<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: People Friendly Spaces</title>
	<atom:link href="http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 12:03:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sacha</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/#comment-4665</link>
		<dc:creator>Sacha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 09:14:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=2338#comment-4665</guid>
		<description>Shared space not a new concept - check the mingling in this clip from a 1905 streetcar in San Francisco:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NINOxRxze9k</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shared space not a new concept &#8211; check the mingling in this clip from a 1905 streetcar in San Francisco:<br />
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NINOxRxze9k" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NINOxRxze9k</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/#comment-4664</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 08:40:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=2338#comment-4664</guid>
		<description>As long as you don&#039;t have minimum parking requirements (which fortunately the CBD doesn&#039;t have), over time generally the market will determine an appropriate level of parking provision. I think that over time higher land-prices in Auckland&#039;s CBD will lead to less parking provision - especially less surface level provision. That would do wonders from an urban design perspective as empty sites used for parking are a real blight on our city.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As long as you don&#8217;t have minimum parking requirements (which fortunately the CBD doesn&#8217;t have), over time generally the market will determine an appropriate level of parking provision. I think that over time higher land-prices in Auckland&#8217;s CBD will lead to less parking provision &#8211; especially less surface level provision. That would do wonders from an urban design perspective as empty sites used for parking are a real blight on our city.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ethan Tucker</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/#comment-4663</link>
		<dc:creator>Ethan Tucker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 08:37:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=2338#comment-4663</guid>
		<description>Part of the problem is the widespread yet bizarre belief that in a city of a million or more it should still be possible to get in your car, drive to the centre of town and find a parking space.  Never mind that this is a huge waste of space in the CBD.  See also the gripes of the recent Fair Go programme on parking complaints in which a presenter carped about Auckland being much more expensive to park in than Christchurch, where he was from.  Comparing apples and oranges there, I would&#039;ve thought.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Part of the problem is the widespread yet bizarre belief that in a city of a million or more it should still be possible to get in your car, drive to the centre of town and find a parking space.  Never mind that this is a huge waste of space in the CBD.  See also the gripes of the recent Fair Go programme on parking complaints in which a presenter carped about Auckland being much more expensive to park in than Christchurch, where he was from.  Comparing apples and oranges there, I would&#8217;ve thought.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/#comment-4661</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 08:24:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=2338#comment-4661</guid>
		<description>Yeah overnight access would work. I think I&#039;m most fond of Nick&#039;s idea of a 2 lane bus only street (which will hopefully eventually become a tram line).

Queen Street in Brisbane is fairly wide too, but because shops, fountains, seating and other stuff pops up in the middle of the road it doesn&#039;t seem too wide.

High Street should be a no-brainer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah overnight access would work. I think I&#8217;m most fond of Nick&#8217;s idea of a 2 lane bus only street (which will hopefully eventually become a tram line).</p>
<p>Queen Street in Brisbane is fairly wide too, but because shops, fountains, seating and other stuff pops up in the middle of the road it doesn&#8217;t seem too wide.</p>
<p>High Street should be a no-brainer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sacha</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/#comment-4660</link>
		<dc:creator>Sacha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 08:07:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=2338#comment-4660</guid>
		<description>Wouldn&#039;t it make more sense to pedestrianise High St, which is already at the right scale? Queen Street would be a dim canyon even without the traffic, not that I&#039;d complain. Deliveries might still require some overnight access.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wouldn&#8217;t it make more sense to pedestrianise High St, which is already at the right scale? Queen Street would be a dim canyon even without the traffic, not that I&#8217;d complain. Deliveries might still require some overnight access.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick R</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/#comment-4654</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 23:48:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=2338#comment-4654</guid>
		<description>It just makes sense to me of you look at the amenity, the usage, the location, the accessibility... it&#039;s all back to front!

If you had just the two traffic phases you could have the main north-south traffic flow (the primary traffic flow of buses and pedestrians) on the &#039;green&#039; say two-thirds of the time, and the cross traffic and pedestrian flow the remaining one third of the time. This way buses and people would have almost unrestricted access up and down the street because of the lengthy green signals, buy because there are only two phases, you would still be able to walk or drive across the street more often than at present. This does mean losing the popular &#039;barnes dance&#039; all-cross signal, but I think the payoff would be more than worth it.

Plus people could fairly safely cross the busway mid block (unless it was very busy), as the roadway would be only about 7m from curb to curb and the sightlines up and down the street would be excellent.

Also as the intersections would be much smaller in area, there would be more road side edges on the cross streets in close to Queen. These would be the ideal location for loading zones, taxi ranks and mobility parking spaces. Plus the closure of Queen St to general traffic would render the smaller side streets culs-de-sac, which could be converted into pocket parks and mini squares where they meet Queen, with angle parking, loading zones etc a little further back (I&#039;m thinking the bottom of Fort and Shortland here, and Wynyard).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It just makes sense to me of you look at the amenity, the usage, the location, the accessibility&#8230; it&#8217;s all back to front!</p>
<p>If you had just the two traffic phases you could have the main north-south traffic flow (the primary traffic flow of buses and pedestrians) on the &#8216;green&#8217; say two-thirds of the time, and the cross traffic and pedestrian flow the remaining one third of the time. This way buses and people would have almost unrestricted access up and down the street because of the lengthy green signals, buy because there are only two phases, you would still be able to walk or drive across the street more often than at present. This does mean losing the popular &#8216;barnes dance&#8217; all-cross signal, but I think the payoff would be more than worth it.</p>
<p>Plus people could fairly safely cross the busway mid block (unless it was very busy), as the roadway would be only about 7m from curb to curb and the sightlines up and down the street would be excellent.</p>
<p>Also as the intersections would be much smaller in area, there would be more road side edges on the cross streets in close to Queen. These would be the ideal location for loading zones, taxi ranks and mobility parking spaces. Plus the closure of Queen St to general traffic would render the smaller side streets culs-de-sac, which could be converted into pocket parks and mini squares where they meet Queen, with angle parking, loading zones etc a little further back (I&#8217;m thinking the bottom of Fort and Shortland here, and Wynyard).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/#comment-4652</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:55:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=2338#comment-4652</guid>
		<description>Ha good point George. I note that Brian Rudman has an excellent article in today&#039;s herald about how terribly Auckland treats its pedestrians.

Nick, I like your idea actually of making Queen St the pedestrian/PT corridor and Albert St the arterial. One issue is how long it takes buses to traverse Queen St at the moment, but I guess that&#039;s due to complicated traffic light phasing and the lack of bus lanes - both of which could be fixed by your idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ha good point George. I note that Brian Rudman has an excellent article in today&#8217;s herald about how terribly Auckland treats its pedestrians.</p>
<p>Nick, I like your idea actually of making Queen St the pedestrian/PT corridor and Albert St the arterial. One issue is how long it takes buses to traverse Queen St at the moment, but I guess that&#8217;s due to complicated traffic light phasing and the lack of bus lanes &#8211; both of which could be fixed by your idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George D</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/#comment-4651</link>
		<dc:creator>George D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:36:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=2338#comment-4651</guid>
		<description>You should probably update your map showing how much space is taken by the motorway to include the motorways that are Hobson and Nelson.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You should probably update your map showing how much space is taken by the motorway to include the motorways that are Hobson and Nelson.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PBYCatalina</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/#comment-4641</link>
		<dc:creator>PBYCatalina</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 06:24:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=2338#comment-4641</guid>
		<description>Queen St in Brisbane works fantastic as a pedestrian Mall.
It is so busy it has the highest shop rental in Queensland and possibly Australia, So much for the shop keepers losing shoppers!
It was also a 4 lane road, which works great as a pedestrian mall because you can build bars, news agents and performance spaces in the middle. See the picture above with Jimmys Restaurant in the middle of the old road.

Pedestrianising Queens St Auckland should be the goal and a good time to do it will be in conjunction with the CBD Rail loop getting constructed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Queen St in Brisbane works fantastic as a pedestrian Mall.<br />
It is so busy it has the highest shop rental in Queensland and possibly Australia, So much for the shop keepers losing shoppers!<br />
It was also a 4 lane road, which works great as a pedestrian mall because you can build bars, news agents and performance spaces in the middle. See the picture above with Jimmys Restaurant in the middle of the old road.</p>
<p>Pedestrianising Queens St Auckland should be the goal and a good time to do it will be in conjunction with the CBD Rail loop getting constructed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick R</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/11/25/people-friendly-spaces/#comment-4633</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 01:37:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=2338#comment-4633</guid>
		<description>Well they have declared that policy on Swanston St a failure and are now getting rid of the traffic lanes. The dead zone concept was just wrong, it is well patronised by pedestrains and trams at night.


Maybe Queen St wouldn&#039;t be so dead at night if it were an nice place to go to, i.e. without a four lane highway up the middle. It will still have it&#039;s cross streets every few hundred metres anyway. For sure those boy racers ad a bit of colour to the place but it isn&#039;t exactly what most people would call safe and pleasant.

Queen St is too wide to work well as a fully pedestriann space. I think it should be restricted to just two bus lanes in the middle. This would allow the intersections to be smaller and more people friendly as there would be no need for turning lanes. Also this would improve traffic flow considerably on the remaining streets, as the intersections would have only two phases, one for pedestrians and buses moving north-south and a second for pedestrains and traffic crossing east west. Albert street could have it&#039;s bus lanes removed and be marked with four general traffic lanes as the main north-south street for traffic. In my opinion Albert is better suited to this role, and the local urban environment would be less affected.

I think they have it the wrong way around: A four lane arterial on the central shopping and entertainment street that has no driveways, carparks or loading zones, and then they put the bus lanes on the parallel street that has little pedestrian attraction but is full of driveways, parking buildings and loading docks!

How about prioritising the street with pedestrain facilities for pedestrians and public transport users, and turning the one that has all the car based facilities into the highway?!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well they have declared that policy on Swanston St a failure and are now getting rid of the traffic lanes. The dead zone concept was just wrong, it is well patronised by pedestrains and trams at night.</p>
<p>Maybe Queen St wouldn&#8217;t be so dead at night if it were an nice place to go to, i.e. without a four lane highway up the middle. It will still have it&#8217;s cross streets every few hundred metres anyway. For sure those boy racers ad a bit of colour to the place but it isn&#8217;t exactly what most people would call safe and pleasant.</p>
<p>Queen St is too wide to work well as a fully pedestriann space. I think it should be restricted to just two bus lanes in the middle. This would allow the intersections to be smaller and more people friendly as there would be no need for turning lanes. Also this would improve traffic flow considerably on the remaining streets, as the intersections would have only two phases, one for pedestrians and buses moving north-south and a second for pedestrains and traffic crossing east west. Albert street could have it&#8217;s bus lanes removed and be marked with four general traffic lanes as the main north-south street for traffic. In my opinion Albert is better suited to this role, and the local urban environment would be less affected.</p>
<p>I think they have it the wrong way around: A four lane arterial on the central shopping and entertainment street that has no driveways, carparks or loading zones, and then they put the bus lanes on the parallel street that has little pedestrian attraction but is full of driveways, parking buildings and loading docks!</p>
<p>How about prioritising the street with pedestrain facilities for pedestrians and public transport users, and turning the one that has all the car based facilities into the highway?!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
