cycling & pedestrian network priority infrastructure for capital works | draft december 2009

8/14/2019 Cycling & Pedestrian Network Priority Infrastructure for Capital Works | DRAFT December 2009

1/86

Cycling & Pedestrian NetworkPriority Infrastructure for Capital Works DRAFT|

December 2009

Prepared for TAMS(Territory and Municipal Services)

Represented by Roads ACT


2/86

Cycling and Pedestrian Network

Priority Network for Capital Works

1143 draft report 181209 2

Sydney

Level 3, Cardno Building

910 Pacific Highway

Gordon NSW 2072

Tel: (02) 9496 7700

Fax: (02) 9499 3902

Brisbane

Green Square

Level 11, North Tower

515 St Paul's Terrace

Locked Bag 4006

Fortitude Valley QLD 4006

Tel: (07) 3310 2401

Fax: (07) 3369 9722

Wollongong

278 Keira Street

Wollongong NSW 2500

Tel: 1300 369 093

Gold Coast

Level 2, Emerald Lakes Town Centre

1/3321 Central Place

Carrara QLD 4211

PO Box 391 Nerang QLD 4211

Tel: (07) 5502 1585

Fax: (07) 5502 1586

DOCUMENT CONTROL

Version DateAuthor Reviewer

Name Initials Name Initials

DraftDecember

2009

Andrew McGill

Sam Laybutt

Jerryn Zwart

Russell Yell

Jerryn Zwart

" 2009 Cardno All Rights Reserved. Copyright in the whole and every part of this document belongs to Cardno

and may not be used, sold, transferred, copied or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner or form or in or on

any media to any person without the prior written consent of Cardno.


3/86




TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Introduction 11.1 Background 11.2 Scope 21.3 Consultation 3

2 Town Centre Networks 52.1 Civic 52.2 Belconnen 72.3 Woden 82.4 Gungahlin 92.5 Tuggeranong 10

3 Trunk Network 123.1 Overall Plan 133.2 Employment Centre Infrastructure 13

3.2.1 Canberra Airport/Business Park 133.2.2 Hume 143.2.3 Barton/Parkes 143.2.4 Fyshwick 153.2.5 Mitchell 153.2.6 Molonglo 15

3.3 Review of Standards (DS13) 164 Accessible Streets 18

4.1

Civic 20

4.2 Belconnen 214.3 Woden 224.4 Gungahlin 224.5 Tuggeranong 234.6 Fyshwick 23

5 Seven Year Works Program 255.1 Methodology 25

5.1.1 Background 255.1.2 Multi-criteria Analysis 255.1.3 Criteria Weighting 30

5.2 Priorities 315.3 Works Program 31

6 Recommendations 336.1 Other Issues 33

List of Tables

3.1 Recommended Changes to DS13

5.1 Multi Criteria Analysis Criteria

5.2 MCA Scoring System

5.3 Criteria Weighting


4/86




List of Figures

2.1 Civic Town Centre Pedestrian and Cycling Accessibility Issues

2.2 Civic Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

2.3 Belconnen Town Centre Pedestrian and Cycle Accessibility Issues

2.4 Belconnen Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

2.5 Woden Town Centre Pedestrian and Cycle Access Issues

2.6 Woden Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

2.7 Gungahlin Town Centre Pedestrian and Cycle Accessibility Issues

2.8 Gungahlin Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

2.9 Tuggeranong Pedestrian and Cycle Accessibility Issues

2.10 Tuggeranong Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

3.1 Existing and Proposed Trunk Network

3.2 Canberra Airport Employment zone Cycle Network Connections

3.3 Canberra Airport and Business Park Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

3.4 Hume Employment Zone Cycle Network Connections

3.5 Hume Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

3.6 Barton/Parkes Town Centre Pedestrian and Cycle Accessibility Issues

3.7 Barton/Parkes Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

3.8 Fyshwick Employment Zone Cycle Network Connections

3.9 Fyshwick Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

3.10 Mitchell Employment Zone Cycle Network Connections

3.11 Mitchell Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

3.12 Molonglo Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities5.1 Top 50 Priority Routes

List of Photographs

1 Current Facilities in Civic

2 Shared Space and Copenhagen Bike Lane Example

3 Existing Facilities in Belconnen

4 Existing Facilities in Woden

5 Existing Facilities in Gungahlin

6 Existing Facilities in Tuggeranong

7 The Range of Facilities in Canberra

Appendices

Appendix A Stakeholder Consultation ResultsAppendix B Works ProgramAppendix C Public Consultation Results


5/86




1 INTRODUCTIONAs part of the response to the ACT Governments development and release of the ACT Sustainable Transport

Plan in 2004, Roads ACT, working with the ACT Planning Authority (ACTPLA) and the key ACT cycling advocacy

group Pedal Power, undertook a master plan to examine and plan the next 10 years of pedestrian and cyclist

infrastructure provision. It was anticipated that this plan would undergo biennial updates to account for

completion of some projects and identification of others. This report forms the outcome of the 2009 review of the

10 Year pedestrian and cycle infrastructure plan. This review will also coordinate with the current preparation of

the Sustainable Transport Action Plan 2010-2016, which will incorporate a walking and cycling strategy.

Underpinning this study is the 2004 Sustainable Transport Plan for the ACT, which aims to have a 14% mode

share for walking and cycling in the ACT by 2026.

The aim of this study is to update the infrastructure plan with new projects, particularly within Canberras town

centres and employment zones. The network plans were then utilised to produce a seven years works program,

which will be determined based on a prioritisation process applied to each project.

The following sections of the report outline the process undertaken in the development of the works program,

including the review of the 2007 Commuter Cycling Network Priorities for Capital Works report, the

identification of new links and gaps in the network and the assessment and ranking of the proposed projects.

1.1 BackgroundThe following reports provided a background to the project team in developing the projects and reviewing the 10

year plan:

Sustainable Transport Plan for the ACT (TAMS, 2004); Commuter Cycling Network Priorities for Capital Works (CBRE, July 2007); Integrated Transport Framework (ACT Government, 2008); TAMS Design Standard 13 Pedestrian and Cyclist Facilities (TAMS, 2007); Ten Year Master plan for Trunk Cycling and Walking Path Infrastructure 2004-2014 Final Report (McCann

Property and Planning/R.D. Gossip Pty Ltd, 2004);

Civic Accessibility Study Volume 3 Access Guidelines (Eric Martin and Associates, 2004); Gungahlin Bicycle Network Plan (ACTPLA, 2008); Gungahlin Town Centre Study (ACTPLA, 2009 ); Road Safety Improvements for Gungahlin (ACT Government Media Release, 2009); Design Concept Report for Belconnen Town Centre Public Transport Improvements and Transit Oriented

Development (ACTPLA, 2008);

Canberra Central Movement Study (Intelligent Space Partnership Ltd, 2006); ACT Strategic Public Transport Network Plan and Service Design (McCormack Rankin Cagney, 2009).


6/86




1.2 ScopeThe following tasks were undertaken as part of the review and development of the works program:

a review of the 2007 Commuter Cycling Network Priorities for Capital Works report; a review and documentation of the detailed requirements for pedestrian and cycle networks in the five

town centres:

Civic; Woden; Belconnen; Gungahlin; Tuggeranong;

the development of an accessible pedestrian network for visually and mobility impaired persons in the fivetown centres;

a review and documentation of the detailed requirements for cycle networks to the major employmentnodes:

Fyshwick; Hume; Mitchell; Barton/Parkes; Canberra Airport (Brindabella and Majura Park business precincts);

a stakeholder and public consultation process to present the results of the analysis and to receivefeedback and input;

updating the standard drawing DS13-13 from Standard Design 13 to incorporate the outcomes of thestudy process and provision for new standard drawings as appropriate to document the master plans

intent for each of the major town centres and employment areas;

reporting of the process and outcomes (this report).

The 2007 Commuter Cycling Network Priorities for Capital Works report formed a key component of the review

process. Since the report was completed, 16 of the top ranked 21 projects identified in the report as priority

works have been constructed or have had funding secured for investigation or construction. The following

projects, together with their ranking, are among those which are progressing to construction or have been

constructed:

1 Bowen Drive Crossing; 2 Launceston Street; 3 Northbourne Terrace North of Mouat; 4 Cotter Road 1; 5 Jerrabomberra Wetlands; 6 Kingston Foreshore Link; 8 Airport Shared Path; 9 Cotter Road 2; 10 State Circle; 11 David Street Crossing; 13 Causeway Connection;


7/86




14 De Burgh Street Crossing; 15 Cotter Road 3; 17 Ginninderra Drive 2; 18 Mouat Street; 21 Ginninderra Drive 1.

In addition, other lower ranked projects have been completed, including:

Fairbairn Avenue on road, ANZAC Parade to Northcott Drive; Launcestion Street on road at Woden; Lanyon Drive on road from Monaro Highway to Shepherd Street; Morshead Drive on road from Dairy Road to Monaro Highway; Pialligo Avenue on road form Monaro Highway to Airport.

The focus of the 2007 Commuter Cycling Network Priorities for Capital Works report was on the trunk network

connections, forming the overall network. Projects within town centres formed a minor component of the overall

network. As part of the 2009 review, the priority is to develop town centre networks, ensuring that accessible

networks for both pedestrians and all types of cyclists within the town centres are created as well as

connections to the trunk network sections surrounding the town centres. The trunk network connections will also

be updated to include the developing employment zones and new development areas. A further focus for the

study is to consider other projects which would further the recreational network needs of the people of Canberra.

1.3 ConsultationAn important component for this project and the review and development of the network was the input andfeedback from the community and key stakeholders. Key elements of the consultation undertaken for this project

involved:

Initial meetings with the Bicycle Advisory Group (BAG), comprising representatives from Government,NRMA, Motor Cyclist Riders Association, Pedestrian Forum and Pedal Power;

Issues Workshops were held at the Civic Griffin Centre and the Gungahlin Community Centre withmembers of the community councils, BAG and other stakeholders, including members of ACTPLA and

TAMS;

One on one meetings were also held with key stakeholders including Pedal Power, Geoff Farrar, a CivilScope and Pedal Power member, Rod Baxter and James Cox from ACTPLA;

An invitation to the Community Councils to discuss issues was made. 4 Councils (North Canberra,Tuggeranong, Gungahlin and Belconnen Community Councils) accepted the invitation where meetings

were held to brief the councils on the process being undertaken and provide the opportunity to provide

feedback and input into the network plans;

A community consultation process was undertaken between 13 November and 4 December 2009. Theconsultation process was advertised in the Canberra Times, as well as online and on community

noticeboards. The process included the provision of the proposed draft network plans for each town

centre on the TAMS website, as well as three public display locations at:

Tuggeranong Hyperdome; Westfield Woden; Westfield Belconnen.


8/86




These displays were staffed for a couple of hours each day on 9 and 10 November and feedback formswere available from the website and at the public displays for public comment. From the consultation

process, a total of 66 feedback forms were received by the project team.

Appendix A contains a summary of the stakeholder consultation outcomes, while the public consultationfeedback received are summarised at Appendix C.


9/86




2 TOWN CENTRE NETWORKSIn order to assess the required infrastructure requirements for pedestrian and cyclist facilities in each of the town

centres, a site visit was undertaken. During these visits key issues were identified. These issues included such

aspects as:

footpath quality; connectivity; crossings convenience and safety aspects; personal safety; accessibility considerations; land use and desire line observations.

In addition, existing facilities were identified, including public transport facilities, attractors and generators,bicycle parking and shaded areas. It is important to note that the site visits were not a full safety and

accessibility audit of the existing facilities. Consideration was also given during the on-site assessment of the

needs of various user types, including considering the quality of the facilities from the point of view of those with

mobility impairments.

The site visits assisted with the development of future networks. In addition, for each town centre, a detailed

review of existing and future land uses, public transport connections, users, other planning studies, and

consideration of ability of the transport corridors to include walking and cycling facilities underpinned the

assessment and planning of the future networks. As previously discussed these proposed networks were also

submitted for consideration and consultation by the internal stakeholders and the general public.

Resulting from the above process was the development of strong, accessible and legible internal pedestrian and

cycle networks, linking key attractors and generators throughout each of the town centres and connections to the

surrounds. The following sections document the key outcomes for each town centre.

2.1 CivicThe network plan responded to issues identified through the site visits and desire line analysis for Civic. Figure

2.1 summarises the issues identified. The key observations included:

generally good quality footpaths throughout the centre, however some areas lack tactile paving oncrossings;

a lack of connectivity in all directions through the centre of Civic, within London Circuit specifically; well spaced bicycle parking facilities in use, particularly in the eastern precinct; no footpaths along Vernon Circle; significant areas utilised for at-grade car parking facilities, resulting in potential personal safety issues in

some locations, given lack of activity and surveillance. It is noted that there are plans for many of these

areas to be redeveloped;

generally comprehensive existing cycling and pedestrian facilities on most streets within the core; a need to develop facilities to assist and foresee the intensification of activity in the centre of Civic.


10/86

6

6

5

2 3

47

1

1

3

6

5

4

7

Poor sight distance to Commonwealth Bridge

potential for car-cyclist conflict

Pedestrians have long wait times around

Northbourne Avenue and London Circuit

Shared zone at the top of the mall is unsigned and

has unnecessary linemarkings

Sections of Bunda Street have the potential for

shared space form, given the high pedestrian

volumes, active frontages, low traffic volumes and

slow speed environment for further investigation

Vernon Circle lacks easy pedestrian throughmovement opportunities and involves mixing with

high speed vehicle traffic

Car parking areas make t hrough movement difficult

and unattractive

Alinga Street bus interchange lacks wayfinding

signage from nearby destinations

2

Legend

Existing

Bus interchange

Areas with good shade cover

Areas with high pedestrian volumes observed

Bike parking observed

Study area boundary

Issues

Uneven footpath

Footpath does not meet observed demand

Footpath with clutter

No footpath

Frequent driveway intrusion on footpath

Potential personal safety issues

No disabled access

Tactile paving incorrect or non existent

Poor crossing

Poor connection/crossing (incl. through car park)

Poor lighting

*Note: This plan includes a preliminary assessment of

walking and cycling related issues. A full audit of all

facilities has not been undertaken.

05 | 11 |2009

C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\BRISBANE\CE001143_Figures\CES01143_Fig 2.1_Civic PAI.ck.cdr

Figure 2.1 | Job Number: CES01143

Civic Town Centre - Pedestrian & Cycling Accessibility Issues


11/86




Photograph 1 Current Facilities in Civic

Some key recommendations emerged from the investigations, including:

an area of shared space (i.e. equal priority to all users) for investigation along Bunda Street, to enable abetter utilisation of the space by pedestrians and cyclists, as the relative volumes of various user modes

appeared to support this concept. This investigation should consider service vehicle requirements and

volumes for all transport modes;

an area for investigation with the potential for the provision of protected bicycle lanes (also known as

Copenhagen bicycle lanes) along Marcus Clarke Street, Alinga Street and Parkes Way.


12/86




Photograph 2 Shared Space and Copenhagen Bike Lane Example

Figure 2.2 contains the proposed walking and cycling facilities recommended as a result of the investigations and

analysis undertaken. These also reflect results of the public consultation on these draft plans. These facilities

were assessed and prioritised for inclusion in the works program.

2.2 BelconnenA number of issues were identified for Belconnen. Figure 2.3 summarises the issues identified. The key

observations were:

poor connections from the Westfield Shopping Centre west to the industrial area between Lathlain Street

and Josephson Street; uneven footpaths on many roads and footpaths which are not wide enough to accommodate their

relatively high pedestrian volumes, including Benjamin Way;

cycling facilities in existence along the major roads surrounding the town centre, providing goodcommuter and longer distance trip connections;

gaps between the external connections as well as the connections within the town centre itself; consideration required of the forthcoming changes to pedestrian and cycle movement due to the Cohen

Street extension;

areas of poor connections from surrounding residential communities, through service/light industryprecinct to town centre, particularly to the west and south;

possible need to consider a 40km/h speed limit for Lathlain Street while the area remains a major publictransport node;

improvements required to east-west connections to support the recent changes to the public transportsystems which have resulted in the Belconnen bus interchange demolished and interim facilities installed,

on Lathlain Street and Cameron Avenue;

Benjamin Way has the potential to develop as a major pedestrian and cycle connection through the towncentre, with significant median space available for improved facilities.


13/86

West

Basin

Central

Basin

West

Lake

Lond

onCct

Corande

rrkSt

Ainslie

Av

Anz

acPde

ParkesWay

CommonwealthA

v

Edinburg

hAv

Akuna

St

Nort

hb

ourne

Av

ConstitutionAv

Limestone

Av

Girrahw

eenSt

MassonSt

BallumbirSt

CooyongSt

lcCno

nre

V

ParkesWay

Mort

St

Forbes

St

Doonkuna

St

CurrongSt

FlynnD

r

ParkesPl

WendoureeDr

KingEdwardTceAlexandrinaDr

LawsonC

r

Clunies

RossSt

Daley

Rd

North

Rd

McCau

gh

eyS

t

Mar

cusClar

keSt

Allar

aSt

UniversityAv

AlingaSt

CityWalk

RuddSt

BundaSt

Lonsdale

StWatson

St

Torrens

StDon

aldsonS

t

BoldrewoodSt

BarryDr

Macle

ayS

t

Henty

St

Torrens

St

BRADDON

CIVICTOWN CENTRE

REID

PARKES

ACTON

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 2.2_Civic.cdr


Civic - Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

LEGEND

Existing off-road pedestrian and cycle facility

Proposed off-road pedestrian and cycle facility

Existing on-road cycle facility

Proposed on-road cycle facility

Proposed shared space

Recreational areas

Waterways


14/86

3

2

1

4

1

2

3

Lack of active frontages in some places sight line

axis is disrupted by Chandler Street underpass and

unnecessary detour on slope towards waterfront

Benjamin Way is too wide and car oriented. It

requires active frontages and more pedestrian

crossing facilities

The bus stops on Lathlain Street have inadequate

shelter for the patron demand. Temporary measures

for shelter should be considered

Site of future bus interchange

Legend

Existing

Bus interchange




Study area boundary

Issues

Uneven footpath



No footpath



No disabled access


Poor crossing


Poor lighting




4

05 | 11 |2009

C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\BRISBANE\CE001143_Figures\CES01143_Fig 2.3_Belconnen PAI.ck.cdr


Belconnen Town Centre - Pedestrian & Cycle Accessibility Issues


15/86




Photograph 3 Existing Facilities in Belconnen


increased connections to be provided from the surrounding residential areas, particularly to the south andwest;

improved east-west connections to be provided, between and within the industry and retail precincts; Benjamin Way as a potential major pedestrian and cycle connection through the town centre, with

significant median space available for improved facilities.

Figure 2.4 contains the proposed facilities to emerge from the investigations. These facilities were assessed and

prioritised for potential inclusion in the works program.

2.3 WodenA number of issues were identified for Woden. Figure 2.5 summarises the issues identified. The key

observations identified were:

many walking and cycling connections exist to/from the surrounding areas; improvements required on the internal connections to improve accessibility within the town centre itself

as well as higher quality, more frequent connections from surrounding residential areas to town centre;

walking and cycling links needed to service the industry precinct to the south and Canberra Hospital to theeast;

some uneven footpaths and footpaths with widths that do not meet existing demands were identified,particularly along major roads, including Hindmarsh Drive as well as throughout the industry precinct to

the south;

intimidating road crossings for pedestrians along Hindmarsh Drive; identified gaps in footpath provision along desire lines. This includes areas with ongoing construction

where alternatives where not provided;

some potential personal safety issues were present, including in the vicinity of Callam Street where thereis a lack of surveillance and activity;

poor connections from nearby residential areas to the east and west, particularly to the east, whereresidential areas are separated from the town centre by undeveloped land parcels.


16/86

Ginninderra

Dr

Emu Bank

Aik

monD

r

SouthernCrossDr

LuxtonS

t

Cou

lter

Dr

Joy

ntonS

mithDr

College St

BelconnenWay

EasternValley

Way

Cou

lterDr

RedfernSt

BenjaminWa

y

Lake Ginninderra

BELCONNENTOWN CENTRE

MACQUARIE

PAGE

BELCONNEN

FLOREY

COOK

ARANDA

William

SlimD

r

Nettle

fold

St

ChanSt

CohenSt

Bind

ubiSt

BenjaminWay

Ch an d ler St

Beisse

lSt

CatchpoleSt

BindelSt

BandjalongCr

JohnClela

ndCr

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 2.4_Belconnen.cdr


Belconnen - Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

LEGEND






Recreational areas

Waterways


17/8605 | 11 |2009

C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\BRISBANE\CE001143_Figures\CES01143_Fig 2.5_Woden PAI.ck.cdr


Woden Town Centre - Pedestrian Access Issues& Cycle

1

3

2

5

4

7

6

1

2

3

5

Lack of permeability through town centre precinct.

Limited signage and poor visual cues for those

unfamiliar with the area

Inaccurate signage within Westfield regarding

location of bus interchange and no signage into

Westfield from bus interchange

Woden Town Park has poor amenity and displays

evidence of vandalism and poor maintenance as

well as poor casual surveillance due to lack of

surrounding land uses

Hindmarsh Drive provides a major barrier between

the retail and business precinct and the southern

commercial/light industry precinct, with eight

traffic lanes, few crossing points and long delays

for pedestrians wishing to cross

The residential area east of the town centre lacks

connections to the town centre

Callam Street pedestrian path is closed on the

eastern verge for construction, however there is

evidence of significant pedestrian demand

The bus interchange has poor amenity and layout

4

Legend

Existing

Bus interchange




Study area boundary

Issues

Uneven footpath



No footpath



No disabled access


Poor crossing


Poor lighting




6

7


18/86




Photograph 4 Existing Facilities in Woden


increased connections from the surrounding residential areas to the town centre to be provided,particularly from the east;

improved connections to nearby destinations to be provided, such as the Canberra Hospital; improved connections through the southern industry precinct required.



2.4 GungahlinA number of issues were identified for Gungahlin. Figure 2.7 summarises the issues identified. The key

observations identified were:

the area is a developing community with many existing walking and cycling facilities; the existing facilities need to be linked cohesively to allow for greater mobility; connections to the residential areas surrounding the town centre are also required; some potential personal safety issues were present in some areas due to many sites not currently being

developed. In particular some areas lack casual surveillance, including along Ernest Cavanagh Street and

Gribble Street. However these are all proposed to be developed and as such these issues should be

resolved in time;

bicycle parking exists along Hibberson Street, in prominent and visible locations; variation in level of activity in retail frontages, requiring careful consideration when determining possible

pedestrian/cyclist treatments;

some poor crossing facilities exist between the town centres and the surrounding residential areas to thenorth;

the central open space plaza is currently underutilised space which would benefit from an intensificationof activity.


19/86

Melro

seDr

YambaDr

LauncestonSt

Hindmarsh Dr

Egglesto

nCr

Yarra

Gle n

CarruthersSt

Athllo

nDr

WODENTOWN CENTRE

PHILLIP

CHIFLEY

OMALLEY

GARRAN

HUGHES

LYONS

Cal l a

mSt

Melro

seDv

W

isdom

St

GilmoreCr

RobsonSt

K

entS

t

Bradle

ySt

TownshendSt

Parram

attaSt

AinsworthSt

Beasley

St

TuggeranongP

ky

Alan

St

Daven

portSt

Groom St

Irvin

gSt

Easty

St

ChappellSt

PlunkettSt

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 2.6_Woden.cdr


Woden - Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

LEGEND






Recreational areas

Waterways


20/86

4

3

3

41

1

4

4

4

4

4

5

2

4

Underused space

Shared zone opportunity for investigation

Bus stops located outside developed area

Lack of activity results in reduced personal safety.

Once these areas develop some of these issues

may be resolved

Disabled spaces well placed near bus interchange

* Note overall lack of signage

lighting good in developed areas

1

2

3

4

5

Legend

Existing

Bus interchange




Study area boundary

Issues

Uneven footpath



No footpath



No disabled access


Poor crossing


Poor lighting




05 | 11 |2009

C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\BRISBANE\CE001143_Figures\CES01143_Fig 2.7_Gungahlin PAI.ck.cdr


Gungahlin Town Centre - Pedestrian & Cycle Accessibility Issues


21/86




Photograph 5 Existing Facilities in Gungahlin


an area along Hibberson Street was identified which could undergo investigation for conversion into ashared space form (i.e. equal priority to all users);

increased connections for the surrounding residential areas required, particularly to the north-west andsouth;

new connections to fill gaps within the town centre area should be provided.



2.5 TuggeranongA number of issues were identified for Tuggeranong. Figure 2.9 summarises the issues identified. The key issues

identified were:

Tuggeranong is a newer town centre with extensive pedestrian and cyclist facilities; there are some missing links in the footpath network that were not provided during development of the

town centre and where demand is evident;

some streets are difficult to cross due to a combination of road reserve width and limited pedestriancrossing facilities;

connectivity between the bus interchange and the northern area of the town centre is poor; cycle lanes along Anketell Street could create a cycling spine through the town centre; and connections from the town centre to surrounding suburbs are limited due to barriers such as the lake, and

major roads such Soward Way and Athllon Drive (south) routes.


22/86

Yerrabi Pond

MirrabeiDr

GundarooDr

Horse

Park

Dr

Gund

arooR

d

FrancisF

ordeBvd

FlemingtonRd

AnthonyRolfeAv

HibbersonSt

TheValleyAv

KateC

raceS

t

GungahlinDr

Kosciuszk

oAv

Gundar

ooDr

DelmaWay

MapletonAv

Oodge

rooAv

Nudu

rrDr

AMAROO

FORDE

GUNGAHLIN

PALMERSTON

HARRISON

SwainSt

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 2.8_Gungahlin.cdr


Gungahlin - Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

LEGEND






Recreational areas

Waterways


23/86

Legend

Existing

Bus interchange




Study area boundary

Issues

Uneven footpath



No footpath



No disabled access


Poor crossing


Poor lighting




1

1 Pram ramps point into centre of road

05 | 11 |2009

C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\BRISBANE\CE001143_Figures\CES01143_Fig 2.9_Tuggeranong PAI.ck.cdr


Tuggeranong Town Centre - Pedestrian & Cycle Accessibility Issues


24/86




Photograph 6 Existing Facilities in Tuggeranong


missing footpaths should be provided, particularly in the southern part of the town centre; a cycle spine along Anketell Street would bring cyclists to within a block of their destination; difficult road crossings should be improved by the provision of pedestrian crossing facilities to allow safe

crossing manoeuvres;

pedestrian and cyclist approach routes from Erindale Drive and Isabella Drive should be improved.

Figure 2.10 contains the proposed facilities to emerge from the investigations. These facilities were assessed

and prioritised for potential inclusion in the works program.


25/86

Athllon

Dr

OXLEY

MONASH

TUGGERANONG

WANNIASSA

ISABELLA PLAINS

BONYTHON

Lake Tuggeranong

Isabella Pond

SowardWay

Erindal

eDv

TavernerSt

IsabellaDv

Drak

efo

rdD

v

Athllon

Dr

OHall

oranC

ct

AnketellSt

WheelerCr

TharwaDr

John

sonDr

Keverstone

Cct

Cowishaw

St

Bartl

etPl

JoselandSt

ScollaySt

ReedSt

Sth

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 2.10_Tuggeranong.cdr


Tuggeranong - Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities

LEGEND






Recreational areas

Waterways


26/86




3 TRUNK NETWORKThis development of the trunk network was divided into three key aspects:

review of the 2007 Trunk Network and identification of missing commuter links; addition of major recreational links; development of proposed links into individual projects.

These tasks were addressed via a desktop reviews of the 2007 Commuter Cycling Network Priorities for Capital

Works report, aerial photographs and site visits to assist in defining the missing links and scoping individual

projects. The review focused on providing additional cross-regional links (e.g. Belconnen to Mitchell, Long Gully

Road/Mugga Lane), links with the Queanbeyan cycle network (e.g. Lanyon Drive, Pialligo Avenue) and serving

suburbs which were not connected to the trunk network. The developing public transport interchanges at Erindale

and Kippax were also identified as nodes in need of improved connectivity. The review identified additional linkswere required in some areas, particularly in parts of Tuggeranong, Weston Creek and western Belconnen. It is

noted that the review did not include a full safety and accessibility audit of all facilities in the network.

In addition to the commuter network, recreational links were given greater consideration through the provision of

off-road facilities as an alternative to the on-road facilities preferred by commuters. Routes that facilitated loop

rides, such as Majura Road, Cotter Road and Long Gully Road were also included.

Discussions with Pedal Power and other stakeholders indicated that whilst many corridors were substantially

complete, there were still significant barriers to cycling such as multi-lane roundabouts, short missing lengths of

cycle lane or difficult road crossings that discouraged cyclists. Site visits and aerial photographs were used toidentify pinch points or missing links and these have been incorporated into adjacent projects or included as

standalone projects. It is noted that the review did not include a full safety and accessibility audit of all facilities

in the network, and hence all issues may not be identified.

An examination of pedestrian and cyclist access to the following employment centres was also undertaken via a

review of aerial photographs and site visits:

Mitchell; Canberra Airport (including the adjacent business parks); Fyshwick; and Hume.

The improvements proposed for these employment centres were generally located on approach routes to the

centre. The employment centre of Barton/Parkes were also reviewed for the connections to/from the trunk

network as well as the internal connections to key destinations in the area. Barton/Parkes underwent a review

similar to that undertaken in the town centres due to its unique characteristics and significance.

The following details the trunk network projects identified for Canberra as a whole, as well as those specific

facilities which are proposed for each of the Employment Zones.


27/86




3.1 Overall PlanThe ACT government has constructed a vast proportion of the pedestrian and cycle trunk network, consisting of

both on and off-road facilities. This has included proactive schemes, such as providing cycle lanes as part of re-

sealing programmes and providing both on and off-road facilities as part of major capital works. As a result,

Canberra has a significant network of pedestrian and cycling facilities. There are however, improvements which

could be made to reduce significant barriers to cycling or walking along these corridors which reduce potential

usage of the facilities. The major focus of the review was to identify these missing links, as well as expand the

coverage of the trunk network.

Some key corridors which were identified as having missing links include:

Lake Burley Griffin Loop; Athllon Drive;

City to Belconnen; and Woden to Fyshwick.

Some key additions to expand the coverage of the Trunk Network include:

Long Gully Road/Mugga Lane; Tharwa Drive; Pialligo Avenue; and Majura Road.

All the proposed trunk network facilities are contained on Figure 3.1.

3.2 Employment Centre InfrastructureThe following are the proposed projects intended to provide greater accessibility to/from the key employment

zones within Canberra. They have been included as part of the Trunk Network.

3.2.1 Canberra Airport/Business ParkCanberra Airport and the adjacent business parks have suffered from being poorly linked to the rest of Canberra.

The analysis of issues is contained in Figure 3.2. The recent completion of the City to Airport shared path to

Fairbairn Avenue has improved the situation, however there are still a number of desirable improvements,including:

Majura Road cycle lanes; Fairbairn Avenue cycle lanes; Morshead Drive cycle lanes from Russell to Airport; Pialligo Avenue cycle lanes; and a more direct link across the Molonglo River to Fyshwick and Narrabundah.

The proposed facility improvements are contained in Figure 3.3.


28/86

Athlon

Dr

DrakefordDv

JohnsonDv

Isabe

llaDr

MonaroH

wy

MuggaLa

Tu g

g eranong Pky CotterRd

AdelaideA

v

Hindmar

shDr

CanberraAv

PialligoAv

MorsheadDr

CommonwealthAv

Nor thbou

r neAv

BelconnenWy

Gung

ahlin

Dr

G u n g a

h l i

n D

r

M a

j u r a

R d

FederalHw

y

ParkesWy

WilliamHovellDr

GinninderraDr

King

sfordSm

ithDr

BartonHwy

Gund

arooD

r

HorsePark

Dr

GUNGAHLIN

FORDE

BONNER

AMAROO

NGUNNAWAL

NICHOLLS

PALMERSTON

FRANKLIN

KENNYMITCHELL

WATSON

DOWNER

AINSLIE

HACKETT

BRADDONCANBERRA

TURNER

OCONNOR

LYNEHAM

KALEEN

GIRALANG

LAWSON

CM KELLAR

EVATT

FRASER

FLYNN

CHARNWOOD

DUNLOP

MACGREGOR

LATHAM

HOLT

HIGGINSSCULLIN

PAGE

HAWKERWEETANGERA

COOKARANDA

BRUCE

ACTON

PARKESRUSSELL

CAMPBELL

MAJURA

PIALLIGOFYSHWICKINGSTON

CAPITAL HILL

FORREST

GRIFFITH

DEAKIN

YARRALUMLA

CURTIN

DUFFY

RIVETT

STIRLING

CHAPMANFISHER

CHIFLEY

LYONS

PEARCE

TORRENS

MAWSON

OMALLEY

ISAACS

FARRER

SYMONSTON

QUEANBEYAN

HUME

MACARTHURFADDEN

WANNIASSA

OXLEY

MONASH

GOWRIE

CHISHOLM

RICHARDSONISABELLAPLAINS

BONYTHON

CALWELL

THEODORE

LakeBurleyGriffin

LakeTuggeranong

LakeGinninderra

GungahlinPond

YerrabiPond

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 3.1_Trunk Network.cdr


Existing and Proposed Trunk Network


29/86

10 | 11 |2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\BRISBANE\CES01143_Figures\CE001143_Fig 3.2_Canberra Airport EZ CNC.ck.cdr


Canberra Airport Employment Zone - Cycle Network Connections

Missing link to business preceint

Missing link to Queanbeyan

Missing link

Missing link to airport

1

2

3

4

Legend

Existing paths

Proposed paths

Existing lanes

Proposed lanes

Identified missing links

Study area boundary

to Gungahlin

to Queanbeyan

*Note: This plan includes a preliminary

assessment of walking and cycling related

issues. A full audit of all facilities has not been

undertaken.

3

1

2

4

3


30/86

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 3.3_Canberra.cdr


Canberra Airport and Business Park - Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities


31/86




3.2.2 HumeHume is a relatively isolated employment centre, located several kilometres from the nearest residential areas.

Its proximity to Queanbeyan and Jerrabomberra was an important consideration, as is the potential future

development of Tralee. The results of the investigations are contained in Figure 3.4. Consideration has beengiven to desirable links between Hume and Tralee, however none have been included in the prioritisation process

due to the uncertainty surrounding this development. It is anticipated that these links would be funded as part of

the development should it go ahead.

Key improvements on approach routes to Hume include:

cycle lanes along Monaro Highway from Fyshwick to Tharwa Drive; cycle lanes along Isabella Drive from Tuggeranong to Hume; cycle lanes along Lanyon Drive to be provided as part of duplication works; and cycle lanes/wide shoulders along Long Gully Road and Mugga Lane to link with southern Woden and

northern Tuggeranong.

The proposed facility improvements are contained on Figure 3.5.

3.2.3 Barton/ParkesBarton and Parkes are the locations for many of the centres of national significance in Canberra. These include,

but are not limited to:

National Gallery of Australia;

Old Parliament House; High Court of Australia; National Portrait Gallery; National Library of Australia; National Science Centre (Questicon).

As such the area is a key attractor for tourists and large volumes of people. Given this, the need for high quality

pedestrian networks is important, particularly to cater for large volumes. Figure 3.6 contains the outcomes of

observations of the precinct. Some of the proposed projects to overcome issues identified in this area include:

footpaths along the outer verge of Federation Mall; proposed off road shared path along King Edward Terrace; improved footpath facilities along National Circuit; on-road facility along Kings Avenue.

Figure 3.7 contains the proposed infrastructure improvements.


32/86

Potential future link to Tralee

Major entrance point

Missing link (Mugga Lane/Long

Gulley Road to Woden)

Potential future link as

Hume/Tralee develops

1

2

3

4

Legend

Existing paths

Proposed paths

Existing lanes

Proposed lanes


Study area boundary

*Note: This plan includes a preliminaryassessment of walking and cycling relatedissues. A full audit of all facilities has not beenundertaken.

4

3

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

to Queanbeyan

10 | 11 |2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\BRISBANE\CE001143_Figures\CES01143_Fig 3.4_Hume EZ CNC.ck.cdr


Hume Emploment Zone - Cycle Network Connections


33/86

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 3.5_Hume.cdr


Hume - Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities


34/86

2

4

1

5

3

1

2

3

5

The varying traffic volumes and speeds on King

Edward Terrace and Parkes Place are an

opportunity for walking and cycling facilities to

improve. There are high speeds and traffic volumes

on Commonwealth Avenue and Kings Avenue, also

warranting consideration for pedestrian/cyclist

facilities improvements

No kerb ramps

Pedestrians have long delays at Kings Avenue to

cross and are required to cross only half the

intersection at a time

Some routes along Federation Mall lack footpaths,

though there are obvious desire lines

The High Court precinct has poor permeability

*Note: poor wayfinding signage generally

4

Legend

Existing

Bus interchange




Study area boundary

Issues

Uneven footpath



No footpath



No disabled access


Poor crossing


Poor lighting




10 | 11 |2009

C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\BRISBANE\CE001143_Figures\CES01143_Fig 3.6_Barton_Parkes PAI.ck.cdr


Barton/Parkes Town Centre - Pedestrian & Cycle Accessibility Issues


35/86

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 3.7_BartonParkes.cdr


Barton Parkes - Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities


36/86




3.2.4 FyshwickFyshwick is a centre that can be quite difficult to negotiate for both pedestrians and cyclists due to significant

numbers of vehicles illegally parked on verges and footpaths. Figure 3.8 contains the outcomes of the

observations. The main spine routes, Newcastle and Ipswich Streets, do not have any cycle facilities and the

multi-lane roundabouts on Newcastle Street can be difficult to negotiate for both pedestrians and cyclists.

Important approach routes to Fyshwick identified include Monaro Highway (north and south), Canberra Avenue

and Hindmarsh Drive. Completion of the Lake Burley Griffin loop through Kingston Foreshore would provide an

off-road link to the centre. The rail corridor and the alignment of the Newcastle Street extension were both

identified as potential routes for direct off-road links with Kingston.

Key improvements for Fyshwick employment centre include:

cycle lanes along Newcastle Street;

an off-road path along the western side of Ipswich Street; cycle lanes on Hindmarsh Drive and Canberra Avenue; and an off-road link from Narrabundah via Wormald Street and an existing underpass beneath Monaro

Highway; and

off-road links to Kingston via the rail corridor and Newcastle Street extension.

Figure 3.9 contains the proposed facilities for Fyshwick.

3.2.5 MitchellThis employment zone is focussed on light industry. Surrounding the area are existing and proposed residential

precincts. Figure 3.10 contains the outcomes of the observations in this area. There are existing on-road

facilities along key roads which run adjacent to the employment zone, Gungahlin Drive, Flemington Road and

Sandford Road, therefore the proposed links are intended to connect these facilities.

Some of the proposed connections included:

Hoskins Street; Vicars Street.

These proposed facilities are contained on Figure 3.11.

3.2.6 MolongloThe Molonglo area is a new development area. As part of this process ACTPLA has planned some preliminary

pedestrian and cyclist routes through the area. New routes were proposed as part of this study. This included

additional links parallel to the primary road links and connections to the key destinations, such as local

educational and community facilities. These are shown on Figure 3.12.


37/86

10 | 11 |2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\BRISBANE\CE001143_Figures\CE001143_Fig 3.8_Fyshwick EZ CNC.ck.cdr

Figure 3.8 | Job Number: CE001143

Fyshwick Employment Zone - Cycle Network Connections

1

2

3

4

to Airportto Chapel Hill

Shared path should continue

along greenspace not Service

Road

Missing links across rail line

Poor permeability

Missing link to airport and

business parks

1

2

3

4

Legend

Existing paths

Proposed paths

Existing lanes

Proposed lanes


Poor crossing

Study boundary area




undertaken.


38/86

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 3.9_Fyshwick.cdr


Fyshwick - Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities


39/86

10 | 11 |2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\BRISBANE\CE001143_Figures\CES01143_Fig 3.9_Mitchell EZ CNC.ck.cdr


Mitchell Employment Zone - Cycle Network Connections

3

1

2

1

to Gungahlin

to Civic

North-south missing internal

connection

East-west missing internal

connection

Northern precinct missing internal

connection

1

2

3

Legend

Existing paths

Proposed paths

Existing lanes

Proposed lanes


Study area boundary




undertaken.


40/86

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 3.11_Mitchell.cdr


Mitchell - Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities


41/86

17 | 12 | 2009C:\CK Shared Artwork Folder\SYDNEY\CES01143_Figures\Maps for Report\CES01143_Fig 3.12_Molonglo.cdr


Molonglo - Existing and Proposed Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities


42/86




3.3 Review of Standards (DS13)The following table summarises the recommendations for changes to Design Standards for Urban Infrastructure

Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities (DS13 ) based on the analysis undertaken in this 2009 review, consultation

undertaken and proposed network plans documented in this report.

Table 3.1 Recommended Changes to DS13

Section Recommended Change

13.1.1 General Second paragraph discusses the AUSTROADS documents Part 13 and Part 14. These

documents have recently been revised and such reference needs to be updated here and

throughout the document.

13.1.4 ACT policies This section needs to be updated to reference new Sustainable Transport Plan and Walk and

Cycle Strategy references to be updated here and throughout the document.

13.2.2 Industry standards Update AUSTROADs references as discussed above.

13.2.3 Policy and

Guidelines

Update with new sustainable transport plan and walk and cycle strategy documents.

TAMS to consider adding guidelines in relation to implementing shared spaces and protected

bike lanes (Copenhagen style cycle lanes). Suggestions include:

Liveable Copenhagen: The Design of a Bicycle City

http://www.sightline.org/research/sprawl/res_pubs/Livable_Copenhagen_reduced.pdf

Street Design Manual (New York City DOT)

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/about/streetdesignmanual.shtml

It is also noted that in terms of Bicycle parking provision, AUSTROADS Guidelines are outdated

in terms of supply for different land uses. It is recommended that the Green Building Council

of Australia rates for bicycle parking in their Green Star rating tools be considered as best

practice and reference to these guidelines be included in this section.

http://www.gbca.org.au/green-star/rating-tools/

13.6.3.1 Table 13-1 Off

Road Path types

The Column width should be described as minimum width. Another column should be added

to include desirable widths to encourage wider paths which should cater for potential future

demands and future proofing. Recommendations for changes to minimum widths are:

- Minor path minimum width should be 1.8m to be consistent with newAUSTROADS guidelines

- Intermediate path minimum width should be 2.5m to be consistent with newAUSTROADS guidelines

- Trunk path minimum width should be 3.0m- Trunk path minimum width should 3.5m


43/86




13.6.4.1 On road cycling

facilities

The list of alternative types should be increased to include protected bike lanes and shared

spaces.

The last paragraph after Table 13.2 should also discuss the opportunity to consider shared

spaces in town centres.

13.6.4.1 Table 13.2 On

Road Cycling Provisions

for New Road

Major Collector Streets addition of shared space treatments should be added to the on road

cycling provision column.

Arterials (both categories) and Parkway addition of protected bike lane treatments should be

added to the on road cycling provision column.

13.6.5.1 General A dot point should be added to also consider the concept of Road Dieting as another way to

retrofit facilities on arterial roads. A road diet entails removing travel lanes from a roadway

and utilizing the space for other uses and travel modes.

A new section under 13.6.5 should also be added to describe when such treatment could be

considered. Refer to the Road Diet handbook: Setting trends for Liveable Cities by Jennifer

Rosales.

http://egov.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP_RES/docs/2008NWTC/2008_presentations/7A_3_rosale

s.pdf

13.6.10.2 Flexible

pavements and 13.6.10.3

Concrete Paths

There are improved construction practices which result in concrete paths being a smoother

ride due to the treatment of joins. Concrete paths have benefits in regards to reduced cracking

and consequently reduced maintenance and an overall longer life, and hence could beconsidered for Trunk Paths and other paths. These construction practices should be

investigated by TAMS and dependant on the outcomes Section 13.6.10.2 and 13.6.10.3 be

amended accordingly.

13.6.14.1 Accessible

Pedestrian Networks

The last paragraph should be updated to refer to the APNs recommended for town centres in

this report.

13.6.15 Provisions at

structures

The minimum clear widths should be updated to reflect the recommendations discussed above

for Table 13-1.

13.8 Glossary Definitions of Shared Spaces, Protected Bike Lanes and Road Dieting should be added

13.9 Standard Drawings DS13-01 The recommendations in regards to changes to minimum widths need to be applied

to this drawing (i.e. Table 13-1). Dependant on the outcomes of investigations into new

concrete paths constructions, notes in regards to asphalt and concrete should be updated.

DS13-11 To be updated with recommended trunk network in this report.

A new standard design drawing should be developed for protected bike lanes.


44/86




4 ACCESSIBLE STREETSThe assessment and development of key routes through the town centres to cater for those with vision andmobility impairments was central to the priority plan review. All streets should be developed to consider all

users, however in some situations this has not occurred. As a result, a recommendation for a key route through

each town centre was identified for priority action.

To identify these routes, site visits were undertaken of each town centre, examining key land uses and

destinations to assess demand along various potential routes. In tandem with this was the assessment of the

quality of the facilities present and the works which would be required.

In addition, discussions were held with representatives of Guide Dogs NSW/ACT to collaboratively identify key

routes which were frequently used by their members.

Representatives from the Guide Dogs NSW/ACT noted the following important considerations for the placement

of the accessible routes:

Many people who are vision impaired or blind use public transport as their means to access town centres around

ACT. Therefore, a key route through each town centre must have accessible routes to both the bus interchanges

and the taxi ranks, from this point people will vary where they access in the town centre.

People who are vision impaired or blind use a technique with their white long canes called Shorelining. This

technique involves using two different tactile surfaces to follow a straight line. This might be a building line, a

grassed edge footpath or an open space with two different surfaces, i.e. brick tiles and smooth concrete.Because of the use of this technique it is important to keep the edges of these surfaces clear of any obstacles,

i.e. sandwich boards, signs, tables and chairs as they can become a hazard.

To achieve a high quality, accessible route, standards identified in the Civic Accessibility Study Volume 3

Access Guidelines (2004) were used for all centres.

The guidelines were developed in order to ensure that Civic was accessible to all users. The guidelines

established designs to meet the requirements of the Building Code of Australia, Australian Standards and the

Disability Discrimination Act.

The Guidelines set out specific notes related to various areas of interest for accessible travel, including:

accessible pedestrian networks (including path clearance, grades and maintenance aspects); kerb ramps; Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSIs or tactiles); lighting; controlled intersections; information signage.

The key outcomes are summarised in the following.


45/86




Accessible Pedestrian Networks

The guidelines state that:

Special access provisions should not be necessary if the environment is built to adequately reflect the diversityand needs of the community. Good design should seamlessly provide access for all. Providing equal access

should be a fundamental part of good design rather than, at a later stage providing solutions to problems. Access

is required for all people including adults and children, the frail aged and young children as well as those with

intellectual, physical, sensory or mobility disabilities.

The guidelines outline the primary requirements for an accessible path. These are as follows:

A clear path of travel is the basis of the accessible pedestrian network. It should be free of steps, lips and steep

gradients and free of all barriers and hazards..

The clear path of travel shall be adjacent to a tactile cue to enable people with a visual impairment to track offit. This can include a wall, shopfront or a kerb.

The minimum width of an accessible pedestrian network and any path is to be 1800mm. In the high volume open

areas without roads the path width should be a minimum of 2,500mm.

It is desirable that the accessible pedestrian network is covered using a colonnade network or awning.

Paving should be slip resistant, including when wet and should not have transitions greater than 5mm in height.

The surface should be overall hard, flat and stable, with appropriate use of colours to assist accessibility.

Gradients for ramps should be a maximum of 1 in 8 if less than 1,520mm long and a maximum of 1 in 14 with

landings every 9m at 1 in 20 landings at 15m. Sloping walkways at 1 in 33 landings should be located every 25m,

over 1 in 33 does not require landings. Cross fall should not exceed 1 in 40. Landings should be a minimum

1,200mm long for the full width of the clear path of travel. Overhead obstacles must be at least 2.0m high,

unless identified. Cycleways shall not intrude into the clear path of travel. Any location where they do cross any

clear path of travel should be treated as a hazard and tactile should be deployed. They are also to be clearly

signed.

Kerb ramps

These enable the safe and easy crossing of kerbs and direct users in the correct direction. They should belocated within the clear path of travel and direction of travel.

Tactiles

Tactiles are to be used to alert people to hazards as well as to direct people to important facilities.

They are required on road crossings, vehicle crossings on an accessible pedestrian path, where there are

overhead obstructions and ground level obstructions, intrusions into the clear path of travel and the top and

bottom of stairs.


46/86




Directional tactile are required at mid block crossings, t-intersections, to bus timetables, to major signage and

across large open spaces where there are no other route of tactiles available.

Lighting

It is intended that lighting will provide adequate vision for safe use and access at all times and conditions, with

levels set down in AS1158.3.1 or the ACT Crime Prevention and Urban Design Resource Manual.

Controlled Intersections

Traffic signals are recommended to assist pedestrian movement, and should have visible, tactile and audible

cues. Traffic islands should be safe and accessible for people with wheelchairs, with a minimum length of

1200mm and width of 1000mm. Cut through or ramped walkways are required, with push buttons within reach.

Fixtures

Fixtures are intended to be located within areas of public facilities but must not impinge on the accessible

pedestrian network, with location preference being on the kerb side of the accessible pedestrian network.

Information Signage

The intention of this measure is to ensure that signs provide users with easy to understand and essential

information. It is recommended that information signage to assist in travel and identification of amenities should

include tactile maps and Braille.

The considerations of the above standards assisted with identifying works required along each of the proposedaccessible routes.

The outcome of these investigations was an accessible route being identified within each town centre and

associated works required. Details of the proposed accessible routes are contained below.

4.1 CivicThe priority route for Civic is between the Alinga Street bus interchange and the Canberra Centre. This route

runs along Alinga Street, Garema Place and Scotts Crossing. This route would also encompass the Bunda Street

taxi rank, which runs perpendicular to Garema Place. It would also encompass connections north to the GriffinCentre, either along Bunda street or internally through the Canberra Centre.

Key issues were raised about many aspects of this priority route by the representatives of Guide Dogs NSW/ACT.

With regard to the bus interchange at Alinga Street, the following observations were made:

The Civic [bus] interchange has extremely poor access for a person who is vision impaired or blind. From the

majority of the bus platforms a person must cross East Row, Mort street or Alinga street to access most facilities

in the area. This area can be confusing and dangerous for people with low vision. Firstly, there is a combination

of loud distracting noises, including the high flow of bus traffic sometimes drowning out the sounds from other

service vehicles using this area, there is often construction noise from buildings in the area, there are no safe


47/86




points to cross as there could be buses pulling up at any point along the road, and on the corners the pram ramps

lead into the middle of the intersection rather than straight across the road. This is a definite area for concern

and keeps some travellers from accessing buses to Civic. This area also houses Vision Australia which is a very

highly used service for people with a vision impairment or who are blind, they must first be able to make their

way through the interchange.

There were also concerns about the accessibility of the route from the bus interchange to the Canberra Centre

via Garema Place:

This area can be very confusing also for vision impaired and blind. There are no straight lines to follow, ie

shorelines, there are unexpected drop offs and stairs in open areas that are not marked effectively, there are also

cars travelling through the area, and many unexpected obstacles ie sandwich boards along the footpaths.

The connections north to the Griffin Centre currently has good connections, according to the Guide Dogs

NSW/ACT representatives and is accessible and safe.

The following works would be required along this route to improve its accessibility for those with mobility or

visual impairments:

provision of a dedicated pedestrian crossing facility (ideally signals) for visually impaired at East Row,Mort Street or Alinga Street;

audit of all pedestrian crossing facilities along the proposed route to ensure it is safe and convenient forcrossing by visually impaired persons. This should include identification and replacement of pram ramps

which do not meet the guidelines;

detailed audit of priority route to identify safe movement from the interchange across to the CanberraCentre, to provide a clear path along the shoreline, tactile paving, signage and lighting to clearly

demonstrate safe passage options;

provision of improved tactile facilities, particularly around the Scotts Crossing section of the route; improved lighting of Scotts Crossing to improve the ease of use of the pedestrian crossing facility.

4.2 BelconnenThe proposed priority route would be located from the Lathlain Street bus station to the Belconnen shopping

centre. This would also continue to the eastern commercial buildings around Chandler Street. The Guide Dogs

NSW/ACT representatives made the following observations on the issues facing those with mobility and visual

impairment throughout this key route:

Currently to do this route one must walk through the car park to access either the red bridge or the mall, this is

not an ideal route and is highly used. Pedestrians must give way to vehicles in the carpark and this can become

particularly confusing for Vision Impaired or blind that are accessing this route. There is also a lot of surrounding

noise from the buses and traffic on Lathlain Street interfering with the safe crossings at the car park.

The key infrastructure required for the improvement of this route would include:


48/86




audit of all pedestrian crossing facilities along the proposed route to ensure they are safe and convenientfor crossing by visually impaired persons. This should include identification and replacement of pram

ramps which do not meet the guidelines and identification for tactile paving at key conflict points such as

driveways. The audit may also identify need for further pedestrian crossing facilities;

detailed audit of priority route to provide a clear path along the shoreline, tactile paving and lighting toclearly demonstrate safe passage options;

associated lighting, wayfinding signage, to assist movement beyond the shopping centre to the lake.

Benjamin Way was also cited as a potential key route, with the area outside the Churches Centre cited as an

area with poor access conditions. These should be the next priority for works.

4.3 WodenThe proposed priority route would be located between the Woden bus interchange and the shopping centre. This

area would connect not only the public transport and the primary retail destination, but would also serve other

key services, including banks and the post office. As stated by the Guide Dogs NSW/ACT representative:

The Woden interchange is currently quite accessible for blind and vision impaired, however the stairs that lead

from the interchange have quite poor access including no marking on the edge of each step and poor lighting.

The key works which would therefore be necessary to achieve a more accessible route for those with mobility

and visual impairment would include:




detailed audit of priority route to provide a clear path along the shoreline, tactile paving and lighting toclearly demonstrate safe passage options;

improved lighting along Bradley Street, linking the bus interchange to the shopping centre; introduce appropriate Markings on the steps leading up to the courtyard areas (in accordance with Civic

Accessibility Study Volume 3 Access Guidelines (2004));

investigate opportunity to provide alternative treatments to stairs, including ramps for disability access; CPTED treatments to increase the safety perceptions of users of this route.

4.4 GungahlinThe proposed priority route is along Hibberson Street, between the bus services and the retail destinations.

Currently Hibberson Street has a wide and clear pathway. Another proposed route would be in the vicinity of the

library and community centre and this would be the second priority for treatment in this centre.

The key works which would be required to achieve these routes would include:


49/86






driveways. The audit may also identify need for further pedestrian crossing facilities. It is noted that the

majority of this route is already up to standard;

detailed audit of priority route to provide a clear path along the shoreline, tactile paving and lighting toclearly demonstrate safe passage options. It is noted that the majority of this route is already up to

standard;

improved kerb ramps in the vicinity of the library and community centre.

4.5 TuggeranongThe proposed priority route identified is from the Tuggeranong bus interchange and taxi rank to the Hyperdome

and beyond to the public service buildings on Anthllon Drive. The route could also be extended from the taxi rank

to the library and Community Centre along Anketell Street and connecting through to Cowlishaw Street. The

issues raised by Guide Dogs NSW/ACT were:

Most of the crossings in this area are ground level, giving vision impaired and blind no warning of where exactly

the road starts and the footpath/gutter finishes, this can become a great hazard.

This area already possess wide footpaths. Therefore the key infrastructure requirements for this priority route

are as follows:

provision of appropriate lighting and wayfinding signage throughout the route;

audit of the route to identify and provide tactile tiles along the route, which should include identificationof pedestrian crossing hazards;

detailed audit of priority route to provide a clear path along the shoreline, tactile paving and lighting toclearly demonstrate safe passage options. It is noted that the majority of this route is already up to

standard.

4.6 FyshwickFyshwick has also been added to the assessment of accessible streets, despite not being a town centre, due to

particular concerns raised by Guide Dogs NSW/ACT. Guide Dogs NSW/ACT note the following issues:

The area and route of concern is from the Canberra South Motor Park to the closet bus stop which is at the

Canberra Eye Hospital. Currently there is no footpath that leads to this bus stop and the visually impaired client

must trek either through nature reserve or along Canberra Av, where there is also no footpath and traffic running

at 80kms/hour. We are unaware of many of clients accessing Fyshwick at all due to safety concerns for

pedestrians. If they need to access the area they generally take a carer with them.

The route identified is along Canberra Avenue, between Wormald Street and the Monaro Highway. The specific

works which would be required for this route would include:

provision of footpath along the extent of the route; lighting and wayfinding signage as required;


50/86




tactile paving; audit of all pedestrian crossing facilities along the proposed route to ensure they are safe and convenient

for crossing by visually impaired persons. This should include identification and replacement of pram



detailed audit of priority route to provide a clear path along the shoreline, tactile paving and lighting toclearly demonstrate safe passage options.

8/14/2019 Cycling & Pedestrian Ne

cycling & pedestrian network priority infrastructure for capital works | draft december 2009

Documents