Council moves forward with Bundock St cycleway

A council vociferous meeting this week descended into a shouting match at times, as councillors eventually voted to move forward with a controversial cycleway between South Coogee and Kingsford. However, a rescission motion has been moved.

An artist impression of a proposed cycleway on Bundock St, South Coogee. Picture: Randwick Council

• Possible shift in cycleway path
• $12m pledge for youth addiction service

Near the end of more than an hour of heated debate over a proposed east-west cycleway from South Coogee to Kingsford, councillor Harry Stavrinos described the project as “the most controversial” Randwick Council had ever undertaken.

The 800 submissions received during the public consultation phase of the council’s preferred route along Bundock, Avoca and Sturt streets was proof of that, he said.

Despite a review that identified eight other possible paths that went before the council on Tuesday night — and overwhelming opposition from residents in the streets affected — in the end a majority of councillors agreed it was the best option on the table.

However, on Wednesday a rescission motion was moved to bring the issue back before the council. It suspends the council’s resolution.

L to R: Greens councillors Lindsay Shurey and Murray Matson voted in favour of the path. Picture: John Appleyard

“We have the option of making Bundock St safer through this cycleway,” councillor Murray Matson said on Tuesday night.

“It is currently dangerous.”

In front of a packed and vocal gallery, councillors traded barbs as proceedings at times descended into a shouting match — requiring Mayor Kathy Neilson to call for calm on more than one occasion.

Speaking on behalf of residents, Peter Tighe told councillors the 1.9km route was too steep and dangerous to become a bicycle thoroughfare.

“Bundock St is the shortest route, but it’s not the safest route,” he said.

Mr Tighe went as far as to question whether an east-west route should happen “at all”, saying it was a project anchored around the light rail and not one that would best service residents.

A protest on Bundock St in 2018.

But Anish Basin from BIKEast said to not take forward this route forward with an agreed funding arrangement “puts further projects at risk”.

In supporting the Bundock St path, Cr Matson also moved an amendment calling on the council to begin an investigation into the design and costing of a north-south Anzac Pde cycleway.

But Cr Anthony Andrews then moved a motion to “cease all work” on the east-west route and instead turn the council’s focus to what he said the council had identified as a higher priority project along Anzac Pde.

“It’s quite clear that Bundock St is number four on the list, I’m not sure how it got to number one,” he said.

Cr Anthony Andrews wanted the plans put on hold. Picture: Craig Wilson

It had the support of councillors Tony Bowen, Cr Stavrinos, Christie Hamilton, Danny Said and Alexandra Luxford.

Cr Bowen, a lifelong cyclist, said the Bundock St path was a “hair-raising ride” that crossed some busy major roads.

Cr Stavrinos spoke about the potential of 37 trees being ripped up along the path: “No one wants it. I’ve never seen a more controversial proposal come before this council.”

Labor’s Cr Tony Bowen was against the route.

His Labor colleague Cr Dylan Parker supported it.

However, those in support of the plan said it represented moving forward with safe cycleways in Randwick.

Cr Dylan Parker said the order was “flexible” and Cr Andrews’ motion “effectively abandons an east-west route … and cycleways in Randwick city entirely.”

Cr Brendan Roberts said the project was eligible for funding from Transport for NSW, and the council should accept that offer.

IN OTHER NEWS

“If we walk away from this, there’s a real risk the NSW Government will consider us an unreliable partner,” he said.

Cr Noel D’Souza said it was just the beginning of the council’s plans for safe cycleways: “A waterfall starts with a single drop of rain.”

The recommendation was approved eight votes to six, in a division that crossed party lines.

FOR:

Cr Murray Matson, Cr Noel D’Souza, Cr Philipa Veitch, Cr Linda Shurey, Cr Kathy Neilson, Cr Dylan Parker, Cr Brendan Roberts and Cr Carlos Da Rocha.

AGAINST:

Cr Anthony Andrews, Cr Harry Stavrinos, Cr Danny Said, Cr Alexandra Luxford, Cr Christie Hamilton and Cr Tony Bowen.