In addition to the information on route optimisation in the CBD, the Waitemata Local Board’s agenda included an item to endorse the final version of the Ponsonby Rd Plan. The plan went out to consultation in July last year with submissions open till mid September. All up there were 256 pieces of written feedback received with the majority from individuals and that feedback has been used to help in amend and refine the plan.
There were a number of changes recommended and the key ones include:
- Organising the document by key outcomes rather than dividing the plan by topic. This more clearly shows the link between outcomes, projects and actions.
- Including design principles as well as actions to guide the detailed work with specific projects listed in an implementation strategy.
- Amending the vision to continue the idea of developing Ponsonby as a place and giving recognition to its unique historic character.
- Merge key outcomes 1 and 6 to focus on the diverse activities along Ponsonby Road through emphasising the role as a town centre and referencing different users rather than simply referring to its entertainment, boutique shopping, housing and employment functions.
In terms of the feedback it was divided into the individual sections being referred to, I won’t go over all of them but on the issue of transport and infrastructure the report states:
Feedback Received
- Feedback demonstrated that despite the 40kmph speed limit pedestrians and cyclists still do not feel safe on Ponsonby Road due to the volume and speed of traffic and lack of opportunities to safely cross the road.
- Overall, respondents agreed that any future streetscape upgrade on Ponsonby Road should prioritise pedestrians, provide for safer on road cycling, maintain the village feel of Three Lamps and improve accessibility from the south to Three Lamps.
- Feedback raised concerns about managing commuter car parking in Ponsonby and businesses were opposed to any loss in on street carparking.
- Generally, feedback was supportive of proposals to create pedestrian orientated spaces on Rose Road, Pollen Street and St Marys Road.
Key changes made
- Design principles have been added to guide streetscape upgrades in Three Lamps, Three Lamps to Franklin Road and Franklin Road to Great North Road.
- These principles are focused on transforming the urban realm of Ponsonby Road to create a village hub and improve accessibility from the south at Three Lamps and have the rest of the corridor more pedestrian orientated with safe cycling options.
- Improving the urban realm of the top of St Marys Road is now one of the design principles for Three Lamps so that it can be considered as part of the upgrade of the wider Three lamps area rather than as a separate action.
- Actions to create more pedestrian orientated spaces at Pollen Street and Rose Road have been retained with some design principles to guide the development of a Rose Road plaza.
- Actions to investigate better management of carparking have been included.
It’s great that the importance of prioritising walking and cycling came through in the feedback as often that doesn’t seem to happen.
Note: The image above is just a concept and not any form of official plan so no needed to comment on the design of the cycle lanes, road layout.
The final version of the plan to be endorsed by the board is attached to the item for more detailed information.
Along with the plan for the entire road, the board were also looking at what should be done with 254 Ponsonby Rd which is owned by the council. Patrick commented on it fairly extensively in this post. Since the consultation the board has decided to decouple the plans for the site from the overall Ponsonby Rd Plan however they note:
Feedback Received
- Feedback was divided on the options presented. Most respondents however, were supportive of the final design of the site at 254 Ponsonby Road to include an open space component that is activated by surrounding uses and that does not attract antisocial behaviour.
- Many submitters have expressed concerns around losing a locally important and well loved retail outlet on Ponsonby Road. Some submitters called for this section of Ponsonby Road to have more retail activation to increase vibrancy while others expressed the view that an open space in this location will provide a welcome relief from retail.
- Feedback was supportive of the rear portion of the site being developed so that it is in keeping with the residential character and scale of O’Neil Street.
- Many submitters supported incorporating public art on the site and requested that a children’s playground be incorporated on the site.
Key changes made
- The “open space”, “active edge”, “public art” and “safety” design principles will be retained in the final plan to guide the final design of the site.
- “Providing opportunities for children to play” will also be included as final design principles.
- The “retail continuity” and “cost to council” design principles will be excluded from the final plan.
A separate report on the site says that two options from the original four are being progressed and will go for further community consultation at a later date.
Lastly not on the agenda but a post implementation evaluation has been completed on the Ponsonby Rd Bike Corral which was installed in September last year. The key points found in the review were:
- There are overall more people cycling to the area now than there were prior to the infrastructure being installed. In successive surveys in December 2013 and February 2014, bike occupancies in the bike corral and around were shown to be higher than prior to the infrastructure being installed (refer to Section 5.1).
- The bike parking corral has strong occupancies during the pre-work period- peaking at 100% on the Friday morning surveyed, and strong use at the weekend ‘brunch time’ period also (refer to Section 5.1).
- Over time, there is a case for the bike parking corral to generate even more cycling trips from the immediate area, with 20% of people sampled from postcode 1011 reporting a willingness to switch to cycling for some trips (refer to Section 6.3).
- Expenditure generation estimates show that the bike parking corral frequently generates greater expenditure that it’s previous use as a car park. There is far greater scope for the bike parking corral to generate larger sums of expenditure at peak times (estimated up to $684 per hour) compared with a car parking space (where the ability to generate expenditure is generally about $70 per hour) – refer to Section 5.3.
- It is expected that as greater take-up of cycling occurs and the bike parking corral becomes more fully occupied the expenditure it is able to generate will more consistently exceed that which was generated by the use of the space for car parking.
- The community are generally behind the bike corral project (refer to Section 5.4), supporting the notion that Auckland Transport should be pursuing this type of infrastructure to inspire greater bike use.
Those are some pretty impressive numbers considering nothing was done in the area to make it easier to access the bike corral. Just imagine how much busier and more economically beneficial it would be if cycle lanes along Ponsonby Rd – like suggested in the plan above. The reason the bike corral was able to generate so much per hour at peak times compared to a car using the same was that the study found that people on bike spend about the same on a per minute basis as drivers do however the corral is able to get many more bikes parked in the same space. If I was a retailer I’d be calling out for one to be installed outside my shop as fast as possible. A breakdown of expenditure generated per hour is below.
I guess the corral will be staying then?
Processing...
So the stranded Bike Corral works already. Then imagine how productive it will be when there are bike lanes connecting to it….
The Bike Corral analysis report shows Bike Corral makes same or more money than the car park did for local “shops”, but because the users of the corral spend 2/3rds less money “per-trip” to local shops, users need to make 3 times as many trips to equal the 1 car users spend (on average).
But once Bike Corral usage goes up, this means the 10 bike corral can generate at least 3 times as much $ for local shops as the single car park could, on a like for like basis.
See this comment (on page 21 and 22 of the post implementation bike Corral report linked to above):
“Even with a modest occupancy of 20% (2 bikes parked in the corral) the infrastructure is likely to generate greater expenditure in Ponsonby Road than it’s former use as a car park.
However, there are differences in the degree to which each business type may benefit from this increased expenditure generation.
Firstly, it is likely that all businesses types will benefit to some degree by the increased efficiency of accommodating trips to Ponsonby Road. Figure 18 shows there are
greater than average use of bikes to access of ‘service’ and ‘shopping’ than other business types. ‘Services’ are categorised as medical appointments, banking, post office and such like.
‘Shopping’ includes all retail with the exception of grocery retailing, which has different transport access patterns due to the requirement for carrying larger loads”
So, the type of trips it encourages will change, to those more of a local trips, which means that some local shop owners who rely on people coming by car and buying heaps of bulky or heavy stuff will no doubt not want a bike corral there as they will say that people can’t park nearby so won’t come and shop at my place.
However, this should mean that some other people on other “service” type trips, banks, doctors post office etc, won’t use the car for these local trips, which can only be good for everyone using P Rd as they’ll have parking available nearby, even if not “right outside” and the road won’t be as full of traffic than it otherwise would be.
However, seems the corral design could be improved further to make it better all round according to the report.
So, all in all, seems that “Came we have some more (bike corrals and cycling priority), is the prescription needed here.”
Is the northbound cycle lane shared with parking? That looks like a recipe for disaster.
Fred here’s what it says directly underneath the image:
” The image above is just a concept and not any form of official plan so no needed to comment on the design of the cycle lanes, road layout.”
presumably when the feedback states that no loss of parking should occur they are talking about customer parking? If the commuter parking in surrounding residential streets was managed (another theme in feedback) then many additional time restricted customer parks could be made available – this would allow the removal of some Ponsonby Road parking to create space for improving bike and pedestrian environment.