Comments on: Have your Say – More “Accessible City” Projects

By: Dave P

Dave P — Thu, 28 May 2015 00:30:56 +0000

In reply to rob5chch6. But are they actually genuine about trying to make Christchurch into a world-class cycling city? The cynic in me thinks it was said as more of a sound-bite than an intended reality for Christchurch. Hopefully I am proved wrong, but looking at the plans above you've got to wonder.

By: rob5chch6

rob5chch6 — Mon, 25 May 2015 19:51:48 +0000

I agree with the above. A big tick for the cycleways programme until you get into the CBD , then it is back to same ol , same ol , paint and compromise. If we wish to be a world class cycling city then best start at the centre and work outwards.

By: Cyclomaniac

Cyclomaniac — Mon, 25 May 2015 08:31:00 +0000

These maps are indeed hard to read – was it Einstein who said if you can not explain it simply enough you probably do not understand it enough? From what I do understand from these maps is that they look messy and confusing. I have always thought the strength of Dutch cycle paths is consistency. What are the reasons behind this utter disjointedness? The chain is no stronger than the weakest link. What good does riding on separated paths do when you are forced to merge with cars again after a few meters? It is the merging back with the motor traffic that will actually create dangerous situations. I rather cycle left of the old white line to be honest. Fail.

By: Meerkat

Meerkat — Mon, 25 May 2015 05:54:26 +0000

I have just responded to each of the 3 proposals in general terms, saying it all looks a bit complicated, surely things can be more straight forward for people on bikes, and referred them to Lenny Boy’s comments. Hope that helps.

By: Magdalena Lorenzo

Magdalena Lorenzo — Sun, 24 May 2015 22:41:40 +0000

Thank you for the analysis. My brain is working hard trying to imagine a final product that looks like a fluid network.

By: Stephen Judd

Stephen Judd — Sun, 24 May 2015 22:28:42 +0000

On reflection, it strikes me that a hospital is a particularly bad place to have shared paths around — lots of infirm people with mobility and visibility issues, moving slowly. Horrible for them to have cyclists vooming past, inconvenient for cyclists.

By: LennyBoy

LennyBoy — Sun, 24 May 2015 06:26:02 +0000

In reply to Dave P. Various consulting firms bid to do each of these packages of work for CERA. While they will certainly have transport planning/engineering skills, I don't know how much specialist cycle planning/design skills they will have; it varies. I can't say that Spokes Canterbury (or any other road user groups for that matter) get much say in the design until this consultation phase now.

By: LennyBoy

LennyBoy — Sun, 24 May 2015 06:21:45 +0000

In reply to Catherine K. All "special vehicle lanes" in NZ (bus, cycle, high-occupancy veh) can use green; it's not exclusive to bike lanes. If it says "BUS LANE" you can bike on it too; however all of these shown are "BUS ONLY" (but I could see some being ignored by bikes on the road, e.g. top end of Manchester St).

By: LennyBoy

LennyBoy — Sun, 24 May 2015 06:18:03 +0000

In reply to Stephen Judd. I have to agree; the resolution of the plans this time is not great and the colours don't seem to match the key even. Suffice to say that most of these streets are being completely reconstructed, so everything is "new". The dark grey are road-level surfaces while the light grey areas are paths/islands (i.e. raised above the road).

By: Catherine K

Catherine K — Sun, 24 May 2015 04:19:00 +0000

This looks really confusing for anyone to cycle through. Weaving back and forth on footpath then on the road and back again. Really disjointed.
Why is the bus only lane green like a cycle lane or are cyclists supposed to be using it too?
How hard is it really to have a lane that starts on the left of the map and is continuous all the way to the right hand of the map just like car lanes but for bikes? Seems impossible.