CCC (Christchurch City Council)

CCC consultation over aspects of the tram extension to Poplar Lane and Tuam/ High Streets.  Mainly appears to be about impacts on car parking, but may be an opportunity to address improved cycling access across the Lichfield/ Manchester intersection for those travelling along High Street.

There is a plan of the proposed route at:  http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/haveyoursay/10-213538-Tram-PIL-April2... . Submissions close on 30 April 2010.

Spokes has made the following submission:

Dear Christine

This is a submission from Spokes - the Canterbury Cycling Association.  Thanks for the opportunity to comment on these proposals.

Because of its alignment, linkages to other streets, and connection between the city centre and CPIT, High Street is an important cycling route in the central city.  There is considerable potential for cycling use to increase along this route as more people take up cycling, the cycling network is improved and proposals to make the central city more cycling friendly are implemented.  The High street is also an important pedestrian route.

Spokes is concerned that the proposed tram extension project may compromise the qualities of High Street and Tuam Street for cycling.  Two specific issues of concern are the installation of tram tracks (particularly curved tracks which have proved problematic in Armagh St) giving rise to cycling accidents, and what appears to be a lack of provision for cyclists between moving trams and parked cars.  While we accept that Council has made a decision to extend the tram into this area, we consider that both these issues need to be addressed in the final design of the scheme.

Spokes also considers that, given the extent of street works involved, the project should address improvements to cycling access across the Lichfield/ Manchester Street intersection in order to provide a more direct connection between the two sections of High Street.  We sought such provisions in our submission on the tramway extension along High Street from Cashel Street, but were told that this was outside the scope of that project, and that our comments should be addressed to the future Lichfield/ Manchester intersection works.

Currently cycling access across this intersection is awkward, particularly travelling south east towards CPIT.  Cyclists have to leave High Street and cross two lanes of traffic on Manchester Street in order to regain the next section of High Street.  Travelling north west also requires a dogleg via Manchester Street to reach High Street.  It would be relatively easy to incorporate cycleways and crossing lights in the area on the north west side of the Manchester/ Lichfield Street intersection in conjunction with the proposed tram route and crossing provisions.  This would significantly improve cycling access in both directions between the two sections of High street.  Better light phasing and more appropriately located cut downs would also improve pedestrian access across the intersection.

We look forward to a positive outcome in respect of these matters.  Don't hesitate to get in touch if you have any queries, or require further information.

Yours sincerely

Rob

Robin Delamore
Cycling Improvements convenor - Spokes

The proposal involves the exchange of an area of Hagley Park (that includes a car park, on park land, currently used by the hospital) with a similar sized piece of land between the hospital’s Riverside Block and the Avon River.  The swap provides an opportunity to acquire a piece of Hagley Park with Avon River frontage which can be enhanced.

As part of the deal there is potentially an opportunity to obtain cycling access through the park from Riccarton Ave to Rolleston Avenue via the existing hospital bridge. Spokes has already met with the DHB to discuss such a link.

Spokes submission on the re-development and land swap proposals is attached below.

The councils consultation site for this proposal is at: http://www1.ccc.govt.nz/haveyoursay/ConsultationView.aspx?ConsultId=710  Detailed information about the proposal can be found at:  http://www1.ccc.govt.nz/haveyoursay/ConsultationView.aspx?ConsultId=710  (warning - large file!).

Here's a good project - consultation over completion of another section of the Avon "boulevard" shared cycling and walking path along Cambridge Terrace between Madras and Peterborough Streets. It is part of an overall street renewal project for this area.

Currently this is a "missing link" in terms of the good quality shared path that exists along the river both before and after this section.  The existing path entrance off the corner of Kimore/ Madras is narrow, rough and not at all obvious. The project should address these issues.   Last year the council also consulted over the extension of the shared path along Cambridge Terrace section between Barbadoes and Fitzgerald.

The only other issues would appear to relate to the need for signage so that people can pick up the path at the Kilmore Madras corner, and also know that the path is part of cycling Route 7 which takes them down the Avon River, and possibly the adequacy of the overall path width (2.5m) - comments on this please!

The consultation pamphlet with a plan showing the proposed path is attached. Submissions closed at 5pm on 26 March.

The following submissionwas sent on behalf of Spokes:

Dear Phillipa

Thanks for the opportunity to comment on this proposal.  Spokes strongly supports the construction of the shared cycling and pedestrian path along this section of Cambridge Terrace.  Improved cycling and walking access along the Avon is consistent with the Avon Master Plan, the recommendations of Council's recently commissioned report by Jan Gehl: "Public Space, Public Life", and "A City for People - Action Plan" that flows from this.  This part of Cambridge Terrace is also an important link on cycling route 7 (Avon City Route).

Spokes considers that the proposed path width of 2.5 metres may not be adequate, particularly if walking and cycling numbers increase in the future, which seems likely as this route is improved.  To "future proof" the path, we suggest that the constructed width be increased to 3m.  It is also important to ensure that street furniture, signage and the fronts of parked cars do not "clutter" the shared path, as has occurred on the sections of the Avon promenade on Oxford Street between Manchester and Madras Street, and also opposite the Strip between the Bridge of Remembrance and Lichfield Street.

The "Give Way" at the intersection of Peterborough Street and Cambridge Terrace for traffic turning left into Peterborough Street, or continuing straight ahead, is supported.  This corner is "blind" for cyclists and motorists entering Cambridge Terrace from Peterborough Street.

The entrance to the existing river side path at the Madras/ Kilmore intersection (next to 318 Madras Street) is currently somewhat obscure, and easily missed. The upgraded path entrance should be clearly signposted (including the cycle route name and number) and made inviting for users, with sufficient space for cyclists and walkers travelling up river and waiting to cross Madras or Kilmore Streets.

The crossing of Madras and Kilmore Streets to link up the river side path sections along Oxford Street and Cambridge Terrace is tortuous and confusing, and presents a barrier for walkers and cyclists.  It would be helpful if a more direct crossing could be provided as part of this project, or possibly the Madras St street renewal project.  Possible solutions might include a "barn dance" crossing at the Madras/ Kilmore intersection, or underpasses under the Madras and Kilmore Street bridges over the Avon. Improved directional signage should also be provided.

Don't hesitate to get in touch if you have any queries, or require further information.

Yours sincerely

Robin Delamore
Cycling Improvements convenor - Spokes

This is a street "renewal" project on Simeon Street, which also happens to be on an excellent cyling route from Hagley Park to the Heathcote River, and will be identified in the forthcoming cycling guide (map). 

The proposal is to extend the curbing out and increase the berm area between Coronation Street and Andrew Crescent.  This has already been done to a short section of Simeon St and to part of Collins Street.  A potential problem is that this narrows the carriageway and if cars are parked along the curb (there can be a surprising number around the Brougham St intersection) this pushes cyclists out into the traffic.

It may be better to provide indented parking areas along the proposed new berm areas to overcome this.

The consultation plan is attached.  Submissions close Wednesday 4 November, 2009.

An email submission has been sent as follows:

Dear Angela

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission on this proposed street renewal project.  Simeon Street forms part of an excellent quiet cycling route from Hagley Park to the Heathcote River, and is identified as a route on the Council's Season of Cycling website at:  http://www.seasonofcycling.co.nz/rides/getting-around/25-somerfield-city

While Spokes is generally in favour of projects that involve traffic calming and street "greening" we are concerned that the proposal to narrow the width of the carriageway between Coronation St and Andrew's crescent may reduce the attractiveness and safety of this road for cycling.  The reason for this is that the previous street renewal works in both Simeon and Collins Streets on either side of Brougham Street (and Grove Road)have narrowed the carriageway to the extent that there is no longer separate road space for parked cars, cyclists and other vehicles.  As a result "pinch" points are created in these areas when cars are parked on both sides of the road and passing traffic can be intimidating for cyclists.  Parking appears to be a particular problem at weekends, and on Collins Street regularly includes a delivery truck.  An extension of the existing street narrowing south down Simeon Street could exacerbate this conflict, particularly if more road side parking or urban intensification occurs in the future, as appears to have happened in both Collins St and Grove Road .

We consider that a simple solution to this issue would be to recess parking into the berm area, so that parked cars do not extend out beyond the proposed curb line.  This would provide additional "greening" of the street, and ensure that cyclists are more visible and have adequate road space.  If parking is not recessed, then more road width should be provided.   We also note that, with the wider berm, some residents appear to be parking cars on the grass rather than the road.  Providing dedicated parking areas may help reduce this practice.

We also consider that the curve in Simeon Street at house numbers 148/ 161 is two gentle.  It appears to be geometrically designed for 60-70 km/h speeds rather than a neighbourhood street.  We request that the curve be engineered to a tighter radius to suit local traffic conditions.  This would also contribute to traffic calming in the street.

The approaches on both sides of Coronation Street should be reduced to 6 metres in width from the proposed 7 metre so that overtaking of cyclists and "pinching" them to the curb just before the intersection is discouraged. 

Thanks again for the opportunity to consult.  Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any queries or require further information.  We would like the opportunity to attend any site meeting or hearing held to consider the project.

Yours sincerely
Robin Delamore

Cycling Improvements convenor - Spokes

These works mainly arise from laying the tram tracks - there will be double tracks over this section.  This part of High St will be a "slow street" and space appears to being created for cyclists as well as the trams.  In addition, cycle stands will be provided! 

The trams have to cross the pedestrian area at the junction of High and Lichfield Sts in order to cross the intersection into the next section of High St.  This may provide an opportunity to improve cycling ccess between these two sections of High St as well (currently linking them requires an awakward devisation via Manchester St).  However, the current proposal doesn't appear to provide for this.

A plan of the proposal is attached.

An email submission ha sbeen lodged, as follows:

Dear Anne

Thanks for the opportunity to comment on this project.  We see a number of potential issues arising from the installation of tram tracks in High Street, and the way this has been addressed in the proposed design.  Unless these issues are addressed, they will significantly diminish the usefulness and pleasantness of High Street for cycling, particularly if the same design is extended to the other sections of the street.

Of particular concern is the space designated for cyclists between the parking bays and the outer tram track (approx. 1.7 metres). A cyclist riding between parked cars and the outer tram track and trying to avoid opening car doors will be very close to the track, and a minor movement outwards could see them getting their front wheel caught in the rail. As we know from the Armagh / Rolleston intersection, this can result in frequent cycle accidents.

To make matters worse, the parking bays are very narrow at 2.0 metres. For years, CCC has been building parking bays at 2.3 metres, as this reflects driver behaviour. Drivers having to manoeuvre into a parking bay across a V channel often end up significantly further away from the kerb than where a parking lane is marked on the carriageway (the V channel is only shown on the cross section; the plan view doesn't give this detail).

With the layout proposed, cyclists riding between the outer tram rail and parked cars will constantly within the door opening zone, as the proposed corridor is too narrow for this, and the parking bays are not deep enough (and are a departure from Council’s own practice). Opening car doors are the main hazards for cyclists in the midblock.  Cycle safety problems have therefore been engineered into the proposed design, as it stands.

It will be far safer to cycle between the tram rails, i.e. in the same position where a tram would position itself. This is already common practice on other sections of road with straight stretches of tram lines (e.g.  Worcester Boulevard). For this to be comfortable for most cyclists in this location, we suggest:

Posting a 20 km/h speed limit for the street (which would support Council’s aim of creating a slow street environment),

Making the carriageway narrower, so that the gap between parked cars and the tram tracks reduces to something that is obviously too narrow for cyclists to use (We suggest reducing the carriageway width from 8.3 metres to perhaps 7.0 metres, which gives another 650 mm on each side to footpaths and/or some more width to the parking bays), and

Marking the location between the tram lines with some road markings other than the normal cycle logo (as that defines a cycle lane which no other traffic can routinely use) so that all road users know that this is where cyclists are supposed to be.

The trams will cross the pedestrian area at the junction of High and Lichfield Sts in order to cross the intersection and gain the next section of High St.  This should also provide an opportunity to improve cycling access between these two sections of High St (currently linking them requires an awkward deviation via Manchester St).  Cyclists could simply use the same signals as the trams will use to cross the intersection, while other traffic is stopped.  We request that the project be amended to make provision for such improved access.  The pedestrian crosswalks at the Lichfield / Manchester intersection will also need to be adjusted to take account of the tram tracks and tram movements in the area.

Once again, thanks for the opportunity to provide comment on these projects.  We would like to be heard in support of our submission.

Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any queries or require further information.

Yours sincerely
Robin Delamore

Robin Delamore
Cycling Improvements convenor - Spokes