Auckland Transport have started consultation on cycling networks for the inner west of the isthmus which is being funded as part of the governments urban cycleway funding.

A bit like they did with the Glen Innes consultation, AT are asking about what people want to see for the whole network rather than just one route. It doesn’t mean the whole network will be built in one go but is useful to ensure they get all aspects considered. The proposed network they show is what they expect to build over the next 10 years.

Inner West Proposed Network Consultation

I’m not an expert in the area but from what I do know the routes look pretty good and I know Patrick in particular will be happy to see Ponsonby Rd on there as he has written about that a lot. Of course the key will be the quality of the facilities proposed and how long it will be till they’re implemented over the next 10 years.

Here are the other pages in the consultation which give more information on why it is being done.

Inner West Proposed Network Consultation - page 2

Inner West Proposed Network Consultation - page 3

As well as the brochure to residents and online consultation, AT list two events where people can talk about the plan

Bubs on Bikes – Grey Lynn Park (next to the playground and paddling pool) – Sunday 13 and 20 March 2016 from 10am – 1pm.

Pasifika Festival – Western Springs Reserve – Saturday 12 and Sunday 13 March. AT will be providing valet bike parking so why not cycle to the Pasifika Festival and enjoy a premium parking experience?

Share this


  1. How seriously are they going to take this consultation?

    We’ve seen that the angry rich white mob from Ponsonby and Herne Bay will descend on Council and threaten legal action and use Orsman to attack the Council if it does things that offend them. I’m concerned that their ‘right’ to park their Audi on the street might trump the safety and wellbeing of Aucklanders.

    1. Yeah, disappointing to see that even at this early stage they have said
      “We propose to: … Keep as much on-street parking as possible, but in some locations may need to remove parking to make streets safer.”
      Doesn’t bode well.

  2. Which part of this is going to be funded by the government? Isnt there a need to build those aspects relatively quickly?

    This looks good though (subject to quality). Sorting out a network of on-street cycle infrastructure is what is really needed. Expensive off-street facilities are great but, generally speaking, this stuff is far more important.

    1. The first 3 years will mainly go via the Urban Cycleways. Funding for that is in place. This consultation is to tease out opportunities, and of course, also to communicate that its not just itsy bitty improvements here, or flagship routes there, but a real network intent.

      1. Also given the momentum we have at the moment it wouldn’t surprise me if there is another block of urban cycleway funding from 2018 onwards.

  3. Meola Rd would have to be widened surely? Removing the parking there for a cycle lane won’t work with MOTAT II, Seddon Fields and the dog walking park it’s all but impossible for buses to pass by each other most weekends.

          1. I agree in principle, but the heavy use of parking in this area is public who will not immediately benefit from cycling infrastructure: Dogwalkers at Meola Reserve and Sports park users (“Away” teams will be coming from far and wide)

  4. Really great to see AT are talking about slower vehicle speeds. Safer neighbourhood streets are significantly cheaper and often easier to implement than dedicated facilities (which of course still have their place!)

    1. Pity they still want to dedicate as much room as possible to car parking though. Until they start removing car parking they wont make much difference

      1. Removing parking but still having the same wide street isn’t going to slow down cars at all. I’m aware my idea of flogging off the berms and on-street parking spaces for Tumbleweed Houses isn’t popular, but on-street parking is still a better use than nothing.

        Parked cars do slow traffic to a degree, and since I think our streets are already too wide, using that surplus for parking is better than having it empty, and needing to use up far more land for off-street parking.

        (obviously this doesn’t apply where the proposal is for street trees, protected bike lanes or wider footpaths – just about removing parking with no other change).

  5. Onstreet parking should be removed completely along all of these routes. I understand the politics; my family would not agree with me, oh well. However, we are talking here about the principle of what is best. Parked cars are a huge, lethal hazard and they leave no space for actually walking or cycling.

    1. My experience from Berlin (and many other places) disagrees with you. urban streets jam-packed to the gunnels with parking can be very pleasant walking and cycling places. IF the traffic speeds are consistently 30 km/h and below. As someone above mentioned, our challenges there is that our streets try to do both, historically: provide tons of parking AND speedy travel even in residential areas.

    2. Some of these routes don’t have much off street parking and long distances to the nearest side street where you could park if there is no on street parking, the example that pops up immediately is West End Road. Not sure how you deal with that given there isn’t excessive width and that some of the lots do not have any feasible ability to add off street.

    3. The majority of the streets that could require cycle lanes/tracks are wide enough to loose parking on one side of the road at the worst. If we absolutely minimise the need to remove parking, this entire project will be much more achieveable.

    4. On street parking doesn’t have to be a big problem as long as we don’t go overboard with it. An example of going overboard is High Street, with its two lanes of parking while the sidewalks are to narrow to walk two abreast. Lorne Street is similar but slightly wider, a difference which is noticeable when on foot.

      With parked cars and cyclists the main question is what we expect to happen in the gaps between parked cars: should a cyclist move to the left, let cars behind him pass, and merge back in when he encounters another parked car? Or should he just follow his line? The first option is of course better for [car] traffic flow, but it is also much more dangerous for cyclists and it may require waiting for a gap in traffic when merging back in.

      The second option is much more annoying to drivers, but if we want both a pleasant cycling environment and parking it has to become the default option.

        1. I do the same, ask myself if I would be happy for a motorist to pass if I pulled left. If not stay in to centre of lane. It’s in the road code too.

  6. The prerequisite compulsory purchases along Meola Rd would have the locals manning the barricades and throwing molotov chardonnays.

    There are a lot of parks and cul de sacs west of Garnet Rd, would it be that hard to create a new dedicated east-west cycle route through them?

    Suggested westbound route: West View Rd to south side of Zoo via new pedestrian/cycle path connecting to existing Zoo access road, across Motions Rd to Moray Pl via new pedestrian/cycle path and then into backstreets for the rest of the trip home.

  7. The blue routes, especially Ponsonby Rd are obviously necessary.

    I would like to add a new cross m’way bridge between the NW cycleway and GNR at Motions Rd, if Chamberlains Golf course ever gets sorted.

  8. If parking is going to be a concern I hope AT are out there conducting parking occupancy surveys across the area. I’d also suggest AT should actually be trying to figure what kind of latent demand for cycling exists should improved infrastructure be put in place.

  9. Sorry a little behind the 8ball here but when is there plans to do cycle lanes from South Auckland heading back into the Auckland CBD pretty much like how you have from West along western motorway heading back into town that is absolutely awesome how you can pretty much go as far was West/Massey and possibly further I enjoy driving out West and seeing the improved cycle lanes also my aunt (54) says she started taking the Massey to Pt Chev on her bike what used to be over an hour in the car with traffic is now a 40 min bike ride

    1. I commented in my feedback that these need to be posted at 30kph. I believe that is the standard in Copenhagen where streets are shared between vehicles and cycles.

    2. In Belgium I think 30 kph is a common speed for quiet local streets, and it is key to enabling cycling on the road on these quiet streets.

      The most striking difference is sheer width of our streets. Even the smallest local streets are at least 8 metres wide, often with a few extra metres of green space around the footpath. Compare that with Belgium (and probably surrounding countries): local streets are usually be 5 to 7 metres wide, and usually on-street parking is allowed. I remember that on our topographical maps streets wider than 7 metres are drawn as arterials.

  10. This is positive!

    Something to remember when submitting, don’t only think bike lanes, think quietened streets – where might some strategic dead ends keep cars out and saved the need for lanes on every street.

    1. From what I’ve seen it’s quite tight, with blind corners, steps, etc – so walking only. In any case, it’s almost a loop so more of a destination than a route

Leave a Reply