Agreed – there is no compulsion to ride in a cycle lane if there is one available. So passing safely can be a simple matter of popping onto the road for a short bit. This works really well in the 30 km/h sections of town.

Downside, it makes you look bad from a non-cyclists point-of-view, and gives the anti-cyclelaneist (?) ammunition to say “look at all the money spent on bike lanes and they’re still not using them!”

High St is not separated though, if you want to pass, just pull out of the cycle lane. With the low speed limit, any cars won’t be very fast either. I am not very concerned about that part on the High St plans.
Overall though, this might be a good argument to create low-cost separated cycle ways first, and then once usage is high provide wider cycleways in the future.

Sadly room for passing, or for eventual increased use, is not being provided in most instances. This is especially true on non MCR routes. Just take a look at plans for High St, a designated cycle route, where lanes are narrow and hard up against on street parking.

I realize that it is good to encourage Council to keep up the “good work” and we are making progress. But what is being delivered will fail us as more of us cycle. Passing the cycle counter at the Antigua Street bridge the other night about 8 it had over 1,800 for the day. People want to cycle, even in winter, and narrow “just enough” widths stifle that.

Or, to the tune of the Lone Ranger theme (William Tell Overture):
Get a bell, get a bell, get a bell bell bell
Get a bell, get a bell, get a bell bell bell
Get a bell, get a bell, get a bell bell bell
Get a beeeeelllll, get a bell bell bell.