[!ai]
Cyclist advocating for multiple commuter routes, not single paths. Prioritizes basic maintenance and safety improvements. Supports inland port to reduce truck traffic but concerned about national government interference.
Kia ora Devonia,
Thank you for reaching out to me about this. As a cyclist myself, ensuring that roads and cycle lanes are safe and accessible for cyclists and pedestrians is not just a priority civically, but a personal concern of mine.
I strongly support more variety of cycle lanes with multiple routes for commuter cyclists and not just a single route. For example, when the extension to the Harbour cycle lane to the Railway station was opened, the old path diverting through to Wickliffe was closed creating a back trap loop to connect to the Fryatt cycle lane connection to South Dunedin. It would be unheard of to funnel all road traffic down a single path, but this is common for cyclists, who are seen not as commuters with destiners, but as a tick box for tourism.
The more the cycle lane network is extended and destinations accessible by cycle lanes diversified, the more people will be empowered to safely travel by bike. Additionally, too many of our cycle lanes are dangerous, from raised manholes to slippery metals plate to overgrowth that can make a cycle lane more of a hazard than a benefit. Basic maintenance is needed, and renovations to improve safety must be a priority.
Additionally on this question, our roads can only take so much capacity. Our harbour and hills determine max capacity, and more lanes and carparks can’t get around that. To make our streets safer and commutes faster we need to get as much traffic off our roads as is practical. The inland port presents the greatest promise of any project to do this, increasing bus capacity, reliability and accessibility of course must be increased if we can work with ORC to achieve that, but if we can relieve the pressure trucks put on our roads, especially along state highway 88 to Port Chalmers by diverting that traffic to an inland port connected to Port Chalmers by rail will do more than any other proposal to improving the safety of our roads.
I have been involved with consultation on the mahi currently underway on Bath St and from that experience I don’t have a lot of faith in any of the current council infrastructure, not because of anything to do with council but because of the interference of the national government.
The new ACT-backed push for councils to focus on ‘need to do’ over ‘nice to have’ is specifically targeted at preventing public investment in infrastructure projects unpopular with the car-centric ideology of the coalition (i.e. cycle lanes or pedestrian developments), regardless of their proven economic and social benefits.
We’re going to have to fight tooth and nail against the national government just for maintaining current routes, minor expansions and essential maintenance. My top priority will be to fight for whatever we can, not for promises in the sky the national government has been clear it will block.
Likewise, we must fight to maintain speed restrictions around schools and in residential streets. My vision for George Street is to preserve it as is. A defined north bound cycle lane would be a small improvement as the current arrangement of northbound traffic allowed but unsupported is confusing and a hazard for all users but overall I am happy with the state of George Street in its current position and any changes and amendments should be done so in consultation with Rūnaka given their role in the current layout.
Thank you for these questions and for advocating for the cyclists of Dunedin, feel free to ask any follow up questions you have.
Kā mihi
Evelyn