Selwyn STREET in Christchurch Rebuild Plan

2.2.12 Final submission now attached. Please be encouraged to comment. Changes can be made. Post as comments here or email to newsletter [at] spokes [dot] org [dot] nz

Thanks, Dirk 

Selwyn Street Shops Master Plan is open for submissions. You can get the draft at http://www1.ccc.govt.nz/haveyoursay/ConsultationView.aspx?ConsultId=817

Submissions can be sent to: SelwynMPlan [at] ccc [dot] govt [dot] nz and is due by 17 February.

Please send comments or drafts to newsletter [at] spokes [dot] org [dot] nz or attach a file here.

Here are some basics around which the submission will be constructed.  With respect to summary document, Spokes recommends:  

Built environment (page 9)1.       In the artists impression, it is evident that the proposed rear car parking results in undesirable instances of motor vehicles crossing the footpath.  Consider shared parking resources rather than vehicle crossings for each site to eliminate or minimise the number of turning vehicles which may conflict with pedestrians and cyclists.

Street and movement (page 10). 

1.       The summary document describes marked cycle lanes but then the plan view at the bottom of page 10 does not show marked cycle lanes, only a general traffic lane line and parallel parking markings. 

2.       The cross sections suggest indented car parks between landscaped kerb extensions with trees and pedestrian crossing facilities, but the plan view does not.   

3.       Southbound vehicles turning onto Coronation travel too fast for slower northbound cyclists to be able to accelerate from a stop; consider a low-speed design roundabout instead.

4.       Consistency in terminology – use “separated cycle lane” not “segregated cycle lane”

5.       Consistency in general traffic lane widths between alternatives shown – should be 3.0 m traffic lanes without centreline (total 6.0 m) with the saved space distributed as follows:o   Separated cycle lane alternative – 0.4 m savings (per lane) given 0.3 to make 1.8 cycle paths and 2.1 footpatho   On street cycle lane alternative – 0.2 m savings (per lane) given to the indented car parks / landscaping to minimise car parking encroachment on the proposed 1.8 m cycle lanes

6.       Selwyn St south approach lanes to Brougham (northbound)o   Consider physical separation of kerbside cycle lane using bollards, flags or kerbs to prevent left turning motor vehicles from blocking the cycle lane approacho   If physical separation is not utilised, ensure that the mixed left and through general traffic lane is no more than 3.0 m and the cycle lane is 1.5 m to minimise two-abreast informal queuing of motor vehicles.  A good example is Antigua St north approach to Moorhouse (southbound), and a bad example is Strickland St south approach to Brougham (northbound).

7.       The proposed parallel offset kerbs on the southbound departure from Brougham result in sharp angles for the cycle lane which are not best practice; as with all traffic lanes, cycle lanes should have smooth curves.  A good practice example is Lyttelton St south of Lincoln Rd, where rather than parallel offset kerbs the entire kerb line is angled and the cycle lane alignment is smooth.