Graham Taylor
Highway Strategy & Standards Manager
Transit NZ

Dear Mr Taylor,

STATE HIGHWAY REVIEW - Comments from the Cycling Advocates Network

Thank you for providing us with information about Transit's SH review and the opportunity to comment. We realise that the closing date for formal submissions has been and gone, but we would like to make some brief comments about the review. Please accept our apologies for the lateness of our input - we hope it will still be of some use.

State Highway criteria

We note with regret that CAN was not included in the list of key stakeholders consulted during the process of determining the State Highway criteria. CAN has established an on-going working relationship with Transit NZ and we believe we could have provided useful input on the SH criteria from the cyclist perspective. We note that the NZ Automobile Association does not have this perspective.

CAN would have wished to seek amendments to the State Highway criteria. For example, it is not made explicit that information should be provided on cyclist usage of the proposed state highway.

We note that submitters should provide information on community concerns. We are not aware that any consultation between Transit regional offices or local authorities and CAN's regional groups or local contacts has taken place on proposals for changes to the State Highway network. The State Highway Review process should make the need for such consultation clear.

Government transport objectives

The design and operation of State Highways needs to reflect the Government's transport objectives. We are pleased to note that Transit has recognised this responsibility in the State Highway Review documents. There is now an explicit� National Land Transport Fund priority of promoting cycling and walking, and many of the objectives of the New Zealand Transport Strategy are strongly supportive of transport modes like cycling.

The State Highway Review needs to reflect these objectives.

Other comments

CAN does not have specific proposals for changes to the State Highway network. We ask that consultation with local cyclist representatives take place with regard to Transit regional office and local authority proposals as part of the this Review. We do, however, wish to make some general points.

�Cyclists' journeys often make use of both local roads and State Highways, for commuting, touring, recreation and sport. Any proposal to add or remove a road from the State Highway network needs to:

• assess current and potential use by cyclists (what type of cyclists use the road? how many of each sort are there? what changes in cycle use are likely? how can the design of the road assist in promoting cycling?)
• include liaison with relevant regional/local authorities to ensure that the road makes an active contribution to local or regional cycle route networks as appropriate (e.g. continuity of routes, consistency of signage and markings)
• ensure adequate access for cyclists to the road
• ensure convenience and safety for cyclists crossing the road (minimise severance)
• apply minimum standards for cycle provision (Austroads 14, to be adapted through a Transit-led process)
• determine the level and type of cycle provision required (according to criteria in Transit's yet-to-be-finalised cycling policy).

We would be happy to discuss this further with you.

We look forward to having the opportunity to comment on Transit's recommendations prior to final decisions being made by the Transit board.

Yours sincerely,

Robert Ibell

Campaigns & PR Secretary
Cycling Advocates Network of NZ Inc.
PO Box 6491, Auckland
Tel/Fax: 04-385 2557
www.can.org.nz

15 April 2002