andrecymba
Unsoiled
Joined: Sep 09, 2007
Posts: 15
|
 Posted: Thu 3rd Jul 9:29pm Post subject: Public Consultation: Ngauranga To Airport Corridor Plan |
  |
|
Hi Guys, my name is André Cymbalista, I am with Cycle Aware Wellington, and I am accountable for coordinating the submissions to public consultations.
I am writing you to inform about an opportunity to make a difference in the Greater Wellington Regional Coucnil planning process that will result in a significant impact for cyclists.
The Ngauranga to Wellington Airport Draft Corridor Plan proposes a series of roading projects that are not of interest to cyclists.
Can I count on you to take 5 to 10 minutes from your time to make a submission? Thank you. I have prepared a guide to help you through the submission.
You can find out more downloading the consultation brochure (available fromhttp://www.gw.govt.nz/story_images/5307_GWRCWCCNgaurang_s10705.pdf).
You can have your say about what you think using the online form (available from http://consult.gw.govt.nz/corridor.aspx).
If you don't have much time to read the brochure, here is a quick guide to the consultation, highlighting the most important issues for cyclists. Please be a cause in the matter, and make an informed submission.
Please feel free to cut and paste and change these propositions at your will, preferably adding a personal touch to it, and please take on the opportunity of the consultation to have your say.
Would you please forward this request to your firend cyclists. Thank you.
Best,
André
SUBMISSION TO THE NGAURANGA TO WELLINGTON AIRPORT DRAFT CORRIDOR PLAN
ISSUES OF CONCERN TO CYCLISTS
Prepared by André Cymbalista
July 3rd 2008
1) The proposal includes a high quality and frequent public transport spine (page 11) and they propose to invest 14.6 million on that - and this is important for cyclists because the Draft Cycling Policy proposes the use of bus lane for cyclists as well. The decision we seek is that all bus lanes are designed taking in consideration the specific needs of cyclists, and this mean wide enough to promote safe acommodation of buses passing cyclists in between stops, and cyclists passing buses at bus stops. The minimum width required is 4.2m.
2) The proposal includes a fly over the Basin Reserve to provide grade separation of east-west traffic from north-south traffic, at a cost of 33 million (page 11). To a certain extent grade separation makes sense, but the tradeoffs are huge. Any "improvements" to increase road capacity across the basin will just result in increased traffic throughout the city. The decision we seek is that any expansion of road capacity on the Basin must take into consideration that the level of service to cyclists in these areas is very poor. There are also city wide implications of duplicating capacity on the Basin Reserve - this will just create more traffic in the surrondings, degrading level of service to cyclists on all adjacencies, and potentially well beyond. This project is not of interest to you cyclist.
3) Cobham Drive Roundabout: they propose to add an extra lane there (page 12), and they consider this as an "improvement". The decision we seek is that any expansion of road capacity on Cobham Drive must be accompanied by apropriate provisions for cyclists to negotiate the roundabout safely. The level of service to cyclists at the roundabout is very poor, and we would like to see the safety issues addressed rather than accommodation of increased road capacity, which will only worsen the level of service to cyclists. This project is not of interest to you cyclist.
4) The plan mentions Cycling Network improvements (page 13), but those are not budgeted for. It mentions that cycling improvements will be dealt with through the WCC Cycling Policy, but funding proposed for this policy is less than 273,000 a year - nowhere near the 262 million allocated to increasing road capacity. The decision we seek is that the Draft Corridor Plan allocates resources to cycling projects proportionate to the number of trips being done by cycle to the CBD, which is currently 2.5 % according to the most recent cordon count and other WCC estimates. We believe that it would be fair to expect that, if budget is available to all projects mentioned in the plan will be undertaken, at a total cost of 631 million, at least 15 million are allocated to cycling specific projects (or 2.5 % of that). Cyclists are tax payers as well - we would like to see our money applied to projects that matter to us.
5) The plan proposes allocating 1 million to assess duplication of Wellington Road and Ruahine Street, and potentially 43 million if the project is undertaken. The decision we seek is that any expansion of road capacity on Wellington Road and Ruahine Street must be accompanied by apropriate provisions for cyclists to negotiate the stretch before duplication for motorized traffic is undertaken. The level of service to cyclists in these areas is very poor. Ruahine Street is 70km/h, and there are aproximately 20,000 vehicles a day there. All traffic engineerig manuals and standards and best practice suggest that this combination of speed and traffic volume, in order to acommodate cyclists needs, must be dealt with through provision of a segregated cycle path - no road expansion should be considered without provision of AT THE VERY LEAST a cycle lane, if not a segregated path, shich would be more difficult due to space trestrictions. There are also city wide implications of duplicating capacity on Wellington St and Ruahine Road - this will just create more traffic in the surrondings, degrading level of service to cyclists on all adjacencies, and potentially well beyond. This project is not of interest to you cyclist.
6) The plan proposes allocation of 5 million to assess duplication of Mt Victoria Tunnel, and potentially 175 million if the project is undertaken (page 15). Duplication of the Tunnel capacity will just create more traffic in the surrondings, degrading level of service to cyclists on all adjacencies, and potentially well beyond. This project is not of interest to you cyclist.
|
|
