It's really nice to see someone saying exactly the sort of things that's noted by Boroondara BUG (BBUG) members. Re: your points.
Point 1: Infantilise the path user
Take a ride along the Anniversary Trail (all Boroondara Council) and you will now find that all the chicanes have been moderated, if not removed. Additionally there are new crossovers at Argyle Rd and Normandy Rd and improvements to the path just east of the Harp Rd junction. A new crossover is to be implemented imminently at Laurel St/Ashburn Grv.
On the Gardiners Creek Trail (GCT) in the Boroondara Council sections, the traffic light at Dunlop St changes instantly when the button is operated. Nearby at Winton Rd, where Boroondara Council explored path segregation techniques, a new crossing is to be implemented. What another traffic light? This one will be triggered directly by cyclists using loop detectors on the path itself. The GCT is to be rebuilt from Toorak Rd to the Velodrome.
All the improvements on the GCT and Scotchmans Creek Trail over 2009—resurfacing, paintwork, realignments—on the Stonnington side, were implemented by Monash Alliance at Monash Alliance's expense. BBUG suggested that the temporary replacement of Elm St, at MECWA, be retained as a bicycle path, eliminating the highly unsafe drain overflow that was on the old path at this point.
The chicane you show at Dunlop St is the responsibility of Stonnington's Parks and Gardens.
Point 2: Obstruct the path user
Those over at BBUG have always claimed the bollard/bollards at this point are a menace. You may not have witnessed the short lived versions that were up for about three weeks that were, believe or not, far worse than what you see today. BBUG at least managed to have those removed with the assistance of many others, who complained to Stonnington Council. Super Tuesday counts indicate over a thousand cyclists (yes, over a thousand), go through these bollards each day during summer. Let's not forget the walkers and joggers as well—do the bollards help them? Refer to BBUG's Brixton Rise page.
These bollards are the responsibility of Stonnington's Parks and Gardens.
Point 3: Misdirect the path user
Red rag to a bull. Words typically fail on this one. Brand new signage for this location have been languishing in storage for at least two and half years. Here they are.
Have you ever noticed this sign at the same location? It's in Treadly's photo, can you spot it? Fat chance.
Or perhaps further a field, this one on the Scotchmans Creek Trail (not the Gardiners Creek Trail) at Waverley Rd?
All these signs are the responsibility of Stonnington's Parks and Gardens.
Total and utter contempt for path users, whether they be commuters or family groups out with the kids on a Sunday—walkers or cyclists.
The original plans for the East Malvern Station bridge were pathetic. After BBUG meet with Monash Alliance the result is as you see it today. The access ramp is far wider than originally envisaged and the bridge main span itself is not level—it was deliberately sloped by Monash Alliance to improve gradients for cyclists and other people using wheeled vehicles, such as those using electric wheel chairs. The tarmac approach on the north side is still steep but guess what? That was not within Monash Alliance's area of engagement. Stonnington's Parks and Gardens are responsible for this section on the public golf course.
Super Tuesday counts done for the very first time (2010) in East Ward showed that 191 cyclists crossed this bridge in the two-hour morning peak; that equates to 600–800 a day. At this distance from the CBD, this is the busiest point in all of Melbourne.
By the way, BBUG managed to have these locations counted for the first time in 2010. Counts are not the responsibility of Stonnington's Parks and Gardens—the Traffic Department is responsible.
I was present when a Stonnington Council officer from Parks and Gardens stated there should be a gate at the bridge access ramp on the northern side, i.e. on the public golf course. Council's draft Public Realm Strategy (it's about public spaces and their connectivity) allocates just one sentence to the public golf course, in a document 159 pages long. Those people over at BBUG responded.
Guess what department is responsible for the Public Realm Strategy at Stonnington?
Those at BBUG tried to have this path implemented.
Guess who was responsible for throwing away this great opportunity? Did I mention it's a public golf course? You know the public—that's who we are.
I'll say it again: total and utter contempt for the local community, whether they be commuters or family groups out with the kids on a Sunday—walkers or cyclists.
Your last paragraph says it all. It's a cracker and unfortunately the most accurate and astute statement I have ever read about this location. It's really nice to see that others are clear on what is going on here.
For those that pay rates in Stonnington, they may be interested in knowing that $215,000 of their money is being contributed by Stonnington Council for the new path, being built in Monash and Booroondara (Markham Reserve, etc.) That is you Stonnington rate payers are paying for a path that is not even in Stonnington.
Heh, it's not on the golf course either, so it's obviously worth it.
The golf buggy lane is probably a world first. Maybe they would like to present a paper on it at the next BV Bike Futures Conference? Congratulations to Stonnington's Parks and Gardens on this fine innovation.
Then again, it may be better to give up on the gardeners and get in the traffic engineers.