want their kids to cycle (they may even have a bike in the garage), but do not do so because it's perceived as too dangerous. Surely an indictment on our past and present transportation policies. Their requirements cover all the above categories.

The one requirement I haven't yet mentioned because it covers all categories is driver education and enforcement. Sadly many motorists show a callous disregard for cyclist safety, which has to be countered through better driver training, publicity campaigns, effective legislation and enforcement.

And finally, we'd all like clean air to breathe, thanks. More on that in another post.

So where are your hotspots?

As I cycle around the Shore, there are some stretches of road that that make me grit my teeth and pedal flat out to get through them as quickly as possible. Typically they're fast and narrow, where traffic thunders past with just inches to spare. Perhaps you can add to my list by responding to this post so we can get some action on them:
- Lake Rd between Hauraki Corner and Esmonde Rd
- Wairau Rd from Shakespeare Rd to Tristram Ave
- East Coast Rd up the hill past Rangitoto College (no wonder so few kids cycle to school...)
- Sunset Rd motorway overbridge
- Upper Harbour and Albany Highways in the vicinity of Bush Rd
- Upper Harbour Drive over the bridge (though this may improve with the new bridge construction)
- all of Northcote Rd
- Glenfield Rd, especially where the few sections of cycle lane disappear when you need them most
- Kitchener Rd where we're for ever pulling out into the traffic stream around parked cars
- Northcote Rd/Taharoto Rd intersection. Note how the cycle rails neatly launch you in to the path of straight through vehicles even though you're legally turning right.

I'm sure there are more - there are some roads I just don't get to ride. Please add them to this list. or discuss other danger spots that could do with improvement.

Well, this is encouraging!

The responses are flowing in, and the responses are overwhelmingly in favour of cycling initiatives. Of the 33 of 61 candidates who have replied, 32 are split 50-50 between my "Enthusiastic advocate" and "Generally in favour" categories.

I'll keep chasing the non-respondents, and publish the names in each category shortly, as voting papers are being delivered from Fri 21 Sept.

And tell your friends and colleagues about this site! Email them, discuss it on social networking sites, ask them to spread the word. We have an opportunity to influence candidates and really make a difference this election. As we've seen in the past, once candidates are elected, entrenched attitudes are difficult to sway, despite logical arguments.

Now is the time for cyclists and potential cyclists (those who don't because it's perceived as too dangerous) to make their voices heard.

Email to candidates

The North Shore City Council elections are looming, and I want to know what each candidate thinks about cycling initiatives. Over the next few days I'll collate responses and rank them according to "Cycle friendliness". Watch this space! I'll also take the opportunity to blog about specific issues that concern me as a cyclist on the Shore.

Thanks to the CAN website (http://www.can.org.nz/) for suggestions on questions to put to candidates - I've incorporated many of these in my email.

The email:

Hello

I see from the NSCC website that you have put your name forward for election/re-election.

I and my cycling colleagues living on the Shore would like to make an informed choice this election, and on their behalf I am collating candidates views. We believe that the Shore has the potential to become a much more people-friendly city, where lifestyle, the environment, and community health predominate. We believe that commuter, recreational and competitive cycling have an important role to play in this initiative, but are distressed to find that political will and associated funding to implement cycling initiatives are all too often marginalised. As a result, very few children and adult cyclists are brave enough to tackle our roads as it's perceived as just too risky and dangerous. We believe this can and must change.

Please give me your honest feedback as to how you will treat cycling initiatives if elected:
A. Enthusiastic advocate
B. Generally in favour
C. Ambivalent
D. Generally not in favour
E. Cyclists should get off the road

So a simple one letter response as per the above is all I'm looking for, but if you have the time and would like to elaborate on the points below, please do so.

* Do you cycle?
* Would you support lowered speed limits on certain streets?
* Would you support cycle lanes along arterial streets and roads?
* How do you feel about the cycle lane issue along Kitchener Rd in
Milford?
* Would you support cycle lanes across the Harbour Bridge?
* Are you aware of where cycle paths/lanes/routes are?
* Are you aware of parts of the transport system cyclists can’t use
(the barriers)? What would you do about them?
* Do you support the council's cycling strategy and enhancement of
existing cycling routes?
* Are enough children cycling to school?
* Do you support travel plans in schools and workplaces?
* What role do you see the council has in promoting public health?
How do you see cycling contributing?
* And if you're an existing representative, how did you vote on
cycling initiatives in the past?

Thanks

Steve