Proposed Kilmore Street, Stanmore Road and Linwood Ave Cycle Lanes

River Road/ Stamnore intersection. Council has come back to submitters about the cycle lanes proposals for Stanmore Road. They have agreed to put in a crossing at the River Road/ Stanmore intersection. Well done everyone!

The email states:
A project information session is scheduled for Wednesday the 3rd of June at the Methodist Church Hall, at 311 Stanmore Road, that submitters are welcome to attend. At this session project staff will present the changes that have been made to the plan and answer any questions or clarify any issues that you may have. There will be a short presentation of changes starting at 5.30pm, followed by an opportunity for you to ask questions with the session finishing between 6.30 and 7.00pm. Does anyone want to attend, or shall I just email CCC and give the OK.

Hi

The Council has proposed that our submissions on these cycle lanes be heard on Tues 10 march at 8.50am. Council can hear all three submissions at once and we would have 20 minutes.

I need to confirm the date and time with her over the next couple of days.

Who would be available to co-ordinate our input and speak to the hearing? It really needs to be someone who is familiar with the particular routes.

I can assist with the Stanmore/ River road crossing, but that's about all. I definitely don't feel qualified to speak on the Kilmore and Linwood issues, as I don't use either of these routes.

The three submissions are at:
http://spokes.org.nz/submission/2009/proposed-kilmore-street-stanmore-ro...

Volunteers please.

The final submissions on these cycle lanes are attached at:
http://spokes.org.nz/submission/2009/proposed-kilmore-street-stanmore-ro...

Council have advised that they will notify us of the time when these submissions are to be heard.

I would have to agree with Nigel. The clearway idea is not cycle friendly as it effectively narrows the road and makes it harder to maintain safe separations distances between vehicles and cycles when in operation. I regularly ride down Memorial Ave from Kendal Ave to Fendalton Road. I find that cars pass noticeably closer to me on the four laned section down to Greers Road than from there to Fendalton Road. While Fendalton Road is four laned it has well marked cycle lanes on each side which help maintain the separation, something Memorial Ave lacks. From the plan it would appear that cycle lanes are only in place on parts of the proposed four laning along Kilmore St. Keith Turner

I generally agree with the previous comments on the proposed cycle lanes for the 3 projects being consulted on. However I have serious misgivings with regard to the proposed westbound clearway on Kilmore St between Barbadoes and Madras streets. I believe it is an expensive and inappropriate way to deal with a dangerous situation.

Over the last few years I've been able to spend considerable time observing traffic movements along this stretch of roadway. In view of this I make the following specific observations:

1) Clearway: Apart from the high cost of such contraption, I believe the automated hinged gantry sign to be erected at the start of this section makes the entire situation overly complicated. The only purpose for the clearway is to allow two traffic lanes to remain for a mere two hours of the day. Without the 2 hour clearway there is no need for the hinged sign.

We need to keep things simple and easy for motorists to understand. The poor blighters have enough to worry about without adding to their misery!

Therefore it is my opinion that the single westbound traffic lane should continue up to the proposed pedestrian refuge on Kimore Bridge, from where it becomes two lanes. I do not agree that traffic volumes justify extending the two lanes beyond this point.

Another alternative is to make Kilmore St between Barbadoes and Madras streets one-way but that would affect egress from the Fire Station and so probably not an option.

2) Pedestrian Refuge east of the Kilmore Street Bridge: To a lesser degree I believe the 2.0m wide physical island to the east of the Kilmore Street Bridge is another unnecessary expense. The reason is that the traffic volumes in both directions do not justify it.

There is only 2 hours of heavy westbound traffic and very little east bound traffic at any time. Also the speed of east bound vehicles is reduced because they have had to turn right from Madras St. If a pedestrian is concerned about safety then the pedestrianised traffic signals at Madras St are but a few metres away.

If CCC have an urge to install pedestrian refuges there is far greater need for one on Madras St/Oxford Terrace crossing. In addition I'd also like to see the width of the mid-block lanes narrowed to the same as that at the intersections on the one-way section of Kilmore St but that section doesn't seem to be part of the current consultation.

Sorry for the late response but I've been a bit busy.

Nigel

Draft submission based on Glens comments and both his and my input re. the River Road/ Stanmore Road crossing. Please have a good look at this particular point.

The submission is due this Friday.

Tuesday, 10 February 2009
Brian Boddy
Christchurch City Council
PO Box 237
Christchurch Mail Centre
Christchurch 8140

Dear Brian

RE: PROPOSED STANMORE ROAD CYCLING IMPROVEMENTS

SUBMISSION FROM SPOKES CANTERBURY

Thanks for the opportunity to make this submission. Spokes Canterbury is a local cycling advocacy group with approximately 1200 members that is affiliated with the national Cycling Advocate's Network (CAN). Spokes is dedicated to including cycling as an everyday form of transport in the greater Christchurch area.

Spokes supports improved provisions for cyclists in Stanmore Road. Our comments and suggestions on the proposals are as follows:

Access/ cycle crossings
The proposed design does not address the problems that arise for cyclists using River Road and trying to cross Stanmore Road, particularly during periods when traffic is heavy. River Road is part of the quiet "family friendly" cycling route down the true left of the Avon, and this route has the potential to be one of Christchurch’s show piece recreational and commuter cycling routes. Currently, the Stanmore Road crossing is the only real impediment to this occurring.

The proposed design provides for up to three lanes of traffic to be banked up at the Avonside lights across the River Road intersection. Implementation of the project without provision for a cycle crossing will tend to reinforce both the perception and the reality that the intersection is a barrier for cyclists.

Options for the river route to cross other parts of Stanmore Road are limited. The marked cycle route down Draper and Swanns Rd which leads cyclists away from the river is also compromised by an inadequate crossing on Stanmore Rd at the intersection of these two roads. This crossing has an inadequate and poorly placed refuge, and is further compromised by right turning traffic out of Swanns Rd.

Options for a cycle crossing at the Stanmore/ River Road intersection may include:
• A signalised cyclist/ pedestrian crossing on the north side of the intersection co-ordinated with the Stanmore/ Avonside lights, or
• Widening the footpath on both sides of Stanmore Rd east of the intersection and providing a refuge a short distance north of the proposed flush median towards Slade Avenue (similar to those at the Ashgrove/ Barrington intersection).
We request that crossing issues for cyclists associated with the Stanmore Road/ River Road intersection are addressed as part of the project. Consideration also needs to be given to improving the design of the crossing refuge just north of the intersection of Stanmore Draper and Swanns Rd. However, improvements to this crossing are not considered to be a substitute for a Stanmore Road/ River Road crossing.

Design and road markings

The Mobile Library parking space at the Richmond Village Green may need to be to be indented so that cyclists are not forced out into the traffic lane, particularly as there is a crossing refuge on this section of the road. Similarly the Village Green northbound bus stop should be indented so that cyclists are not forced out into the traffic lane where cars can't move over because of the refuge.

Several of the bends along Stanmore Rd would benefit from coloured road marking on the inside cycle lane, to deter corner-cutting by cars.

We question the concept of a coloured stop box in front of a right turn lane (as at Avonside Drive). These are difficult to access once cars are queued. We would prefer to see a separate right-turn cycle lane if the demand is high enough (which it probably is here), as long as this does not compromise the River Road crossing point.

Thanks again for the opportunity to make this submission. If there are matters requiring clarification, please contact our Submissions Co-ordinator Robin Delamore in the first instance. His contact details are:
274 Highsted Road
Casebrook
Christchurch 8051
Phone: 3599746
Email: robind [at] actrix [dot] co [dot] nz

Paul de Spa
Chairperson, Spokes Canterbury

Largely based on Glens comments. Will post Stanmore Road later tonight.

Tuesday, 10 February 2009
Peter Barnes
Christchurch City Council
PO Box 237
Christchurch Mail Centre
Christchurch 8140

Dear Peter

RE: PROPOSED LINWOOD AVENUE CYCLE LANES

SUBMISSION FROM SPOKES CANTERBURY

Thanks for the opportunity to make this submission. Spokes Canterbury is a local cycling advocacy group with approximately 1200 members that is affiliated with the national Cycling Advocate's Network (CAN). Spokes is dedicated to including cycling as an everyday form of transport in the greater Christchurch area.

Spokes supports improved provisions for cyclists in this part of Linwood Avenue. Our comments and suggestions on the proposals are as follows:

Access

At Worcester St, there is an opportunity for cyclists to cross over Linwood Ave to the other part of Worcester St (a connectivity advantage over motorists), but it's not clear that the pathway connections will be obvious enough for cyclists to encourage this. The approach paths on either side should be adjusted and marked to assist here.

The cycle median cut-throughs in the median opposite Cashel St are a useful feature. However, cyclists will have difficulty crossing three lanes on the NE side of Linwood Ave. These lanes could be reduced to two by deleting the right-turn lane at this point as this appears to extend a long way back from the Buckley’s/ Aldwins Rd intersection

Additional path crossings of the Linwood Ave median should be considered for cyclists (and pedestrians) entering and leaving the many side roads between Chelsea and Tilford Street, and also to provide access into Linwood Park. The U-turn facilities for motorists are generally not suitable as cycle crossings.

Design and marking

Just before the Hereford St intersection it appears that SE-bound cyclists will get squeezed due to the rather short through lane. Removal of several parking spaces and some coloured road marking on the lateral transition would be of assistance here. Similarly, the lane merge at the Hereford St intersection in the NW direction needs some additional colour marking of the cycle lane to avoid cyclists being squeezed out.

It is not clear if the marked spaces in front of #224 and #225 are bus stops. If so, consideration needs to be given to indenting these into the footpath to allow cyclists to pass stopped buses.

We question the proposed use of a "Watch for Doors" sign NW of the Aldwins Road intersection. Motorists are legally required to check for cyclists before opening their doors: this appears to absolve them of their responsibility. If there is insufficient width for cyclists to safely use the cycle lane, a wider lane should be provided. To this end we would support removal of car parking along this section of Linwood Avenue.

Coloured road marking should be used in the cycle lane on the inside curve opposite Cranley St to make this more visible to motorists. This could be tied in with colour across the slip lane entrance, which is also currently lacking.

Thanks again for the opportunity to make this submission. If there are matters requiring clarification, please contact our Submissions Co-ordinator Robin Delamore in the first instance. His contact details are:
274 Highsted Road
Casebrook
Christchurch 8051
Phone: 3599746
Email: robind [at] actrix [dot] co [dot] nz

Paul de Spa
Chairperson, Spokes Canterbury

Here is a draft submission based on Keith & Glens comments so far. I tend to agree with Glens comments re. Alans suggestions for separated cycle paths. Any feedback on this?

Submission needs to go out Thus pm.

Phillipa Upton
Christchurch City Council
PO Box 237
Christchurch Mail Centre
Christchurch 8140

Dear Phillipa

RE: PROPOSED KILMORE STREET CYCLE LANES

SUBMISSION FROM SPOKES CANTERBURY

Thanks for the opportunity to make this submission. Spokes Canterbury is a local cycling advocacy group with approximately 1200 members that is affiliated with the national Cycling Advocate's Network (CAN). Spokes is dedicated to including cycling as an everyday form of transport in the greater Christchurch area.

The following are our comments and suggestions on the proposed cycle lanes and other cycling improvements for this part of Kilmore St.

Design and access

Better provisions for cyclists to access the Kilmore St east bound cycle lane are required. Cyclists can't come down Kilmore St, as it is one way from the bridge so they have to either turn from Madras St (not the most cycle friendly street in Christchurch) or cross from the blocked off part of Cambridge Tce, or the shared path on Oxford Street. As most cycle traffic using the proposed cycle lane will come from Oxford/ Cambridge the crossing points over the Madras/ Kilmore intersection should be improved to provide better access for eastbound cyclists.

In conjunction with improving these crossing points, the opportunity should also be taken to improve access to and from the Madras St/ Kilmore St corner to the eastern continuation of Cambridge Tce (adjacent to #211). This is an important linkage for cyclists wishing to travel along the Avon river , but the current path is narrow and somewhat obscure. The path connections to Cambridge Tce on both sides of the Madras St intersection could be better highlighted at the crossings by paint marking around the intersection pathways.

The proposed temporary clearway outside #206-#222 is likely to be confusing for both motorist and cyclists, and will create a pinch point for cyclists when cars are parked there. We question why parking should continue to be permitted on this section of Kilmore St. It is also not clear if there is any time restriction on parking in Kilmore St when it's available.

Signage and road markings

The variable clearway signs are unlikely to be useful from a cycling perspective. The "clearway time" one on the LH side should show a cycle symbol to the left of the through/left arrow, while the "outside clearway time" one should show a cycle symbol where the X is, perhaps to the right of a "P" symbol.

We would like to see some coloured road marking at the end of the cycle lane in front of #260 to remind motorists about the continued presence of cyclists as they drift over into the clearway lane. Coloured road marking is also required to make the cycle lane obvious where it resumes by the fire station.

The coloured cycle-box markings at Barbadoes St are not totally clear for all users. It looks like there is a very small space behind this box, which may be used by left-turning motorists. These users could end up encroaching in the cycle box, particularly when parking is right up to the intersection, or blocking cyclists from getting to the box. Either the cycle box should be removed (i.e. forcing left-turners to stay in the main lane when the clearway is closed) or an adequate length turn lane and markings should be provided so that cyclists won't get stuck.

Thanks again for the opportunity to make this submission. If there are matters requiring clarification, please contact our Submissions Co-ordinator Robin Delamore in the first instance. His contact details are:
274 Highsted Road
Casebrook
Christchurch 8051
Phone: 3599746
Email: robind [at] actrix [dot] co [dot] nz

Paul de Spa
Chairperson, Spokes Canterbury

It's not all bad for the Kilmore eastbound cycle lane; I imagine that some will come via Oxford Tce from the west, thus avoiding the one-ways.

I think also this project is arguably too far down the track to consider curbed Danish-style cycle lanes; they add a considerable cost element to these locations, which presumably hasn't been budgeted for. It'd be pretty tricky to do for the clearway part anyway. Not to say that we shouldn't be encouraging Council to look out for opportunities to try these out.

Here's a few other comments I have about the three projects:

Kilmore St:
- I don't think the variable clearway signs are that useful from a cycling perspective (comes back to Keith's point about motorists knowing what to expect). The "clearway time" LH one should show a cycle symbol to the left of the thru/left arrow, while the "outside clearway time" one should show a cycle symbol where the X is, perhaps to the right of a "P" symbol (not clear if there's any time restriction on parking when it's available?).
- In front of #260 I'd like to see some colour at the end of the cycle lane to remind motorists about the continued presence of cyclists as they drift over into the clearway lane.
- the coloured cycle-box markings at Barbadoes St are not totally clear for all users. It looks like there is a very small space behind this box, which I could imagine left-turning motorists trying to use and ending up encroaching in the cycle box when parking is right up to the intersection, or blocking cyclists from getting to the box. Either get rid of it (i.e. forcing left-turners to stay in the main lane when the clearway is closed) or provide an adequate length turn lane and markings so that cyclists won't get stuck.
- By the fire station when the cycle lane resumes, a bit of colour would be nice to highlight its resumption.
- At the Madras St intersection, it would be nice if the path connections to the Cambridge Tce sections either side were better highlighted at the crossings. Again, a bit of paint around the intersection pathways would help.

Stanmore Rd:
- I'm not entirely sold on the concept of a coloured stop box in front of a right turn lane (as at Avonside Dr): how do you get to it once cars are queued? I'd rather see a separate right-turn cycle lane if the demand is high enough (which it probably is here).
- River Rd is a nice quiet alternative cycle route along the Avon, but crossing Stanmore Rd is pretty grotty and this proposal hasn't helped. How about a traffic island and pathway connections just to the north, as done at Ashgrove/Barrington?
- There are a couple of bends along Stanmore Rd, where it wouldn't hurt to have some colour on the inside cycle lane to deter corner-cutting.
- At the Richmond Village Green, I'm hoping that the Mobile Library that parks there is able to stay within its parking space? Otherwise this kerb needs to be indented so that cyclists are not forced out into the traffic lane (esp. with a traffic island right next to it).
- Similarly at the Village Green northbound bus stop, a bus will stick out into the cycle lane thus squeezing cyclists into the traffic lane where cars can't move over because of the traffic island. Indent the bus stop!

Linwood Ave:
- At Worcester St, there is an opportunity for cyclists to cross over Linwood Ave to the other part of Worcester St (a connectivity advantage over motorists), but it's not clear that the pathway connections are obvious enough for cyclists to encourage this. Look at tweaking/marking the approach paths on either side to help here.
- At Hereford St SE-bound, it looks like cyclists will get squeezed in their lane due to the rather short thru lane. Add some colour on the lateral transition and (ideally) lose another parking space or two.
- Similarly, the lane merge at Hereford in the NW direction needs some colour in the cycle lane to discourage getting squeezed out.
- Nice cycle median cut-throughs at Cashel St, but crossing three lanes is a big ask. Does the right-turn lane need to extend so far back?
- Is that a bus-stop in front of #225? Where are cyclists supposed to go when someone is there? Same in front of #224
- Not particularly impressed with the "Watch for Doors" sign; it is motorists who legally have to check for cyclists before opening their doors; this appears to absolve them of their responsibility! Better to provide a wider cycle lane here.
- The inside curve opposite Cranley St needs some colour on the cycle lane. This could be tied in with colour across the slip lane entrance, which is also currently lacking.
- It would be nice if additional path crossings of the Linwood Ave median could be provided for cyclists entering/leaving the many side roads (also access into Linwood Park). It's a bit much to expect cyclists to have to use the same U-turn facilities as the motorists.

Glen Koorey
Spokes Core Member

I made my own submission to the Christchurch City Council on the proposed cycle lanes for Kilmore Street( on which the college at which I'm studying is located but which I absolutely avoid riding on every day).

"Kilmore street provides a perfect opportunity for trialing a much needed paradigm shift in the implementation of cycle lanes.

Experience has shown that for cycle lanes to appeal to and be usable by the general population ( i.e. not just the existing very narrow cycling demographic) they must be segregated from motor vehicles.

Sydney bike plan: shared pavements
(picture not included here, see link at the bottom of this page)
read about Sydney's solution ( link to article)

(Picture of Copenhagen configuration of footpath>cyclepath>parallel car(and bike)parking > motor-vehicle lanes.

There are more ideal solutions,- that will require either the removal of the right of motor vehicles drivers to park beside roads,- or a configuration ( which is used in Europe ) that puts parked cars further to the centre of the road with segregated cycle lanes running between them and the pedestrian footpaths.

See also:

http://www.copenhagenize.com/search/label/%22bike%20lane%22

http://bikefriendlyoc.wordpress.com/

Refer to
http://urbanbicycles.googlepages.com/cyclelanes
"Why cycle lanes are fatally flawed"
for further elucidation on some of the points I have made.

Alan Preston
http://urbanbicycles.googlepages.com/home
http://utilitycyclism.blogspot.com/

A general comment first - while I like the proposals generally one of the problems seems to be educating motorist what cycle lanes look like. I never fail to be amazed at the number of times I am riding along one and find motorist either encroaching into them or stopping/parking in them. The Dutch / Danish approach where curbs are built along the edge of cycle lanes to prevent this happening sounds good to me.
Specifically - the Kilmore St east bound lane, while well designed, needs to have better provision for cyclists to actually get onto it. They can't come down Kilmore St, as it is one way from the bridge so they have to either turn from Madras St, not the most cycle friendly street in Christchurch, or come across from the blocked off part of Cambridge Tce neither of which offer easy ways to get across or round onto Kilmore St. If left as it is it will likely be little used. Might not Worcester St be a better option for a bike laned street?
I am impressed with the Stanmore Road and Linwood Ave design that address a number of issues I have noticed when riding down them.

Keith Turner