All new office developments in South Africa should be legally required to offer end-of-trip facilities (EOTF) for cyclists and other nonmotorised transport (NMT) users to incentivise workers to use alternatives to road and rail commuter transport, delegates at the Southern African Transport Conference heard on Tuesday.

Presenting the findings of a research report into driving the uptake of NMT by commuters and the need for a realignment of the current South African bicycle legislation, Hatch Goba senior transport engineer Glen Randall argued that it was essential that bicycle parking design and EOTFs be included in the early planning stages of any new office development to ensure space requirements, access by bicycle and integration within the building were considered.

The level of facility provision would depend on the size of the development and the number of employees, while recommended and minimum EOTFs should also be included in the Draft National NMT Transport Policy and relevant municipal guidelines, he suggested.

“Appropriate guidance should [also] be made available, showcasing examples of [best] practice to encourage high-quality facilities.

“While almost all government departments have developed an NMT policy, plan or strategy in response to addressing travel demand management and to promote the use of public transport and NMT . . . at present, little legislation exists to encourage or compel new developments to provide bicycle parking and bicycle facilities, which could greatly promote the use of NMT,” he commented.

Randall added that, while all major cities within South Africa were currently investing in NMT infrastructure or associated awareness programmes, “very little” was being done regarding EOTF, which was believed to be one of the most important determinants in a commuter’s decision to journey to the workplace using a bicycle rather than their private vehicle.

Undertaking a case study on the factors inhibiting or encouraging the use of NMTs by working commuters, he found that the primary reason preventing employees from cycling to work was the distance between the home and the office.

“Unfortunately, this physical constraint is a limiting factor, as no interventions would enable these employees to cycle to work in the future. Therefore, future awareness campaigns should focus on those employees who live nearby, but who choose not to cycle to work (20%) and those who use a bicycle, but not for work purposes (52%),” he said.

A second reason cited by commuters as preventing them from cycling to work was the perceived safety risks facing cyclists on the road.

Some 37% of those polled perceived buses and taxis to be a danger to cyclists, while 35% of employees ranked the presence of heavy goods vehicles on the roads as a reason not to cycle to work.

Meanwhile, Randall asserted that his research had identified shortfalls in the current South African planning legislation with regard to NMT and bicycle provision.

He proposed that the South African Parking Standards be amended from a minimum to a maximum provision; that Bicycle Parking Standards be included in all revised parking standards and be made mandatory for all new or extended office developments; and that bicycle provision be expressed as minimum standards to reflect the sustainable nature of this mode of travel.