To A Brown. You are correct plus buses (it is a public bus route) are around 3.0m with mirrors I understand. It also has a large commercial precinct so will have many trucks using the dangerous roads.

The developers SUPPORTING traffic report stated “vehicles are expected to yield to vehicles coming the other way rather than “squeeze” cyclists”. The traffic engineers the affected public engaged (Abley Transportation) to challenge the council on these dangers stated the above analogy was car centric and wrong. The vehicles are actually required to yield to the cyclist (in the middle of the lane as you point out), not the vehicles coming the other way.

Council staff have been relentless in their covering up and continued support of the known dangers they erroneously approved. Should the frequent deaths and serious injury occur as Dr Turner predicts in his safety audit then criminal culpability is a real possibility.

0.8m Average bike width
+1.5m Recommended bike/car clearance
+1.8m Average car width
=4.1m. (numbers from a quick and dirty Google search)
This would indicate to me that the safest and recommended course of action is to cycle in the middle of the lane.

NZTA & CCC approved a dangerous non-complying road network for the new Living G Yaldhurst Zone. Required Cycle Lanes came to abrupt ends with pinch points and cyclists being squeezed into 3.2m wide traffic lanes with buses, trucks & cars. Right turning medians & safety parking kerb build-outs were also eliminated adding to the dangers.

Only 3 1/2 years of pressure from the affected community prompted an independent safety audit that confirmed “10 (ten) serious and significant frequent death and serious injury safety issues” plus numerous “moderate minor injury safety issues”. Hopefully our new Elected Council have the metal to insist on these dangerous non-complying roads being remedied before vesting. Criminal culpability might otherwise apply to the predicted deaths and injuries.