Traffic lights have been installed on Tāmaki Drive in Auckland in the middle of a cycleway. Photo / Alex Burton
Traffic lights have been installed on Tāmaki Drive in Auckland in the middle of a cycleway. Photo / Alex Burton
OPINION
The recent addition of the “traffic management street furniture” in the middle of the new $14.4-million Solent St/Ngāpipi Rd Cycleway is the last straw.
Unfortunately, it is only the latest in many issues being created, purportedly for active modes, along the route on Tāmaki Drive.
The rationale provided byAuckland Transport (AT) is that the measures taken are part of the necessary traffic management works in support of the long-awaited Ngāpipi Bridge extension project.
This raises a series of key points, including a lack of consultation and foresight but, most concerning, safety.
Firstly, there was a lack of consultation with the Ōrākei Local Board and Bike Tāmaki Drive.
All have been deeply involved with the implementation of this cycleway, which took much time and effort on our part - including three attempts, in fact, with the contractors - to obtain an acceptable surface for cyclists.
A cyclist negotiates traffic at the intersection of Tāmaki Dr and Ngapipi Rd. Photo / Dean Purcell
Then there is the quality of cycleway provision. Reconstituting the damaged cycleway surface, due to the unnecessary addition of various poles, a traffic box and a drum is going to be very difficult. We know from experience what patching is likely to create.
There has been a lack of foresight in creating a safe environment for active modes/cyclists during the six months of the ongoing bridge extension works.
This brings us to the matter of safety. This is the very area that we believe has been the most unsafe on the Tāmaki Drive Cycleway.
The Ngāpipi Shift, a wind that blows straight through the area, creates very challenging conditions for all users, including cyclists.
There is no safety barrier separating the cycleway and the busy arterial road which Bike Tāmaki Drive requested, so any uneven surface in these high winds will cause further problems.
We have experienced this wind at 37kph+ when travelling eastbound and it has pushed cyclists into the westbound cycle lane, very close to the busy narrow Tāmaki Dr road lanes.
Su Nicholson.
The chaos these traffic lights will create, being just over the brow of the Ngāpipi Bridge has, with respect, been ill-considered.
The traffic lights at the Solent St intersection could have been used as part of the temporary traffic management measures, rather than attempting to add a new signalised traffic crossing.
The bridge extension project could also have been combined with the cycleway installation to minimise the need for repeated disruption. But no.
Then there are the wider matters. There are also several issues with the Mission Bay Safer Speed initiative, with a meeting scheduled with the AT team in the next few days. These include the hugely expensive village cycleway, which was not requested by local cyclists and the St Heliers Bay Cycleway.
We believe that the AT processes for both safety and traffic management need a major overhaul.
Local consultation with the community, including elected representatives and active mode groups, is so important for design, implementation, and sign-off stages to ensure timely, fit-for-purpose outcomes.
Many of the proven designs for active mode infrastructure are available from international best practice. It would be great to see these used in concept development and delivery of built-in safety from the outset.
Audits should include both active mode safety audit specialists and the local community, since each has an important role to play.
Temporary, poorly-conceived measures create an unnecessary cost, often confuse those trying to travel through the area, and contribute to a reduction in safety.
Again, timely inclusion of the local voice and applying good quality control can mitigate many of these shortcomings.
Working with elected representatives and expert local groups from concept to delivery at each stage of the many projects is essential to support timely, well-considered outcomes. This is far beyond the current process of initial surveys at early assessment stages.
Ensuring the inclusion of the local voice is imperative, prior to public launch and suggested use.
By considering these key points, we have the opportunity to transform both road and active mode infrastructure provision across Auckland.
We hope that with support from the local board, AT will be able to repair the harm caused by the traffic management measures and provide a far safer and more appropriate set of measures for the Ngāpipi Bridge works.
