KEY POINTS:
For about two years I was almost certainly Auckland's loneliest commuter.
The reason: I chose to use a bicycle. The nature of Greater Auckland conspires against the cycling commuter. It's hilly, windy, frequently raining and is sprawled over 1086 square kilometres.
But my route was perhaps the best
bike lane in the world - the flat Tamaki Drive scenic waterfront stretch between the dormitory eastern suburbs and downtown Auckland. It's been there for more than 30 years, is a wonderful recreational amenity for the whole city, yet has never attracted more than a handful of pedalling commuters.
There's no doubt that the Auckland region is overdue for a decent public transport system but there is doubt that cycling will ever play a major role in it.
Cycling enthusiasts point to sales of pushbikes as an indication of a widespread desire for pedalling to work. It's almost certain that sales of kayaks have increased more rapidly than sales of cycles. But there's no strong movement to spend public money on facilities to encourage paddling to work. Both are recreational purchases and pursuits.
Before huge sums are spent on cycling infrastructure there should be a proper investigation to determine where the region's limited funds can be best - and most fairly - spent on public transport.
A visit to the German city of Munich might provide some of the answers. Its population of 1.35 million compares well with Greater Auckland's 1.4 million, although occupying just 310 square kilometres the population density is 3.5 times higher.
Since 1972 Munich has enjoyed a co-ordinated network of underground rail, fast surface rail, trams, buses and cycleways with a bike hire service. Yet the most recent counts show commuting by private car continues to dominate, with cycling a distant last.
That's only counting trips, too. If distance travelled was factored in, cars would be even further ahead and cycling further behind, because there's a limit to how far even the keenest cyclist will ride to work.
It's probable that even in compact, flat, largely windless Munich the money that has been spent on local rail networks has produced greater benefits than that spent on cycling infrastructure.
Cyclists will argue that their preferred means of transport brings health benefits as well and, ignoring the results of accidents, they have a point. However this is a separate argument and it may be that from a health perspective, money might be better spent on subsidising gym memberships or school sports coaching than on cycleways.
If, on the other hand, the major benefit of a cycleway is recreational and conducive to the health of its users - as is quite clearly the case with Tamaki Drive - it might best be funded from a source other than the stressed transport vote.
Perhaps, as an example, the Auckland Regional Council members so keen to promote a cycleway across Auckland Harbour Bridge might campaign on paying for it with a one-off health and recreation levy tacked on to the ARC rates. It would add about $90 per ratepayer and its acceptance, or otherwise, would provide a practical indication of whether voters believe cycleways offer value for money.
My experience in both Munich and on Tamaki Drive indicates quite clearly that while cycling is a popular sport or recreation, it has a very small following for commuting.
Even in crowded Munich with its comprehensive public transport networks and astonishingly expensive parking, more people commute by car than by train, underground, tram, bus and cycle combined.
For two years I was a lonely commuter cyclist along Tamaki Drive partly to offset the effects of sitting behind a desk all day and partly to stretch a journalist's meagre wage. On fine days it was even enjoyable.
So why did I stop? I was promoted and the new job came with a company car. The pushbike became like the vast majority of bikes and never turned another non-recreational wheel.
* Jon Addison is a journalist and transport writer.
