mcc flat bush cycleways and walkways mp 16.08.05 for pdfl...helen preston jones (principal landscape...

$: MCC Flat Bush Cycleways and Walkways MP 16.08.05 for pdfl...Helen Preston Jones (Principal Landscape Architect) Phil Haizelden (Senior Transportation Planner) C:\project file\flat$

Flat Bush Cycleways and Walkways Master Plan

Opus International Consultants Limited Auckland Office Level 3 The Westhaven, 100 Beaumont Street P.O. Box 5848 Auckland, New Zealand Telephone: 64 09 355 9500 Facsimile: 64 09 355 9584 Project No. 3AL056.00 Date: 11 August 2005 Status: Final

Prepared by:

Catherine Campbell (Landscape Architect)

Kit McLean (Transportation Planner) Reviewed by:

Helen Preston Jones (Principal Landscape Architect)

Phil Haizelden (Senior Transportation Planner)

C:\project file\flat bush_3ALO56.00\Flat Bush cycleways & walkways\MCC Flat Bush Cycleways and Walkways MP 16.08.05 for pdfl.doc This document is the property of Opus International Consultants Limited. Any unauthorised employment or reproduction, in full or part is forbidden.

© Opus International Consultants Limited 2005

F la t Bush Cyc leways and Wa lkways Mas te r P lan

Page i

CONTENTS Introduction................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1

Context ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of Document................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Hierarchy of Routes.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2

Network Theory ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Flexibility..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Implementation........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Master Plan ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Design Principles........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 6

General......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Linkages....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Use/Function ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Safety ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Width ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Surfaces ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Grade ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Steps ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 8 Barriers......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Sightlines...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Intersections ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 9 Crossing Points ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Underpasses ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Bridges ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Planting ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Rest Places ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 11 Cycle Parking Facilities .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 11 Lighting....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Signage ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Park Branding............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 12 Alternative Routes for Flood Conditions..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12

Other Routes and Activities ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 The Network ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 14 References ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18


Page 1

Introduction

Opus International Consultants (Opus) have been commissioned by Manukau City Council to prepare this Cycleway and Walkway Master Plan for the Flat Bush development area.

The Flat Bush development involves the establishment of New Zealand's largest new town. When completed, Flat Bush will be home to at least 40,000 new residents within approximately 1730 hectares. The area will provide both urban and suburban residential development and a new retail and commercial centre.

The Flat Bush development seeks to provide land use patterns that support greater access to services and facilities through public passenger transportation, walking and cycling. In addition, Council is seeking to protect and enhance the natural area of the Flat Bush catchment, providing areas of public open space which also achieve better environmental outcomes. The lengths of green corridors in the Flat Bush area are seen as an ideal location and opportunity to provide attractive access and connectivity throughout the area. For the purpose of this document the “green corridors” are defined as being made up of stormwater management areas, public open space zones, reserve contribution areas and roadside berms adjoining all three of these areas.

Context

This Master Plan has two key objectives, to aid the development of Manukau City’s transport network and the development of Manukau City’s open space network. Manukau City Council is seeking to develop a complete transport network for the Flat Bush area. The roading network has already been established. Walking and cycling are an important aspect of any transport network and this Master Plan has been created to ensure that these modes of transport are not forgotten as the site develops. This holistic view aligns with the Land Transport Management Act (LTMA).

The LTMA, introduced in 2003, has widened Land Transport New Zealand (LTNZ) role from an organisation that funds land transport to one that works actively with its partners (including Local Authorities such as Manukau City Council) to ensure that land transport plays its full part in developing New Zealand economically, socially and environmentally.

The Master Plan also aims to ensure connectivity through Manukau City’s open space network, enhancing both recreational and ecological opportunities. This Master Plan will stand alongside existing Manukau City Council documents and has been developed to complement strategies such as Manukau City Cycle and Walking Strategy (Draft), Riparian Planting Guidelines for Flat Bush (Draft), Recreational Walkways Management Strategy for Manukau City (Draft), Manukau City Council Making Connections.

Purpose of Document

The Flat Bush Cycleway and Walkway Master Plan has been developed as a reference document primarily for use by two groups:

Council staff, and

Private developers.

It is envisaged that the document will be consulted by Council staff involved in all aspects of the planning and design of the Flat Bush area. Although the Master Plan is not at a level of detail to prescribe exactly where facilities will go, or specific detail for every situation, it does indicate best practice for location and form. It will provide a basis and check list to achieve connectivity within the Flat Bush area when reviewing development proposals.


Page 2

The Master Plan will be an invaluable tool for private developers. It will provide guidance about the type of facilities required and indicative locations. The Master Plan also includes the theory behind the facility type and location, giving developers the flexibility to design within the constraints of their site while achieving consistency throughout the whole network. This is particularly important due to the varied terrain and multiple functions of many of the green corridors.

Hierarchy of Routes

Developing a hierarchy of cycleways and walkways is an important first stage in the development of the Master Plan. Developing new cycle and walking facilities, as opposed to adding to existing transport infrastructure, will allow each level of hierarchy to be completed and seen as part of the overall picture.

Manukau City Council have already proposed on-road cycle facilities for a number of the key arterial and collector roads running through the Flat Bush development site. These on-road arterial and collector facilities form the top level within the hierarchy. They will often provide the fastest route through the site, but are likely to be characterised by high traffic speeds. This report does not deal with these facilities and routes in detail, but includes them to indicate the completeness of the network. Other arterial and collector roads have been identified which could also act as on-road cycle routes and support the network.

The Master Plan primarily focuses on off-road cycleways and walkways, and facilities. These will be provided within the Flat Bush green corridors and the adjoining road berm footpaths will also be utilised where appropriate. Where a cycleway is not easily accommodated within the green corridors it is proposed to provide them alongside, on the adjacent road edge.

The Hierarchy of routes includes:

Off-Road

Off-road shared use path for cycles and pedestrians

Restricted shared use path – where space is limited

Off-road pedestrian only path

Recreation

Off-road walking trail; pedestrian only

Off-road cycle trail – mountain bike specific

On-Road

On-road cycle lane – local road

Significant connecting local road

On-road cycle lane – arterial road

On-road cycle lane – collector road

These routes, both on-road and off-road are detailed in ‘The Network’ on page 14.

Figure 1: Typical shared use path (Austroads Part 14)


Page 3

Network Theory

The “backbone” or main cycleway/walkway proposed in the Master Plan is a shared use, two-way, 3.0m wide path (shown in Figure 1). This shared use facility provides for:

Recreational pedestrians

Other pedestrians

Recreational cyclists (mum, dad and the kids type)

School cyclists

Commuter cyclist shortcuts

The shared use paths will provide links between all the major residential, retail and recreational areas, public amenities and institutional facilities, such as schools, within Flat Bush. Shared use paths are not always appropriate, particularly in urban areas, but the facility is appropriate in Flat Bush for the following reasons:

Combining both uses increases the likelihood that someone will be using the path, making users feel safer (personal safety) and encouraging path use.

Having one path for combined use will impact less on the surrounding environment.

Many locations along the green corridors are restricted in the amount of land available due to topography.

A sealed (or concreted) shared use path will provide direct links between areas for pedestrians and potential shortcuts for commuter, school and short trip cyclists.

In addition, it is important to retain a consistent approach across the network. Land Transport New Zealand’s Cycle Network and Route Planning Guide states “To be recognisable, cycling routes should use consistent standards and design.” Using a single, wide, dual-use path wherever possible will contribute to a consistent network.

A single shared use path down each side of the green corridors, where these are wide, and on one side where the corridor is narrow, is likely to be best utilised and easier to construct and maintain. Good connections onto the paths are vital with frequent access points from surrounding areas. Local roads (proposed) are significant in creating opportunities for good connections between the on-road and off-road network and across the green corridors. These are identified on the Master Plan.

Sections of specifically targeted single use routes are proposed where topography or site constraints preclude the development of the minimum width (2.5m) shared use cycle and pedestrian path. Where topography is steep, widths are narrow, or vegetation is dense, bicycle use may not be practical. For these sections, narrower pedestrian paths will be provided and cycles will move onto the local road network (refer to Figure 2). In some instances, pedestrians too will need to move out of the green corridor and utilise the road berm footpath. In all instances, keeping pedestrians in the off-road network is to be investigated as a first option. Where the road berm footpath is used as an alternative to the shared use path, the path should be developed according to the principles of this Master Plan. Special treatment and design will be necessary when moving the users of the shared use path on to the alternative paths. Off-road pedestrian only paths have also been included in the network to offer alternative opportunities.

In addition, the Flat Bush area is suitable for the development of routes aimed at specific recreational groups such as mountain bikers or off-road trail runners. These routes can be developed and added to the total network as Flat Bush develops and demand becomes apparent. Specifically targeted recreation routes will add to the network of paths and

Figure 2: Typical diagram showing alternatives to shared use path.


Page 4

potentially reduce conflict between users on the main shared use paths. There is opportunity for these trails to extend into the steeper topography of Flat Bush, utilising the Conservation/Stormwater Management Policy Area. The location of these trails are very site specific and for this reason have not been shown on the Master Plan, but are part of the Network. However, two recreational links have been indicated on the Master Plan to highlight the use of the Conservation/Stormwater Management Policy Area for additional off-road trails which form important recreational links between routes.

A number of long distance walking/hiking tracks are already proposed/exist for the Flat Bush area, such as the Ridge Top Walkway and Flat Bush Trail. These are indicated on the Master Plan. Both walks make use of the surrounding bush and connections between reserves to enhance the recreational activity. Connections need to be made to these from the network to maximise their use.

Flexibility

The Flat Bush Cycleways and Walkways Master Plan is designed to be a reference guide to aid development, ensuring that the needs of cyclists and pedestrians are catered for within the Flat Bush area. As such, the document has been created with an inherent flexibility. The Master Plan shows the location and type of facility proposed. However, without detailed knowledge of the site or the developments proposed, it is impossible to predetermine each specific design. Instead, this document outlines the facilities that should be provided, the standards to be achieved and shows “typical” design details. This information can then be applied to specific situations by developers or Council.

Some reduction in the optimum provision may be inevitable due to site conditions. Other variations may result from major developments such as Barry Curtis Park. Cycleways and walkways are already proposed for this park and connections to the network will need to be achieved.

As an example, typical design detail will be provided for a number of different treatments to get cyclists and pedestrians across roads (Figures 3 and 4). The application of each crossing will be explained in this document, allowing the crossings to be applied in additional locations.

Implementation

The Master Plan will be effected section by section. On-road cycleways and road berm footpaths will be part of roading construction. The off-road cycleways and walkways through the green corridors will be achieved either as part of subdivision developments or part of reserve development. To achieve good linkages between on-road and off-road cycleways and walkways, provision will need to be co-ordinated by Council between interested parties, to ensure that the aims of the network are clearly met. Proposals will be checked against the Master Plan to ensure connections proposed are achieved.


Page 5


Page 6

Design Principles

General

Good design of walkways and cycleways aims at achieving adequate sightlines, gentle grades, generous curves, comfortable flows, appropriate surfaces, efficient drainage, no obstructions and regular maintenance.

In addition the design should seek to provide attractive routes and surroundings taking into account public safety, in location and treatment. Achieving continuity of design, standards and of signage, particularly at entrance and exit points, and intersections and crossings.

There are a number of statutory requirements which need to be met, particularly in relation to roading design, as well as Council policies and documents. The latter include Manukau City Cycle and Walking Strategy (Draft), Riparian Planting Guidelines for Flat Bush (Draft), Recreational Walkways Management Strategy for Manukau City (Draft) and Manukau City Council Making Connections. The Standards New Zealand Handbook SNZ HB 8630:2004, Tracks and Outdoor Structures, is used by Manukau City as its benchmark for developing walkway facilities and walkways through the City’s parks and reserves.

The following design principles have been developed as a tool to achieve these aims.

Linkages

Linkages are primarily driven by the location of the suburban roading network, and the need to connect off-road routes to these, the on-road arterial and collector cycle network. Additional linkages onto the network are desirable from adjoining uses such as schools, housing developments, community centres, neighbourhoods, transport nodes etc, as well as to public spaces, recreation centres and reserves. All developments should consider the potential to connect to the network shown. There are routes proposed along both sides of green corridors wherever possible. Where routes are limited to one side of a green corridor, connections to the route across that link should be no more than 300 metres apart. If this is not achievable via a road bridge, a separate pathway and bridge should be constructed. In order to maximise the usefulness and continuity of the network seamless, links need to be achieved between the different path types. In particular, the transition between on-road and off-road routes, refer to Austroads 14 for detail design (refer to Figures 3 and 4).

Use/Function

Design should ensure that pedestrians and those whose movement is restricted can use the facility. Where possible paths should be designed to cater for the greater type and number of users including people with a disability. These guidelines are generic, aimed at a consistent and standard approach for a network which is to be developed incrementally. Each section of route shall be designed and located to best fulfil the function of the path and opportunities to increase connectivity. It should also consider the adjoining land use to see how the route can be integrated into its surroundings. Gains can be achieved, for example, where seating or stopping points already exist or where there is already a linkage to other facilities.

In contrast, an unattractive boundary treatment, or one where various entrapment points exist, could suggest the route is located further away or that additional detailing, such as lighting or additional sight distance is required for this section.

Safety

There are two aspects of safety to be considered one is that of physical safety, the risk of crashes, accidents, particularly on shared paths or on roadways. The other is that of perceived safety, feeling comfortable and secure in an environment.

Figure 3: Cycle path leaving carriageway. (Based on Sustrans guidelines and practical details)

Figure 4: Cycle path joining carriageway. (Based on Sustrans guidelines and practical details)


Page 7

Good design of one safety aspect can help the other, though no situation is totally risk free and inflexible interpretation of design will create a sterile and often counterproductive situation.

Physical safety is achieved through application of Austroads Part 14 standards and guidelines in this document. A feeling of safety is more difficult to achieve and also is dependent on the surrounding community, and each individual. Good principles of safer design such as a lot of activity, good visibility and overview, quality environments and good lighting, can be achieved in various degrees through the network. Guidelines on set back and sightlines are given. The design of the area beyond the route can be equally important and should be considered in all developments. The effect will also be achieved over time as the Flat Bush area develops.

A further example of designing for safety is ensuring local roads are a slow speed environment. This can be achieved by narrowing carriageways or by the use of traffic calming measures for local roads that are likely to be used by cyclists. Traffic calming reduces the speed of motorised vehicles, bringing it closer to that of cyclist, increasing safety and enjoyment for the rider. An example of appropriate traffic calming for local roads is the two way chicane with cycle bypass as shown in Figure 5.

Width

The width of the path is critical in achieving and maintaining the principles of safety, use and function of a route. Each path type identified in the network has been given a desirable width and a minimum width which must be adhered to. If a minimum width cannot be provided, an alternative option must be provided by utilising the green corridors and roading network. Special treatment and design will be necessary when moving the users onto this alternative path.

A reduction in width of a path by 200mm may be accepted at specific pinch points on routes, over distances no greater than 50m, at Councils discretion. All other principles must be considered, paying particular attention to safety.

Where a route abuts a wall or an upstand of over 500mm, the width of the path or the distance from the obstruction should be increased by 500mm. A wall or upstand abutting a path must not exceed 900mm (refer to Figure 6).

Path types and widths are detailed in ‘The Network’ on page 14.

Surfaces

A consistency in surface treatment must exist throughout the path network, but will be determined by factors such as location, network/park branding, function and by adjoining land use such as links through shopping centres or subdivisions.

Surface shall be all weather, even and graded to a cross fall to shed water and avoid ponding at the path edge. Paths should be laid with a 40mm cross fall or 25mm central camber to eliminate ponding. Ground shall be graded away from the path to prevent ponding at the side of the path.

Shared use cycleways and walkways shall be broom finished 6% black oxide concrete paths. Pedestrian only paths shall either be broom finished plain concrete or match the treatment of the park or reserve development through which it passes.

Colour and tactile paving treatments should also be used help define intersections, crossings and path types to the user, this is further detailed under Intersections and Crossing Points below. Colour ground treatment will draw the user’s attention to upcoming hazards; however will not convey meaning which is the role of signage and road markings. A consistent use of colour and tactile paving treatment throughout the network is essential to achieve the most usefulness for the user (refer to Figures 8 and 9).

Shared use paths shall be marked with cycle and pedestrian symbols in non slip paint, (shown in Figure 7) along the path at 200m intervals. Arrows will also be used where directional movement is required (see NZS Austroads Part 14). A delineating white line down the centre is proposed at points of high traffic volumes to separate users into user type or directional movement. This will be at the point of cycle paths moving between off-road and on-road (refer to Figures 3 and 4), where a shared use path approaches a carriageway or separates into single use types (refer to Figures 10 and 11), at

Figure 5: Two-way chicane. (Austroads Part 14)

Figure 6: Shared use path abutting upstand.


Page 8

bridge crossings (refer to Figure 14), or where a high level of accessibility is required, such as close to car parking areas. Alternatively, where deemed necessary, an intermittent raised (50mm) marker (e.g. cobble or brick inset) down the centre line can be used to separate users into user type and for increased definition for the partially sighted. Cyclist safety would have to be considered when using this type of marker and would only be suitable where a desirable path width can be achieved.

Where routes are to double as access for maintenance machinery, the width, form and construction of the path may vary, to provide sufficient vehicle bearing strength.

Grade

Grades should fall to cater for the greatest number of different users and be related to the type of user and the site conditions. The gradient of all paths should be kept to a maximum of 1:8 where possible, striving to minimise gradients not to deter bicycle riding or wheel chairs.

In areas which either provide for or connect areas specifically used by the less mobile, grades shall be 1:12 or easier and comply with the required New Zealand Standard (NZS 4121: 2001 Design for Access and Mobility – Buildings and Associated Facilities). Grades should not exceed 1:8. For steep sections of cycleway, additional width should be provided to take into consideration greater lateral movement required by cyclists and provide greater safety for pedestrians on shared use paths.

Paths shall have cross falls of 40mm or 25mm central camber to avoid ponding of water on the path.

Steps

These should not be used on main links in the network or on cycleways. To negotiate difficult site constraints along a shared use path, the path can offer two alternatives, more direct steps for pedestrians and a winding path for cyclists. This has the benefit of greater safety with cyclists separated on steep paths.

Where required, steps should have maximum riser height 180mm, minimum tread length 310mm, with maximum vertical rise between landings of 2.5m. Sets of steps also have a minimum of one handrail on one side. A landing of minimum 1200mm, off the shared route is to be provided at the top and bottom of each set of steps.

In high use open spaces or routes, graded access shall be provided for people with mobility difficulties as an alternative route where steps exist.

Barriers

Physical barriers will be required at locations to prevent motorised vehicles entering the cycle and walking network. Bollards spaced at a maximum of 1.4m centres will prevent cars entering the network. It is difficult to prevent access to motorcycles and retain access for cycles and wheelchairs. Barriers that will successfully prevent a motorcycle entering a path are likely to pose a hazard for bicycles and preclude the entrance of push chairs, strollers and wheelchairs. For this reason, it is not proposed to try to physically preclude motorcycles from paths.

Service vehicle access will also need to be considered dependent of location and lockable removable bollards should be included.

A single intermittent bollard can be used to indicate upcoming hazards such as an intersection, a tight curve or where a section of the shared use path diverges into alternative paths. User safety will need to be considered and would only be suitable where a desirable path width can be achieved (refer to Figure 12).

Handrails will also be provided where cycle paths intersect with roads and where significant hazard exists (see Figures 3 and 4).

Figure 7: Bicycle, pedestrian and arrow pavement symbols. (Austroads Part 14)

Figure 8: Surface treatment at intersection of shared use path and pedestrian only path.

Figure 9: Surface treatment at intersection of two shared use paths.


Page 9

Barriers shall meet the requirements (New Zealand Standard 4121: 2001 Design for Access and Mobility – Buildings and Associated Facilities) where paths are adjacent to areas with a vertical drop of 1000mm and, if in a park area, take account of any Reserve Management Plans design proposals.

Sightlines

At intersections and crossings, it is important that adequate visibility is provided for the safety of the path users. Sightlines are particularly important for the cycle paths and shared use paths to allow for achievable stopping time (assuming an operating speed of cyclists of 30km with a 6% gradient a minimum 40m sightline along the path must be maintained). This will involve careful selection and maintenance of planting along side the path especially at points where the path curves. Extended detail on required sightlines is given in Austroads 14 (refer to Figure 13)

Intersections

Intersections should be in areas of good visibility, be kept clear of hazardous obstacles, be convenient and easy to understand and make the passage across major roads simple. Users will face intersections at beginning and end points of a path type, a change of path type within the off-road network or on the road network, and at the transition of a path between the on-road and off-road network. This will involve careful selection and positioning of planting. Planting should be low and soft and located to keep clear of the intersection. However planting can be located to prevent cyclist shortcuts which could create a hazardous situation or maintenance problems. Care should also be taken when locating intersections near bodies of water and steep embankments. On approaches and in the intersections and crossings, the surface of the path should be provided with a colour or surface contrast treatment to clearly identify changes ahead. Appropriate use of tactile ground treatment should be used where appropriate to clearly identify an intersection ahead and enable the user to differentiate between changes in path types in particular this will benefit the visually impaired. The design should pay attention to kerb ramp detail to allow cyclists to join or leave the carriageway safely and conveniently, without interruption. Manukau City Council standard details of pram crossings will give grades that will also enable use by wheelchair users.

Crossing Points

Two kinds of crossings have been proposed for use within the Flat Bush area, both of which are at grade crossings. The crossings are shown in Figures 15 and 16.

Crossing 1 is appropriate for crossing local and collector roads that have relatively low traffic volumes (<5000 vehicles per day) and a 50 – 60km/h operating speed. The facility provides a hold rail on the approach to the road to allow cyclists to wait until the way is clear. These crossing facilities should be located a minimum of 30m from any other intersection.

Crossing 2 is appropriate for busier collector roads and arterial roads. A 2m (minimum) wide refuge made up of two raised islands with a space in the middle is provided for cyclists and pedestrians to shelter in. This allows cyclists and pedestrians to cross one side of the road at a time, providing safer and potentially faster crossings.

Appropriate use of tactile ground treatment should be used to clearly identify crossing points to users, including people with disabilities. Care should be taken in the positioning of poles, any guard railing and other street furniture so as not to create conflict by constricting movements.

Underpasses

The network aims to give priority to its users. Grade separated crossing points will in most cases be inappropriate for the type of facility proposed and have been avoided wherever possible. The design of grade separated crossings (in this case underpasses are far more likely than pedestrian and cycle bridges) relies heavily on the details of each site including

Figure 10: Shared use path intersecting with footpath and carriageway. (Austroads Part 14)

Figure 11: Shared use path separating into alternative paths.


Page 10

topography, existing structure type, surrounding traffic volumes and likely use. As such, it is virtually impossible to provide a generic design for these facilities.

Where the existing or proposed roading structure lends itself to function as an underpass for the network and the topography precludes a level crossing, Figures 17 and 18 should be used as an example of the dimensions required to provide for cycles and pedestrians. Three locations are identified where overhead structures and levels can facilitate good underpass design.

Clear sight distances, generous width, easy approaches, a non-slip all weather surface and lighting are all issues which should be considered in designing the approach to an underpass. It is also desirable to achieve clear views from the road bridge deck to the pathways. Figure 19 shows an example of a well designed underpass and Figure 20 shows an example of a badly designed underpass.

Grade separated crossings may also be appropriate as a feature of a particular reserve or development, such as those seen in Barry Curtis Park.

Bridges

Cycleway and walkway bridges on the off-road routes will primarily be crossing streams in the green corridors and must be designed and constructed in a selected location with minimum impact on the surroundings, and clear sight lines on entry and exit. Users of the bridge must be able to clearly identify other uses on the bridge on both entering and exiting the bridge.

The width of the bridge shall be a minimum of 1.5m and relate to the function and width of the path. Handrail height is to be a minimum of 1m and comply with Building Code requirements. Surface to be a non-slip surface with a maximum grade of 1:20, minimising the amount of level change along the path. A landing of minimum 2.0m is to be provided at each end of the bridge. In general bridges shall be at right angles to the cycleway/walkway. Additional clearance to provide good sightlines may be required for angled bridges. Design should ensure use by people with disabilities shortcutting by alternative step access can also be provided where appropriate and necessary. Bridges on a shared use route should have a delineating white line down the centre to separate users into directional movement (refer to Figure 14).

Where off-road paths need to utilise road bridges with routes becoming part of the carriageway, care shall be taken in design of the approaches and comply with the requirements for on-road cycleways.

Planting

The attractiveness of the network will depend much on the greenways. Good planting shall be maintained or carried out to provide an attractive setting for the route, consistent with its location, function and degree of use. The main objective is to maintain a degree of openness to achieve safety and surveillance. A clear envelope around each route shall be achieved, with vegetation to be cleared to the total width of the path, with an additional 1.0m either side and to 2.5m in height.

Either grass or low planting to 400mm is acceptable within this envelope. Where a minimum width path is formed, only grass shall be used to enable people to step off the path if necessary. If the ground level is deemed an unsuitable grade for mowing, then low planting shall be used. These cleared areas should be level ground, where possible, for safety purposes. Low planting or grass should be used around tight curves or where intersections occur on route to maintain sightlines (refer to Figures 21, 22 and 23).

Much of the network lies within the area covered by the Manukau City Council Flat Bush Riparian Planting Guidelines and vegetation treatment shall take account of these. Where paths are located on the road berm, street trees shall be clear stemmed to provide a clearance of 2.5m to the routes, enabling character to be achieved within the road corridor.

Plantings to rest points and at viewing points will add variety to the routes; some thinning of tall trees may be necessary to provide wider views, particularly across the green corridor.

Figure 12: Single intermittent bollard to indicate hazard ahead.

Figure 13: Sightlines along path.

Figure 14: Segregated path on bridge crossing.


Page 11

Rest Places

Each route shall provide stopping points along the network, to both add interest to the route and to increase the level of use by the less able. Rest spaces should be available every 100 metres. This may be increased to every 300m on streets, especially where other opportunities such as bus stops or café seats exist. All seating areas need to be set back to maintain required path width. Orientation of seats should encourage surveillance of the network and to allow appreciation of views and activities, and located not to become a hazard and to take account of site constraints and opportunities. Vegetation can be used to enhance seating areas for shelter and shade, but the location of planting is to ensure surveillance is not compromised.

Cycle Parking Facilities

Appropriate cycle parking facilities need to be considered and provided along the network according to use levels and function of the area the network passes through. These may also be situated on adjacent land, such as outside community buildings or shopping parades. A consistent style is required, either that of the immediate locality, a themed building or for the network as a whole.

Two types of cycle parking facilities are required; short stay such as outside libraries and shops where simple structures for locking are adequate, and long stay such as at schools and transport nodes where all day storage is required and a higher level of security and cover may be necessary.

Lighting

A defined lighting plan has not yet been developed for the network. For on-road routes and routes adjacent to minor roads, the level of street lighting should be adequate. Additional 3m high pole lighting should be provided at intersections or where changes in the type of route occur and at access points to the off-road network. Light standards and light colour should conform to the style adopted for the network. Bridges and connection points should be clearly lit throughout their length. For lighting of underpasses, see the relevant section underpasses, above.

Lighting of the off-road network should be discussed with the Manukau City Council Parks Officer. Some routes through green corridors will be unlit at night where alternative routes are available. This may vary as the area develops, and increased use is made of the network.

Signage

This document does not attempt to prepare a signage strategy for the Flat Bush area, but the following principles are proposed. Clear and coherent signage is vital for cycleways and walkways particularly where these are shared use paths. A consistent approach to signage will potentially reduce conflict on paths and increase usage of the facilities as people become familiar with the style. Good signage is necessary to promote safety on the network, in particular to identify secluded recreational tracks and possible uneven surfaces associated with these track types.

At least three levels of signs will be required:

1. Mandatory signage: Any on-road facility or facility that crosses a legal road will require the mandatory signage identified in MOTSAM and the Transit New Zealand Supplement to Austroads Part 14.

2. Restriction signage: Signage will be required to identify which users are permitted to use the facilities developed. Austroads Part 14 and the Transit New Zealand Supplement to Austroads Part 14 list the signage that should be used.

Figure 15: Crossing 1 (Austroads Part 14).

Figure 16: Crossing 2 (Austroads Part 14).


Page 12

3. Directional and information signage: An overall style and design of this signage will need to be developed. This signage strategy will need to cover:

Gateway signage to clearly identify entrance and exit points of paths and at reserves boundaries;

Information and map boards at locations in parks, reserves and around town centres;

Interpretive signs located along paths to explain the environment or at points with significant historical, cultural or environmental value;

Directional and distance signs at the start and end of each path and at each path intersection and where the route changes type;

Special interest routes, such as long distance trails.

Good location of signage is critical for the signage to be beneficial to users. Signage is to be located for best visibility by users and not to create hazards for users. Sightlines shall be kept unobstructed and vegetation should not obscure signage.

Also, refer to Manukau City Council Recreational walkways Management Strategy Draft, 4.4.2 Signage and Making Connections: A Strategy for Manukau’s Parks into the Future.

Park Branding

Use of materials and signage must achieve consistency of form and detailing through the network to be both aesthetically pleasing and informative. Where the network passes through open spaces, materials and signage should be consistent with Reserve Management Plans and other associated Manukau City Council branding tools (refer to Making Connections: A Strategy for Manukau’s Parks into the Future, goal 9, action 9.2.).

For specific routes, such as long distance paths, identity through branding can be added. This should be in keeping with the network style.

Alternative Routes for Flood Conditions

Much of the green network and many of the routes are located within stormwater management areas. These areas are intended to manage the effects of flooding. At certain times, parts of the routes may be inundated. Cycleways and walkways must be designed and located to best fit with any stormwater management structures to minimise proximity and hazard, and be located not to impede on flood levels. Parts of the network that are at risk of potential flooding in extreme events must have a practical, clearly signed alternative route available that can be used in the event of flooding.

Figure 17: Grade separated crossing A.

Figure 18: Grade separated crossing B.

Figure 19: An example of a well designed underpass.

Figure 20: An example of a badly designed underpass.


Page 13

Other Routes and Activities

The network shown is the basis of the system. Other linkages to/from activities are to be encouraged as the area develops.

More specifics on other types of routes, such as specifically for mountain bike trails or specific user groups, are to be developed and added to the document, in particular routes utilising the Conservation/Stormwater Management Policy Area.

Further investigation is required and more detailed specifications for materials, lighting, street furniture and signage will be included as these are developed for particular portions of the route.

Figure 21: Planting clearance - shared use path along green corridor.

Figure 22: Planting clearance - shared use path adjoining road berm.

Figure 23: Planting clearance - pedestrian only path.


Page 14

The Network

Route type Target user Path width Material Requirements Comments

Off-road shared use path – two-way, cycles and pedestrians.

Commuter, utility, school, recreational.

3.0m plus clearance from vegetation and side obstructions (1.0m), desirable.

2.5m absolute minimum with appropriate clearance and sightlines. Appropriate only for short lengths (up to 50m).

Less than 2.5m minimum cycles move onto local roads according to on-road principles, pedestrian path to apply with pedestrian only path principles or to move on to the road berm footpath (as a second option ), dependent on site conditions and constraints.(refer to Figure 2)

2.0m minimum (2-way) for cycle path moving cyclist to alternative route.

Width to increase 500mm where path abuts a wall or upstand over 500mm. (refer to Figure 6)

To remain consistent throughout the network, but be determined by factors such as location, branding, function, and use as per principles.

Specification dependent on traffic use

Broom finished 6% black oxide concrete.

Differential colour to define intersections, hazards ahead and path type as per principles. (refer to Figures 8, 9, 10 and 11)

Cycle, pedestrian and arrow non-slip paint markings as per principles. (refer to Figure 7)

Delineating white line where appropriate as per principles.

This is the main backbone of the cycle and pedestrian network for Flat Bush. It will be developed on one side of the green corridor in narrow parts and two sides where site constraints allow on wider parts of the green corridor, to achieve good connections through the Flat Bush Network. .

Where site constraints do not allow for a minimum 2.5 width path an alternative must be sort utilising the green corridors and roading network. Options are to be assessed and selected as a best alternative to accommodate the original function of the path.

The route the path takes will be very site specific and it is essential in the planning and design stage to cater for a seamless transition from the shared use path to alternative routes.

In some instances, pedestrians too will need to move out of the green corridor and utilise the road berm footpath, in all instances keeping pedestrians in the green corridor is to be investigated as a first option.

Off-road restricted shared use path – two-way, cycles and pedestrians.

Commuter, utility, school, recreational.

As per above. As per above.

Every 300m good connections across the corridor are essential

Lighting may be required for some sections of track, particularly nearing the town centre.

Seating and rubbish bins should be positioned along the paths.

Appropriate cycle parking facilities to be considered and provided, according to use levels and function of the area the network passes through.

A range of crossings will be required where the path crosses roads throughout the area. (refer to Figures 15 and 16)

Three locations where underpasses will be appropriate are identified in the Master Plan. (refer to Figures 17, 18, 19 and 20)

The width of a bridge shall relate to the function and width of the path, with a minimum 1.5m. Handrail height minimum 1m, non-slip surface and a maximum grade of 1:20.

A range of intersections will be required where changes in path types occur and where different path types intersect throughout the network.

Enhance sightlines along path and at entrance and exit points to enable user choice and safety. (refer to Figure 13)

Route the path to best fit with the surrounding environment, not to be dominant, and to link into surrounding links.

To cater for wide range of user groups as site constraints allow.

Signage and surface treatments to indicate that pedestrians and bicycles will be sharing this path and to identify hazards. Refer to Austroads 14 for required signage. Signage for park branding will also need to be considered.

These paths have been identified in the Master Plan as areas where a shared use path would be appropriate, but site constraints are likely to prevent the development of such a path. The suitability of each area will have to assessed by a case to case basis and conclude that the minimum 2.5m path cannot be achieved then an alternative option must be sort as per above.


Page 15

Planning and design stages to cater for a seamless transition from the shared use path to where alternative segregate paths are sort and the on-road network.

Desirable grade 1:12, maximum grade 1:8.

Steps can offer an alternative route, graded access shall be provided as well.

Bollards spaced at 1.4m centres, access of cycles and wheelchairs must be retained.

Planting shall be located and maintained to achieve a clear envelope around each route. (refer to Figures 21 and 22)

Off-road pedestrian only path.

Utility, school, recreational.

2.0m plus clearance form vegetation and side obstructions (1.0m).

1.4m minimum with appropriate clearance and sightlines.

To remain consistent throughout the network, but be determined by factors such as location, branding, function, and use as per principles.

Specification dependent on traffic use.

Broom finished plain concrete or match treatment of park or reserve through which it passes.

Differential colour to define intersections, hazards ahead and path type as per principles. (refer to Figure 8)

Pedestrian non-slip paint markings as per principles. (refer to Figure 7)

Seating and rubbish bins should be positioned along the paths.

A range of crossings will be required where the path crosses roads throughout the area. (refer to Figures 15 and 16)

The width of a bridge shall relate to the function and width of the path, with a minimum 1.5m. Handrail height minimum 1m, non-slip surface and a maximum grade of 1:20.

A range of intersections will be required where changes in path types occur and where different path types intersect throughout the network.

Enhance sightlines along path and at entrance and exit points to enable user choice and safety. (refer to Figure 13)


To cater for wide range of user groups as site constraints allow.

Signage and surface treatments to indicate pedestrians only and to identify hazards. Refer to Austroads 14 for required signage. Signage for park branding will also need to be considered.

Planning and design stages to cater for a seamless transition from to alternative segregate paths.

Desirable grade 1:12, maximum grade 1:8.

Where topography or site constraints prevent the development of shared use path, a sealed pedestrian only path will be provided. This path has also been included in the network to offer alternative routes and connections.


Page 16

Bollards spaced at 1.4m centres, access of cycles and wheelchairs must be retained.

Planting shall be located and maintained to achieve a clear envelope around each route. (refer to Figures 23).

Off-road walking trail pedestrian only path e.g. Flat Bush Trail and Ridge Top Walkway (Connecting Parks and Communities MCC).

Recreational. Minimum 1.0m. Unsealed. In more remote or rugged areas a low impact 1.0m path is appropriate. In areas of continuous native vegetation and/or proximity to reserves. There is opportunity for these trails to extend into the steeper topography of Flat Bush utilising the conservation/stormwater management policy area. These routes could be developed and added to the network as Flat Bush develops and demand becomes apparent.

Off-road cycle trail – Mountain bike specific.

Recreational. 1.0m - 1.5m single direction.

Unsealed.

Development of loop trails maximising access to local areas of bush and the interconnecting the green corridors.

Recreational use with limited or no surveillance. User is informed and has chosen to use it

Emphasis on appreciation and education.

Enhance sightlines along path and at entrance and exit points to enable user choice and safety.


Directional and interpretive signage.

Signage is also critical to indicate secluded nature of track, and possible uneven surface etc.

This is an optional concept for providing a sporting recreation track network in the Flat Bush area. These routes could be developed and added to the network as Flat Bush develops and demand becomes apparent.

On-road cycle lane – local road.

Commuter, training, utility, school, recreational.

On-road - specific cycle lane not required (see “Requirements” for conditions).

Road surface as per MCC standards.

Traffic calming, signage and additional space kerbside required. Specific treatments for cyclists at traffic calming could be investigated. (for example see Figure 5 two way chicane) road width.

Enhance sightlines along path and at entrance and exit points to enable user choice and safety.

The route the path takes will be very site specific and it is essential in the planning and design stages to cater for a seamless transition between the shared use path and local road network.

Where topography or other constraints restrict the development of a shared use path within the green corridor, cycles will move to the local road network.

Low traffic volumes are assumed and in many locations there may only be development on one side of the road. This environment is suitable to all level of cyclist and conflict with other vehicles unlikely. If traffic volumes exceed to a level which compromises cyclist’s safety cycle lanes will need to be considered.

Significant connecting local roads.

Commuter, training, utility, school, recreational.

Road berm footpath as per MCC standards.

On-road - specific cycle lane not required.

Road surface as per MCC standards.

Should allow for connections between the on-road and off-road network.

These local roads have been identified as been significant connections between the off-road and on-road network and should be endeavoured to be maintained and utilised in the planning and development process


Page 17

On-road cycle lane proposed by Manukau City Council:

On-road cycle lane – arterial road.

Commuter, training. Kerbside 1.5m (50km – 60km operating speed).

Increased width required for higher speed environments.

Sealed - surface to match road surface.

Manukau City Council has proposed a number of cycle lanes on main roads within the Flat Bush area.

On-road cycle lane – collector road.

Commuter, training, short trip.

Kerbside1.5m. Sealed - surface to match road surface.

Refer to Austroads 14 for required signage.

Coloured surfacing should be provided at potential conflict points.


As with arterial roads, cycle lanes are proposed for a number of collector roads within the Flat Bush area by Manukau city Council.

Additional on-road cycle route to be further investigated, to maximise network:

On-road cycle route – arterial road.

Commuter, training. As part of standard road network.

Sealed - as part of road surface.

Manukau City Council has proposed a number of cycle lanes on main roads within the Flat Bush area. The Master Plan identifies additional arterial roads that should be considered as cycle routes to complete a cycle network.

On-road cycle route – collector road.

Commuter, training, short trip.

As part of standard road network.

Sealed - as part of road surface.

Refer to Austroads 14 for required signage.

Coloured surfacing should be provided at potential conflict points.


As with arterial roads, the Master Plan identifies additional collector roads that should be considered as cycle routes to complete a cycle network.


Page 18

References

Document Author Year

Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice Pt 14 – Bicycles Austroads Part 14 – Standards Australia 1999

Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice Pt 13 - Pedestrians Austroads Part 14 – Standards Australia 1995

2004 RBT Appendix B: Design and Maintenance Standard http://www.hcaog.net 2004

New Zealand supplement to Austroads Part 14 Guide to traffic engineering practice: Part 14: Bicycles

Transit New Zealand 2004

Cycle network and route planning guide Land Transport New Zealand 2004

National Cycle Network - Guidelines and Practical Details Issue 2 Sustrans UK 1997

Sustrans Off-road Cycleways Sustrans UK 1997

Road and Traffic 14 – Guidelines for Facilities for Blind and Vision-impaired Pedestrians

Land Transport New Zealand 2003

Manukau City Cycle and Walking Strategy (Draft) Manukau City Council 2001

Recreational Walkways Management Strategy for Manukau City (Draft) Frame Group Limited 2004

Making connections – A Strategy for Manukau’s Parks into the Future Manukau City Council 2002

Riparian Planting Guidelines for Flat Bush (Draft) Manukau City Council 2004

mcc flat bush cycleways and walkways mp 16.08.05 for pdfl...helen preston jones (principal landscape...

Documents