Posts by Jolisa
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Speaker: Living under bridges, in reply to Russell Brown,
Too good not to double-post :-) The comments below are gold, too, including the one from the writer of the first letter, who's still out there, still biking, still immortal.
On the ferry to Northcote on Friday we were accompanied by an older gent whose daily routine it is to bike from the shore around the harbour via Greenhithe, and then come home on the ferry using his Gold Card. Once a week or so, he meets his road buddies in Kumeu for a coffee, as well, which makes for a daily total of around 85km. Respect!!
-
Also worth a read: the public enthusiasm for a bike/pedestrian crossing from nearly forty years ago, including a letter of support from the then Northcote Residents' Association...
-
The undercroft is a pretty interesting place, all right. Your museum analogy is not far wrong. It’s like a cross between something from The Wire, and the Roman Forum, especially at night…
For answers to some of your other questions, it’s definitely worth reading the commissioners’ report, which addresses everything raised during the 5 day hearing, and imposes further conditions on the designers (above and beyond the conditions and changes they had already made to take into account residents’ concerns).
It’s probable that not every person will ever be completely satisfied, but it’s been gratifying to see how seriously the Northcote concerns have been taken at every step – contrasted, say, with how hard the residents of Waterview had to fight for mitigation of the effects of that motorway project, and how many dwellings were demolished there (some of those details here.)
-
Thank you, Fiona (and thanks Russell for sharing the post). That was a fabulous, enlightening, wonderful read - a reminder of how every family evolves its own culture to deal with its own complex set of conditions and the world beyond; some families more consciously than others.
More power to you, and iClaudia, and the whole whānau. May you continue to be surrounded by optimism and music and Muppet movies, and may your "finely-honed bullshit detectors" never run out of batteries.
-
Speaker: Why all the fuss over six trees?, in reply to Josh Petyt,
In short what I’m suggesting is that maybe we shouldn’t promise short fast trips through our urban areas. Perhaps those that choose to drive should do so in the full knowledge that it will be slow
The Basin Flyover is an excellent analogy, and this is nicely put. And this particular case is a useful example of the lack of planning around what happens when Roads of National Significance backwash into Streets of Local Significance.
-
Speaker: Why all the fuss over six trees?, in reply to James Littlewood*,
James ! So sorry to hear this. Thank you for following up on it.
And as if we needed another argument for fully separated bike lanes along that heavily-trafficked-by-all-modes (including kids towing kids on skateboards!) road.
-
Speaker: Why all the fuss over six trees?, in reply to Russell Brown,
Incredibly, no one can explain to me how I will get onto the new shared path if I’m cycling from Point Chev and turning right onto the bridge.
The not-a-public-meeting "community liaison" meeting had a massive paper layout of the design they currently have consent for, and I asked your question. I wish I'd brought along some old Matchbox cars and buses and Lego bikes to ask the traffic engineer guys to demonstrate the manoeuvres more clearly.
What they seemed to be saying was that you'd queue at the bike box in front of two lanes of right-turning traffic to turn right onto St Lukes Rd, then turn right WITH that traffic (watching out for opposing left turn traffic sneaking through the slip lanes, albeit those are probably controlled by lights, but they weren't sure). And then, about a third of the way across the bridge – at the point where the painted bike "lane" peters out – there will be a curb cut for you to hop onto the footpath. After which all you have to do is wait for a crossing signal to navigate across the existing offramp thingy and its associated slip lanes to get to the official NW bike path.
Simple enough, if you're a ninja wearing kevlar. Good luck, kiddies!
On that note: the other thing that burns me up about this intersection design: no apparent thought for the many kids commuting on bike and foot from Grey Lynn, Arch Hill & Western Springs on the south side of the motorway towards Pasadena Intermediate and Western Springs College -- other than that they'll hopefully just instinctively gravitate to the Motat side of the road and bike (technically illegally) on that footpath. But hey, safety first!
-
Speaker: Why all the fuss over six trees?, in reply to James Littlewood*,
I kinda need the numbers in the cost/benefit before I can get involved in the tree debate.
Just hoped someone here might have them.
Here's a helpful document detailing the options that were apparently considered. The mathematical traffic models aren't necessarily transparent, but each option lists the benefits and ( OMG is this even really a word )"dis-benefits".
Option 6a is the one the Waitematā Local Board (and others) have been pursuing for further consideration, as it is the option that both preserves the trees and achieves the other objectives. It might need some tweaking around pedestrian and bike and bus lanes, but it uses the road space effectively while working around the trees.
--
Two questions in particular that AT hasn't managed to answer to anybody's satisfaction:
1) why the need for 3 eastbound lanes directly in front of Motat, given that only two lanes will feed into them at any given time (either 2 eastbound from Gt North Rd, or two turning right from St Lukes), on separate phases. Yes, the closer you get to the motorway on-ramps near the speedway entrance, the more lanes you'll need, but why widen the road immediately after the lights? It could simply be two lanes for the length of the pohutukawa and then widen out.
2) did anyone consider the option of running the bike and pedestrian path behind the trees? Not necessarily ideal, in that you'd lose the shaded footpath at the foot of the trees beside the road, which brings traffic ever closer to the trees. BUT it does continue the line of the footpath as it passes the petrol station.
-
This feels like a good moment to pop back into this thread and firstly, thank people for their support and advice along the way - what a wonderful resource we are! - and secondly, mention that it would be handy to tap some legal expertise regarding the submission debacle, if anyone with the expertise has a moment (or two!) to spare...
-
Busytown: Beware of the Leopard, in reply to Soon Lee,
Thanks, Soon Lee. Not unexpected but a blow all the same.
There's now an Action Station page that makes it quick and easy for anyone to make their opinion instantly known to David Warburton at Auckland Transport.
Also a fundraising effort, for big professionally printed signs & banners to raise awareness, and an art installation by the amazing Tiffany Singh. Any surplus will be directed towards official appeals against the verdict, which can be very expensive.
On the official timeline, AT has up to 30 working days to accept or decline the commission's recommendation. This would be 12 January at the earliest, and 19 February at the latest. Encouraging actual human beings at Auckland Transport to reconsider -- via email, letters to the board, anything at all -- is a priority right now.
After AT makes its decision, Council has 15 working days to notify submitters and landowners. After which there are 15 working days in which submitters on the NoR can appeal. (This doesn't include those whose submissions were disqualified).
If AT and Council act swiftly and nobody appeals, the trees could be chainsawed before Waitangi Day.
Meanwhile, the trees appear to be tweeting, and signs and bunting and banners have begun to go up. The trees are still on public park land, and thus amenable and accessible. Would be great to see the trees "speaking" in as many voices as possible!
