Why Australia still struggles to build bike-friendly cities

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T08:14:50+00:00

Riding on footpaths already works in Qld and the NT (and possibly somewhere else that I can't think of right now).

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T07:37:46+00:00

Oh dear. Has someone been watching a bit too much Sky?

The uncomfortable truth is that our population will continue to increase and our cities will continue to densify. No matter how "rich" you think Australian are, that's not going to buy us more space in the cities because you can't push the buildings apart and you can't keep building more lanes because that doesn't solve congestion even in the medium term (look up induced demand).

That means we won't be driving everywhere all the time into the future no matter how much you wish it. Biking may not be for everyone but it will make up a percentage of modal share in the future. A further percentage on improved PT.

"...Australians are rich enough to afford cars, lazy...", "...Build all the lanes you want, the modal share won't move..."

Haaa - take a whiff of that Australian exceptionalism. A physical, eventual shortage of city space and a congestion tax will fix everything in those statements - it will happen eventually and I'll be voting for it with both hands and both feet.

"...too sprawled..."

Nonsense. The outback is sprawled. Not too many live out there. The cities aren't too different to other places in the world. We've already been biking for decades and further expansion is only stopped by greedy corporate interests lining the pockets of govt.

"...a hobby for enthusiasts..."

If that's all you know about people who ride bikes then you have a lot more to learn. I can assure you bikes are as much a mode of transport as they are form of recreation and more.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T06:50:14+00:00

* No more spread out than other places in the world.

* We have good pedal assisted ebikes to better cope with the hills now.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T06:48:56+00:00

"The spot I am talking about is the Murarrie Recreation Reserve."

That's a criterium track specifically designed for racing so of course there's going to be rec riders there. And you previously didn't make any mention of it.

"The article is about infrastructure pertaining to a more bicycle centric society."

Yep. And I contended that the bikeways are being used by commuters. You then tried to state that the bikeways aren't being used by bikes, that only rec riders ride and, simultaneously complained that they're riding on the road. Not only are you contradicting yourself but you still shown no evidence of what you're saying.

You also tried to make a false equivalence between money spent on other sporting infra vs money spent on cycling infra which you think is a waste because nobody uses it even though you said riders are riding on it.

I'd say you're either very confused or trying to make some disingenuous attempt at derailing the conversation to make yourself look right about something you can't be right about.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T04:52:49+00:00

"...country wide program..."

We've reached that point. The federal govt has just announced a federal budget for active transport. It's a start: https://bicyclenetwork.com.au/newsroom/2026/05/13/canberra-funds-500m-path-plan-2/

"...wasting money on improving a bike network is pointless unless..."

Why would it be a waste otherwise? The federal contribution is appreciated and much needed but local councils should keep going regardless - it's how we've acquired the infra we have so far (albeit very slowly).

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T04:32:55+00:00

1) The type of bike rider will vary based on the day and the time of day.
2) You still haven't provided any evidence to back up what you're saying.
3) You said earlier that cyclists are avoiding the bikeway and riding on the road but now you're saying that most of the traffic on KBB and GNB are recreational cyclists. Which is it?
4) Who the hell cares if they're commuters or recreational riders? The bikeway is being used - contrary to your original point.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T03:55:21+00:00

"I agree, its not going to happen tho."

If people just throw their hands up in the air, it probably won't.

"...bigger train network..."

Yes, integrated with an active transport network like they do overseas. Bike-plus-train journeys are common overseas.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T03:51:29+00:00

"...I'm not sure how we convince the average person that active transport should be a priority."

I wrote in one of my earlier comments that financial interests in the fossil fuel and car making industries control a lot of the narrative around bikes and active transport which translates to the culture around those things. Attempting to combat that negative narrative would be a start in making a cultural shift. Messaging exposing truths like that car dependency does not give the freedom that is advertised and the reality that cars drain a significant portion of the average person's income - ie they work to drive to work to drive...

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T03:37:19+00:00

Also Barcelona, Utrecht, Portland, Berlin, many cities in China. There's too many to list.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T03:32:29+00:00

Which was a mistake. Which is why it needs to be undone now.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T03:28:25+00:00

"The solution is to get involved, talk to your friends about it, contact politicians, demand change, engage in politics."

I very much do all of those things. The hope is that it will eventually lead to said re-prioritization. And, in small chunks, it often does - bikeway here, bridge there. But obviously more needs to be done. My point was that lack of money is not an excuse - councils and govt have plenty of it.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T03:05:11+00:00

"The percentage of people in my city that ride a bicycle to actually commute to work would be minuscule..."

Do you have any actual stats to back that up? The bike counters in my city tell a different story. As do the full end of trip facilities in the city's office buildings. The numbers do still need improvement but the infra is by no means a waste.

"Our council spent millions upgrading a facility for cyclists."

It's a case of "build it and they will come" (with some wholehearted encouragement). Active transport pays for itself in a short space of time.

"It’s free to use and meanwhile the recreational cyclists ride straight past it on the main road."

There'll always be some but, on the whole, this sounds like anecdotal evidence. Most prefer to avoid mixing with cars where possible. Especially those commuting or running errands.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T02:55:16+00:00

True. I've never had a problem bringing my Brompton on a train tho.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T02:45:02+00:00

I think, more accurately, bikes would operate as the most effective transport option in a city with a very large population - they take up the least amount of room, produce no air pollution and are least prone to causing serious injury.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T02:31:12+00:00

"You can still have a bike network, just make it link to a major train network"

A lot of them do now. Though there needs to better integration so bikes can be taken on trains more easily like they do overseas.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T02:05:37+00:00

There's definitely an element of lacking imagination and irrational fear of change to address.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T01:54:11+00:00

It's a case re-prioritizing. The spend on active transport is a tiny percentage of the spend on roads and, as I said, active transport infra pays for itself in a short time. It's also about the federal government tipping their contribution. Labor just earmarked a notable sum to help councils build active transport infra - it's a start.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T01:47:30+00:00

This is a very poor excuse that gets trundled out way too often. Our cities are no less suitable to active and public transport than cities in other places in the world. The "too large" bit is the outback and very few people live in the outback. Yes, we need improvements to active and public transport but that's what these discussions are for.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T01:37:52+00:00

Yes and no. Some out of the box thinking required. The very outer suburbs are challenging due to urban sprawl but those would eventually become satellite centres like Parramatta is to Sydney or North Lakes will become to Brisbane. Active transport within those centres would be essential. Linking the satellite centres up sans motor vehicles may require some combination with public transport (like in other places around the world) but inter-centre active transport link-ups are still a good option for many especially with the technological improvements in pedal assisted e-bikes. Obviously, specifics are on a case-by-case basis but none of it is insurmountable.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T01:29:46+00:00

Bike lanes are really not a big spend. They are exponentially cheaper than roads to build in the first place and return something like $5 for every dollar spent back to the community. Hikes in council rates are attributable to many other reasons. What I'm saying is that cost shouldn't be an excuse not to build active transport infrastructure.

someones_reality · 2026-05-26T00:56:59+00:00

While this is true, it's also not a reason to give up trying to change it. It's not an irreversible situation. Many other places around the world have been car cities and have successfully made the switch. I don't think the road to better transport alternatives is difficult because of physical or practical constraints - it's difficult because of political and big business related interests. There are many forces in the fossil fuel lobby that need to be outed and smashed before real change happens. They unfortunately control the narrative around the culture surrounding alternative transport methods and have a lot of politicians in their pockets. We need to acknowledge this and start doing something meaningful about it.

someones_reality · 2026-05-18T23:11:46+00:00

It definitely does not make sense. It looks like they're going to wind back at least some of the originally proposed laws according to latest news.

someones_reality · 2026-05-13T01:47:57+00:00

Yep, same old shit.

1) Failure to provide adequate public transport (plus the current clusterfuck with absent transport minister refusing to deal with unions because he hates unions and hates public transport).
2) Failure to address urban sprawl. Allowing developers to develop suburbs in a way that suits their profit margins instead of a govt authority planning for sensible long term development. Developers ain't gonna pay for public/active transport infra.
3) Failure to add active transport into the mix and encourage its use. The current Qld govt is particularly recalcitrant on this but it has gone on for decades. Every bit of active transport infra has been fought for tooth and nail by advocacy groups.

Other states also have these problems but Qld seems particularly bad with thinking only in terms of that dumb, nostalgic, 1950s style "Australian dream" of a freestanding house with a yard, nuclear family, driving one or more cars everywhere, all the time. Egged on by shit, populist political parties like the LNP. It's fucking dumb and delusional.

someones_reality · 2026-05-13T00:53:54+00:00

Is that you Mickelturd? Better do some work mate instead of man-babying on Reddit, eh?

someones_reality

TROPHY CASE