https://www.ccc.govt.nz/the-council/consultations-and-submissions/haveyoursay/show/142 Closes 4.6.18

This is the second opportunity to submit on the mess to be made of Cranford Street. Please share your thoughts with Council.

Seeking to make it easier to commute by car from north of Chch NZTA built the ‘Northern Corridor’. This ‘upgrades’ Cranford Street to move the congestion on Main N Road to Cranford Street down to Berwick and on to Forfar, Madras and Barbados.

The consultation documents are woefully inadequate as is what is on offer. The neighbourhoods of St Albans, Mariehau, Shirley, Edgeware and Richmond are sacrificed to those who commute by car.

Spokes provides our draft submission below. The paucity of acceptable options, the disregard for preserving the amenity of these close in neighbourhoods and providing them with suitable cycle infrastructure to access the CBD and beyond leaves only the option to oppose this project.

Please do make a polite submission. Make it clear that Council needs to do a better job providing the information required for people to make informed submissions. Ask that this project return to the planning stages and include people who cycle as key stakeholders in getting this project right.

Draft Submission from Spokes:

Submission

In this submission Spokes will attempt to highlight some of the inadequacies of both the project and the consultation process. This consultation isolates comments to only a portion of this project, while failing to address the many area wide problems which this project creates. Submitters are left to question the usefulness of participation. People are not empowered here; instead they are fed far less information than is required and restricted in which of their concerns might be considered. This is dis-empowerment.

This painfully illustrates why Council is in desperate need of Cycle Champions and a Cycle Advisory Panel. The project serves the interests of car based transport, not the community, not mode choice. The impact on neighbourhoods and on the ability to provide a local cycle network is simply ignored. This project undermines Council’s policies to support mode choice, meet current and future demand and be a ‘city of cycles’.

The Northern Corridor shifts congestion from Main North and Marshlands Roads. Catering to car commuters from the north, active travel modes are clearly disadvantaged. Existing and new residential areas are left only the option to drive without a local cycle network connecting neighbourhoods or on to the central city.

Close in residential areas of Mariehau, St Albans, Edgeware, Richmond, Shirley well suited to active transport options are sacrificed to accommodate more cars. Innes, Hills and Westminster Roads provide minimal to no cycle infrastructure. Cranford, Berwick, Warrington, Forfar, Madras and Barbados are given over to cars. All will quickly turn into congested commuter routes leaving no one happy. In many instances what cycle infrastructure, if any, will be provided is unstated.

The proposed shared 3 meter wide path on Cranford Street leaves people on foot and bicycle to sort it out while also trying to avoid cars at commercial driveways and intersections. Drivers are to be encouraged to be careful when entering and leaving driveways. This is cold comfort for residents, consumers and cycle commuters. Pedestrians will resent the cyclists on their turf and those cyclists who choose to use the road will incur the wrath of drivers.

People on bikes wishing to avoid the mess on Cranford will be given access to the Papanui Parallel Major Cycle Route, PP MCR,  just north of Placemaker’s taking them to Rutland Reserve. Details on this link are not provided. The draft Annual Plan shows this scheduled for 2020.

In the meantime a connection to Papanui Parallel MCR, PP MCR, via Mcfaddens Road is the next best option. The consultation document provides no details as to cycle infrastructure to be provided on Mcfaddens Road. There is none presently. Papanui Parallel MCR provides basic infrastructure on Rutland, but no cycle provision for cyclists accessing Rutland from McFaddens Road.  At the very least speeds must be lowered with a 30 km/h commitment and cycle friendly speed humps on McFaddens.

PP MCR is the only N/S cycle route between the RR cycleway on the west and the Avon Otakaro MCR and the southern spur of the Northern Line MCR to the east. These are large gaps leaving whole neighbourhoods without real mode choice.

Connections with consistent cycle infrastructure from PP MCR to the east from Sawyers Arms south are not provided until Salisbury St in the CBD. Cyclists coming from the east on the Northern Line MCR will find little on offer. Innes Road lacks infrastructure until Briggs Road through to Hills Road, ending at Manuka. Hills Road has some infrastructure near Innes, but this quickly ends. Hills connects to Westminster which has no cycle infrastructure and is the obvious route to tie eastern areas to the Papanui Parallel MCR. Local riders report that many cars use Westminster as a very fast rat run placing all at risk. What infrastructure is to be provided? An alternative route and/or a 30 km/h speed limit is clearly needed.

Connections to the west are not provided until Peterborough St in the CBD. There may be other options via a local cycle network if one were built.

This project installs car centric infrastructure first, cycle infrastructure where it can be squeezed in. A too narrow shared path and no detail whatsoever for Berwick/Warrington, Innes, Westminster or Hills all of which will be used by cyclists to get to the PP MCR. It is the old story of neglect. Simply excusing this omission by citing it as ‘out of scope’ is disingenuous at best. Piecemeal planning is bad planning. This is a backward looking project which will quickly congest and which neglects what we know people want and the future requires.

Barbadoes and Madras would be the logical east of city N/S cycle routes, but this plan fully dedicates them to cars without shame at undermining the alleged commitment to mode choice. 2 meter wide cycle lanes are the minimum required on both.

Intersections to be upgraded: Forfar/Westminster, Warrington/Barbadoes, Madras/Sherbourne, Edgeware/Barbadoes/Madras. Details of these upgrades are not provided. Instead the public is asked to make suggestions while the options and rational for why and where they might be applied are left out. Yet another consultation document which does not provide what is required for the public to make informed comments.

Speed may possibly be lowered on: McFaddens, Weston, Knowles, Roosevelt, Rutland, Westminster, Flockton, Jameson using narrowing, humps, buildouts, chicanes many of which make pinch points for people on bikes. Ideally speeds would be lowered on all streets in the project’s circled area with the exception of Cranford , Berwick, Barbadoes and Madras. Also lower speeds on Courtenay Street and St Albans through to Rutland. But this is to be a ‘sacrifice’ area, leaving these neighbourhoods ideally suited to active transport to the CBD disadvantaged.

This project is crying out to go back to be redesigned with consideration for the entire area to support true mode choice, safety and preservation of community amenity. Including walking and cycling stakeholders in the wholesale reworking of this plan is clearly indicated.

There are alternatives:

• Would a commuter park and ride with shuttle better serve car commuters? Where would be the best location for such?
• With rail public transport being mooted by central government might it be prudent to put this project on hold until more is known?
• What is the cost of this project including the annual costs of constantly shifting the clearway?
• How will the increased traffic impact the roads linking to and through the central city?
• What is the anticipated demand and the capacity of this proposal?
• Where is the safety audit for this project and why is it not part of the consultation documents?
• None of this information is provided and all of it is vital for a genuine empowered community consultation process.

Spokes is mindful that Council and staff must work within the parameters provided. This consultation makes clear the overwhelming shortcomings of the current process. Genuine community involvement, empowerment and even the fundamental goals of safety, mode choice, resilience and basic transport engineering are all not achieved.

To be true to representing and empowering citizens Council needs to expand how it plans and consults. Spokes and others have been requesting this for decades. When will Council act? Re-opening this consultation offers the opportunity for Council to embark on a community empowered planning process and regain credibility. Spokes has offered to engage constructively with Council and does so again here.

Spokes has no choice but to oppose this project in its entirety.

The clearway is not supported.

Three laning of Madras, Barbadoes and Forfar Streets is not supported.

Traffic calming suggestions cannot be lumped into a single preference. Different situations require different approaches. In all instances people on bicycles should not be forced into pinch points and used as de facto traffic calming devices. This ‘shotgun’ approach to consultation is not supported.

Intersections also require individual assessment. Designs which accommodate all modes while recognizing the unique requirements of each are favoured. Cycle lanes and advance stop areas across the lanes to facilitate cycles first through to increase safety should be provided in high traffic areas.

The failure of empowered community engagement is not limited to NZ. This piece from the U.S. is worth the time to read. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/5/25/public-engagement-isbroken