Comments on: Victoria Street Denial

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 23 Sep 2016 00:28:07 +0000

I agree with all that you say , except for one point when describing the response to the Share an Idea invitation. I am starting to think that what participants actually MEANT when stating that a green, walkable , cycle safe city is desirable , is that a green , walkable, cycle safe city is desirable but do not under any circumstances remove a single car park, nor impede traffic flow , or reduce traffic speeds in any way.

By: Cyclomaniac

Cyclomaniac — Thu, 15 Sep 2016 10:08:08 +0000

Whether they are wide enough probably depends on what rider is using the lane. I will be probably ok with it and I imagine lots of other riders will be. But if the end goal here is to attract people of all abilities and with different levels of confidence, young families, people with slight disabilities, elderly people or simply potential riders that just needs some encouragement then I question whether this design will do the job. We can spend mega dollars in the CBD to make it more bike friendly but if people feel it is not safe enough to ride into the CBD then there is not much point in doing this.

By: Doug Wright

Doug Wright — Wed, 14 Sep 2016 09:24:08 +0000

In reply to LennyBoy. Ah, I didn't grasp the scale very well. On the other hand, I see plenty of large SUVs with doors that would take up most of that 1.8m when flung open...So I would certainly be riding at the extreme outside of the lane towards the casino, and avoiding it altogether if drivers close shaved me while overtaking.

By: LennyBoy

LennyBoy — Mon, 12 Sep 2016 23:22:52 +0000

In reply to Doug. To be fair, they're 1.8m wide, which is wider than the current bike lanes along here and standard recommended width in NZ for a bike lane next to parking. By the time you allow for a car door fully open, you still have 0.8-1.0m left for biking in.

By: Doug

Doug — Mon, 12 Sep 2016 15:01:56 +0000

Those door zone cycle lanes look like worse than nothing. Death traps. Better to claim the full lane, but that obviously requires some confidence.

Would a bi-directional path on Montreal and a short stretch of Bealey be an alternative? It would require removing all parking on one side.

Let the conservative business choose between that or the original plan for Victoria Street.

By: Cyclomaniac

Cyclomaniac — Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:11:39 +0000

I am gutted about this to be honest! In other cities like Paris the focus is on pedestrianising express ways while here we are struggling with an ultra conservative business community who keeps voting for no change. There is a wealth of evidence to suggest that making streets car free can help businesses flourish but try to explain this to a flat earth society.

This back down is not what the people wanted and the council needs to know this. Email, twitter, sign the petition or make an oral submission if you do agree with the revised plans. Without voice of cycling community the original plan does not stand a chance.

http://www.generationzero.org/victoria_street_petition

By: Jo Willoughby

Jo Willoughby — Mon, 12 Sep 2016 01:15:51 +0000

cycles must be prioritised

By: Criggie

Criggie — Mon, 12 Sep 2016 00:53:49 +0000

I work in Victoria Street, so have to ride from either Montreal or Bealey to work.

The part from Bealey south to Montreal feels like a gamble every time – Its like a microcosm of all the dumb road usage possible, from the caffeine-starved wandering out, to delivery trucks parking up in the lanes, to cars doing manoevers just-cos, topped off with driver’s doors opened into the road traffic.

Yes there are good drivers on that piece of road, but there seems to be a higher-than-normal quantity of bad road use.