If SBH is what gets us bike-friendly, then go right ahead!
I was swept up by the anti-SBH sentiment and put my name on the list opposing it. I’ve now changed my mind.
Without knowing the details of the proposal I wrote in support of the opposition by exploring the question ‘Is this what Plett needs?’ and listing things that, in my view, Plett really does need.
This provided me with an opportunity to put two of my pets on show. I sent a copy to the developer’s representative and his response is what changed my mind.
PET 1 – Wilderness ambiance
Serving on the Aesthetics Committee almost a decade ago it struck me that people were putting in plans for structures that were more suited to a first-world mega city than a wilderness. If Plett’s wilderness is what draws them away from cities like that then why try to convert Plett into something they want to escape?
Could the municipality not issue a brochure to guide developers and architects, suggesting that they help retain Plett’s village and wilderness features by imagining what they’d build if they were given the rare privilege of erecting a building in the Kruger National Park?
That suggestion of mine was ignored and forgotten. The amazing thing is that, today, Plett is in the proclaimed Garden Route National Park that stretches from Tsitsikamma to Wilderness. Well, the amazing part is that Plett is ignoring that, too.
PET 2 – NMT (Non-motorised transportation)
It is difficult for me write a paragraph on this subject when I’d like to be writing a book. There are general perceptions that everyone has a car, that the road system is designed and built for motor vehicles and that the only restriction on using them is the affordability of fuel.
We imagine that with luck fuel costs will come down or our incomes will increase. Motor vehicles are so brilliantly designed that they are dead easy to drive, they run quietly (when inside), very smoothly and are very fast. Drivers accept that if the engine won’t start they’d probably not be able to move it, and expect it to easily exceed the speed limit going up Odlands when fully loaded.
The truth is that motorists are a minority (about 17% of the population). The greater majority of road users are pedestrians, and motorists have chased cyclists off ‘their’ roads. Cyclists must either take to hills (getting there by car) or make use of one-day-wonders like the Cape Argus cycle tour, when motorists allow them to use their roads for a few hours before the roads are reopened to motor traffic again.
The beautifully upgraded road from Piesang Valley to Castleton is heavily used by pedestrians, yet absolutely no provision is made for their safety, let alone comfort.
Bicycling has phenomenal benefits for people of almost every description, for wilderness areas, for towns, cities and the planet. These benefits are well document and are considered by many to be essential.
Bicycle ownership in this country exceeds that of car ownership. The Argus brings R500-million in tourism to Cape Town each year. So why do so few people make full use their bicycles? Because our roads are dominated by motor vehicles and as such are unsafe for cycling.
The reason why this gets no attention is that authorities haven’t appreciated the bang-per-buck that would accrue by providing facilities that entice cyclists. They’ve done a little here and there to make cycling a bit safer, but a huge amount could be done to allow everyone to use bicycles for recreation, commuting and touring (without a sag-wagon).
In 1999 I visited the Divisional Council in George to talk to officials there about the idea of building a cycleway between George and Port Elizabeth – a 350km roadway designed and built for cyclists. Most touring cyclists could do this within a week, provided that they were not tempted to stop off at any of the attractive places along the way.
Foreign tourists could fly in one end and out the other. Locals and visitors would have a recreational and commuter route for 24/7/365, not simply for a few special hours once a year. Some officials loved the idea, but the official verdict was to ignore it.
In 2004 I took an active part in the Bitou Spatial Development Framework exercise attending public meetings and making representations. This resulted in the Bitou portion of the Garden Route Cycleway being incorporated in the SDF.
Having had experience in planning cycleways for Cape Town, amazement here was that it would be possible to thread this route through Plett with gradients suited to cycling that would get cyclists to many of Plett’s great natural amenities, simultaneously providing a useful commuter route, and only crossing major motor vehicle routes in two places.
Needless to say, Bitou officials cited lack of funds but otherwise appeared to be unmoved and had forgotten about it when in later years they initiated or approved capital works that ought have taken advantage of building a portion of it or allowing for it later (as suggested in the motivation).
On taking a closer look at the SBH proposal it seemed to me as if it could easily accommodate this portion of the cycleway and I asked Dr Mike Cohen if he thought that would be possible. His immediate response was: “The suggestion will definitely be taken into account in the future planning for the small boat harbour.
“I believe that the proposal for a cycleway through Plett is a worthwhile project and one that should be pursued irrespective of whether the proposed harbour proceeds or not. I feel that all of our towns and cities should be made more bike-friendly.”
This, I believe, is a great opportunity to make a start with something that will be of enduring benefit to Plett for many decades to come. If the opportunity is not taken it will become increasingly difficult as the years of inaction drift on. (Don’t underestimate the cost of dealing with nimbys.)
For centuries Germans tried to link the canal routes on the west with those on the east. Almost 50 years ago, they began the drive once more. By this time part of the most obvious route, through a beautiful valley, had been proclaimed as wildlife protected area.
Custodians familiar with some of the insensitive industrial waterways resisted it, then later agreed to allow it on condition that it enhanced rather than degraded the area. On account of that additional degree of difficulty the 10-year project took 25 years. It provides, either side, continuous cycleways for touring cyclists, and towns along the route each cater for thousands of visitors annually.
One of the engineers who had worked on the project was out cycling when it was finished and stopped at a view site where other cyclists were gathered. He was delighted to overhear this conversation: Beautiful, isn’t it? Yes, but what a pity that they plan to put a canal through here!
John Stegmann, Plett
Source: CXpress