Collingwood Cyclist and Pedestrian Network
Collingwood Cyclist and Pedestrian Network
PAGE
39
Appendix B: Environmental Design Review Design Principles for Pedestrian and Cycle Routes to Promote Positive Perceptions of Safety
Purpose Examine ways to reduce fear of crime or antisocial behaviour that may deter people from using pedestrian or cycle facilities by applying principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED).
Wider Transport Context Providing a safe transport network includes ensuring that users are safe and that they feel safe, not only from other traffic, but also from other people. Concerns about personal security may deter people from using pedestrian or cycle facilities, particularly after dark. The New Zealand Transport Strategy acknowledges that concerns for personal security affect people’s willingness to walk and cycle, and that for the goals of the strategy to be achieved, these concerns need to be addressed. The Ministry of Transport’s strategy Getting There – On Foot, by Cycle recommends that personal security issues are considered in the development of standards, guidelines and safety audit tools for walking and cycling. This document gives some local context for personal security concerns; considers what some of those concerns might be; and the design strategies available to address them.
Crime in the Tasman District Crime rates in the Tasman District are generally below the national average. An example of this is the rate for violent offending, shown in the following graph.
Figure 1: Recorded violent offences per 10,000 population, 1995-2003
Perceived crime risk may be unrelated to actual crime risk so local residents’ perceptions of the safety of an area may tell us more about an area than crime statistics. Perceived safety is an important factor in whether people will use walking or cycling facilities. Personal security concerns may include fear of assault, mugging, robbery, intimidation, harassment, or antisocial behaviour. The following graph compares general perceptions of safety in nine New Zealand cities. Statistics are not available for the Tasman district, however Nelson city, which is shown, is adjacent to the Tasman district. Of the seven cities compared, Nelson residents felt the safest for all areas asked about. However, even in Nelson, perceived safety falls significantly after dark, and is lower again in the town centre.
PAGE
40
Figure 2: Percentage of people who felt very safe or safe NB: Data for the city centre during the day was not available for Nelson
Why do people feel unsafe? People may feel unsafe for a lot of different reasons. It could be because they are unfamiliar with and unsure of their surroundings; they may have had a bad experience there in the past; or perhaps they feel uncomfortable with the people who use that area. In addition to social factors, the environment can contribute to whether people feel safe or unsafe. Particularly after dark, concerns may be caused by inadequate lighting, isolation from nearby activity, sharp corners that block views along a path, or the presence of graffiti. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design examines environmental cues that relate to feeling of safety, and provides design treatments to reduce concerns.
Inadequate lighting One of these environmental cues is lighting, which is important so that pedestrians and cyclists can see and be seen. It increases the risk that criminal or antisocial behaviour will be detected, and that offenders will be apprehended and identified. Lighting can also be used to make a place more pleasant at night. Lighting should illuminate pedestrian and cycle paths and signs if they are to be used at night. Consideration should be given to lighting the surrounding area as well; otherwise lighting only path users may actually make them more vulnerable.
Blocked sightlines Blind corners in paths and underpasses can lead to apprehension because they impede views of the route ahead. Path users may be fearful of what is around the corner. Blind corners on narrow paths may also present a crash risk for cyclists if they are unable to detect oncoming cyclists or pedestrians before reaching the corner. If blind corners must be used, mirrors may help path users see what is round the corner, as long as there is enough light for them to be useful.
Photo 1: Champion Rd: Blind corner leading into a dark tunnel. Also, overgrown weeds make the area look uncared for.
PAGE
41
Photo 2: Ben Cooper Park: The high fence blocks views of the park from neighbouring properties and creates a blind corner on the pedestrian pathway.
Isolation Feeling isolated can lead to concern that should something happen, help will be too far away. People using a public space are a source of observation of other users (i.e. they provide natural surveillance). Strategic location of activities and high quality design that welcomes users to an area facilitates this informal observation, reducing opportunities for crime and increasing perceptions of personal safety. A sense of isolation may deter walkers or cyclists, and this can be countered by ensuring observation from nearby houses or activities, as far as is practical.
Photo 3: Hill St: Solid fence on one side of walkway and dense hedge on the other block opportunities for surveillance of walkway users from neighbouring properties
Movement predictors Movement predictors are routes or paths that offer little choice, making it easy to predict a person’s path through an area, and difficult for them to escape from a potentially threatening situation.
Entrapment spots Entrapment spots are small hiding spaces near pedestrian or cycle paths that are enclosed on three sides, in which attacks may take place and escape is difficult. Risk can be reduced by locating facilities that could become entrapment spots (such as an enclosed stairwells) in areas of high visibility and activity. Planting prickly shrubs or installing fencing are two options for removing entrapment spots adjacent to footpaths or cycle facilities.
PAGE
42
Uncertainty of route Knowing where you are and how to get where you want to go is important for a person’s sense of safety. Signage can help by communicating information about the immediate surroundings and the wider area, as well as the location of facilities such as public telephones and toilets.
Outcomes Design for Awareness of Location This means it should be easy for people to see and understand where they are, what is ahead and nearby, and paths available. This allows people to understand what they can see and how they can move through a space. It also enables people to take avoidance action by using an alternative route if they need to. Relevant design treatments to assist locational awareness and legibility include adequate lighting, clear sightlines, and clear signage. Information maps could include a close-up of the immediate environment as well as a larger map showing relevant information about the surrounding area. Signs should be located at entries and exits, and where there are path choices. Signs can also indicate the locations of nearby activities and how long it takes to reach exit points. Signs should be easy to read and illuminated at night (if used at night time).
Photo 4: Washbourn Gardens: A map located at the entrance from the carpark shows paths and facilities in the gardens.
Design to Maximise Surveillance This involves maximising observation of pedestrians and cyclists, of each other and by those nearby, while they are using an area. Good surveillance can be facilitated through the strategic location of activities, ensuring sightlines are unimpeded, and having a mix of land uses. Where movement predictors are unavoidable, surveillance should be maximised. For example, having a wider path and using light colours on walls or fences may feel less enclosed. Design treatments include appropriate lighting, landscaping that does not obscure opportunities for surveillance, visually permeable fencing, and ensuring that views from nearby buildings (where these exist) are maintained. This can discourage criminal activity by increasing the risk of detection and reducing opportunities for crime. Knowing there are people nearby who are ‘keeping an eye on things’ provides a source of help for people if they need it, and reduces feelings of isolation. Surveillance can be informal, by people carrying out normal activities who can keep an eye on the people and property within an area. Surveillance can also be formal, by Police, security patrols, or monitored closed-circuit television.
PAGE
43
Photo 5: Ben Cooper Park: This house has a visually permeable wire and post fence at its boundary with the park, and its windows overlook the park. Trimming shrubs to below window level and tree foliage to above window height would allow the residents to keep an eye on the park and carpark.
Photo 6: By locating tables in the adjacent alleyway, the Swiss Bakery (Queen St, Richmond) has generated activity and the opportunity for customers at these tables to keep an eye on activity in the alleyway.
Design for Management and Maintenance An area with high quality design and regular maintenance creates a sense of ownership and sends a signal to users that the area is cared for and some surveillance occurs. An area that has been vandalised or needs repairs gives the impression that the area is not cared for and criminal activities may be carried out unobserved. A program of detection, repair and regular maintenance will help create a sense of safety and reduce the likelihood of crime or vandalism. Signs can be used to provide contact details to report needed maintenance. Long expanses of blank walls or fences should be avoided because they lack a sense of ownership and tend to attract graffiti. They also lack interest for pedestrians and cyclists.
PAGE
44
Photo 7: Washbourn Gardens: In this picture the Gardens look attractive and well maintained.
Photo 8: Washbourn Gardens: The break in the log fencing at the edge of the Gardens suggests a designated entry point, but the overgrown bushes block sightlines into the park and could provide hiding places. Such bushes should be kept trimmed.
References •
Hawes, A. & Bingham, A. (2002). Quality of Life in Nelson: Social Indicators Report 2002 – Comparisons between Napier, Nelson, Tasman and Timaru. Prepared for the Nelson City Council Community Development Working Party, September 2002.
•
“Quality of Life in New Zealand’s Eight Largest Cities” (2002). www.bigcities.govt.nz
•
New Zealand Transport Strategy, Ministry of Transport, 2002.
•
NZ Police Tasman District Crime Statistics 2002/2003
PAGE
45
Appendix C: Indicative 5-Year Programme of Works The attached programme shows the primary cycling and walking routes identified in this strategy, and the two phases of implementing any particular project; investigation and construction. These are colour coded green for investigation and red for construction.
Investigation ●
This phase primarily involves looking at the feasibility of a particular cycling or pedestrian project. If it is not feasible to construct a project, then Council will look at alternatives to the route proposed. Investigation will include cycle and pedestrian counts, consultation with user groups costing of routes and, where appropriate, preparation of funding applications from Land Transport New Zealand. For major projects, Council is heavily reliant upon Land Transport New Zealand for up to 59% of funding for the project. If a project is feasible it will have detailed design and a safety audit completed prior to letting the contract for construction.
Construction ●
This phase involved the building of the cycling or walking project in accordance with accepted engineering practice. Construction will include detailed design, audit, tender (if appropriate) and letting of contract to construct the proposed cycle lane. Construction is subject to funding being secured for the project following investigation.
Council acknowledges that it already undertakes works on the road network that can include particularly cycling facilities. The programme proposed in this strategy has identified where maintenance activities are proposed (resealing, seal widening, seal smoothing etc) is programmed for a particular stretch of road, and has sought to include the cycle facility construction during these activities.
PAGE
46
5-Year Indicative Programme of Works PROJECT
Priority 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
Richmond Cycle Facilities Salisbury Road (Entire length including Reservoir Ck Underpass)
1
Oxford Street (Entire length)
2
●●
Wensley Road (Oxford St to Waverly St) Intersection Treatments tie in with reseal
3
●●
●
Wensley Road (Waverly St to Chelsea Av) Intersection Treatments tie in with reseal
●●
Wensley Road (Chelsea Av to Bateup Rd)
●●
SH6 Gladstone Road (Queen St to SH60) Intersection Treatments
4
●●
Hill Street (Champion Rd to Queen St) Intersection Treatment
●
Hill Street (Queen St to Hart Rd) Intersection Treatment
●
Queen Street (Salisbury Rd to Hill St) Intersection Treatment
●
Richmond Off-Road Walking/Cycling Tracks Railway Reserve (Queen St to SH60)
●
Nelson to Kawatiri Rail Trail
●
Richmond Deviation
●
Reservoir Creek Walkway complete network
●
Wakefield, Brightwater and Waimea Walking/Cycling Facilities SH6 (Three Brothers Cnr to Wakefield) Note: Depends on current status of Railway Reserve land as an alternative option Ellis Street (SH6 to 50k boundary) Edward Street (Pitfure Rd to SH6) Pitfure Road (SH6 to Edward St) Possible Combined facility on eastern side Queen Street (Gladstone Rd SH6 to McShanes Rd)
●
●
Queen Street (McShanes – Appleby River)
●
Appleby River Cycle Bridge SH60 Appleby Overbridge
●
Mapua Walking/Cycling Facilities SH60 (Aranui Rd to McKee Domain)
●
Aranui Road (Port to Higgs Rd)
●
Aranui Road (Higgs Rd to SH60)
●
SH60 (Seaton Vly Rd to Aranui Rd) Seaton Valley Road Motueka Walking/Cycling Facilities SH60 (Staple St to Lodder Lane)
1
●
●
SH60 (Lodder Lane to School Rd)
●
High Street SH60 (Calm Zone)
●
High St SH60 Intersection treatments
4
● ●
●
safety ● ● Minor projects
Fearon Street (Entire Length) PAGE
47
5-Year Indicative Programme of Works PROJECT
Priority 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
Thorpe Street (Faeron St to Staple St)
●
Staples Street (Entire length)
●
Queen Victoria & Moutere Hwy (As far as Community Rd) Note: Some work may be done beforehand to improve access to School
3
●●
●
●
Off-road path (Whakarewa St to Parker St)
●
Whakarewa Street (High St to Grey St)
●
Pah Street (High St to Talbot St)
●
Poole Street (High St to Off Road Path)
●
Parker Street (High St to Off Road Path)
●
King Edward St (SH60 – Queen Victoria St)
●
Old Wharf Rd (SH60 – Trewavas St)
●
Wharf Road (SH60 – Trewavas St)
●
Trewavas St to Decks Reserve (Via Goodman Park) This is in place but needs signage and surface improvements
●●
●●
SH 60 (Motueka – Tasman)
●●
●
●●
●
Riwaka Walking/Cycling Facilities Lodder Lane including School Road
2
●
●
Factory Road Walkway
●
Swamp Road (Investigated as part of Swamp Road upgrade)
●
SH60 (Swamp Rd/Dehra Doon Intersection to Riwaka Kaiteriteri Rd Intersection) Walkway to Motueka Wastewater Plant
● ●
Golden Bay Cycle/Walking Facilities SH60 (Birds Hill)
●●
SH60 (Town Boundary to Takaka River)
●
SH60 (Birds Hill to Collingwood)
●
SH60 (Town Boundary to Paynes Ford)
●
Commercial Street (Calm Zone)
●
Meihana Street (Entire Length) Motupipi Street (Part Length)
●
●
●
Abel Tasman Dr (Takaka to Motupipi)
●
Abel Tasman Dr (Motupipi to Pohara)
PAGE
48
● ●
Abel Tasman Dr (Pohara to Ligar Bay) Pohara Footpath at Band Rotunda proposed for 05/06
●
●
Abel Tasman Dr (Ligar Bay to Wainui) Seal widening through Liger Bay township proposed for 2004/05
●
●
Rototai Road (Primarily Meihana to Boundary Rd and then beyond)
●
Combined off road facility from Parker Ave to Glenview Rd Motupipi
●
●
PAGE
39
Appendix B: Environmental Design Review Design Principles for Pedestrian and Cycle Routes to Promote Positive Perceptions of Safety
Purpose Examine ways to reduce fear of crime or antisocial behaviour that may deter people from using pedestrian or cycle facilities by applying principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED).
Wider Transport Context Providing a safe transport network includes ensuring that users are safe and that they feel safe, not only from other traffic, but also from other people. Concerns about personal security may deter people from using pedestrian or cycle facilities, particularly after dark. The New Zealand Transport Strategy acknowledges that concerns for personal security affect people’s willingness to walk and cycle, and that for the goals of the strategy to be achieved, these concerns need to be addressed. The Ministry of Transport’s strategy Getting There – On Foot, by Cycle recommends that personal security issues are considered in the development of standards, guidelines and safety audit tools for walking and cycling. This document gives some local context for personal security concerns; considers what some of those concerns might be; and the design strategies available to address them.
Crime in the Tasman District Crime rates in the Tasman District are generally below the national average. An example of this is the rate for violent offending, shown in the following graph.
Figure 1: Recorded violent offences per 10,000 population, 1995-2003
Perceived crime risk may be unrelated to actual crime risk so local residents’ perceptions of the safety of an area may tell us more about an area than crime statistics. Perceived safety is an important factor in whether people will use walking or cycling facilities. Personal security concerns may include fear of assault, mugging, robbery, intimidation, harassment, or antisocial behaviour. The following graph compares general perceptions of safety in nine New Zealand cities. Statistics are not available for the Tasman district, however Nelson city, which is shown, is adjacent to the Tasman district. Of the seven cities compared, Nelson residents felt the safest for all areas asked about. However, even in Nelson, perceived safety falls significantly after dark, and is lower again in the town centre.
PAGE
40
Figure 2: Percentage of people who felt very safe or safe NB: Data for the city centre during the day was not available for Nelson
Why do people feel unsafe? People may feel unsafe for a lot of different reasons. It could be because they are unfamiliar with and unsure of their surroundings; they may have had a bad experience there in the past; or perhaps they feel uncomfortable with the people who use that area. In addition to social factors, the environment can contribute to whether people feel safe or unsafe. Particularly after dark, concerns may be caused by inadequate lighting, isolation from nearby activity, sharp corners that block views along a path, or the presence of graffiti. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design examines environmental cues that relate to feeling of safety, and provides design treatments to reduce concerns.
Inadequate lighting One of these environmental cues is lighting, which is important so that pedestrians and cyclists can see and be seen. It increases the risk that criminal or antisocial behaviour will be detected, and that offenders will be apprehended and identified. Lighting can also be used to make a place more pleasant at night. Lighting should illuminate pedestrian and cycle paths and signs if they are to be used at night. Consideration should be given to lighting the surrounding area as well; otherwise lighting only path users may actually make them more vulnerable.
Blocked sightlines Blind corners in paths and underpasses can lead to apprehension because they impede views of the route ahead. Path users may be fearful of what is around the corner. Blind corners on narrow paths may also present a crash risk for cyclists if they are unable to detect oncoming cyclists or pedestrians before reaching the corner. If blind corners must be used, mirrors may help path users see what is round the corner, as long as there is enough light for them to be useful.
Photo 1: Champion Rd: Blind corner leading into a dark tunnel. Also, overgrown weeds make the area look uncared for.
PAGE
41
Photo 2: Ben Cooper Park: The high fence blocks views of the park from neighbouring properties and creates a blind corner on the pedestrian pathway.
Isolation Feeling isolated can lead to concern that should something happen, help will be too far away. People using a public space are a source of observation of other users (i.e. they provide natural surveillance). Strategic location of activities and high quality design that welcomes users to an area facilitates this informal observation, reducing opportunities for crime and increasing perceptions of personal safety. A sense of isolation may deter walkers or cyclists, and this can be countered by ensuring observation from nearby houses or activities, as far as is practical.
Photo 3: Hill St: Solid fence on one side of walkway and dense hedge on the other block opportunities for surveillance of walkway users from neighbouring properties
Movement predictors Movement predictors are routes or paths that offer little choice, making it easy to predict a person’s path through an area, and difficult for them to escape from a potentially threatening situation.
Entrapment spots Entrapment spots are small hiding spaces near pedestrian or cycle paths that are enclosed on three sides, in which attacks may take place and escape is difficult. Risk can be reduced by locating facilities that could become entrapment spots (such as an enclosed stairwells) in areas of high visibility and activity. Planting prickly shrubs or installing fencing are two options for removing entrapment spots adjacent to footpaths or cycle facilities.
PAGE
42
Uncertainty of route Knowing where you are and how to get where you want to go is important for a person’s sense of safety. Signage can help by communicating information about the immediate surroundings and the wider area, as well as the location of facilities such as public telephones and toilets.
Outcomes Design for Awareness of Location This means it should be easy for people to see and understand where they are, what is ahead and nearby, and paths available. This allows people to understand what they can see and how they can move through a space. It also enables people to take avoidance action by using an alternative route if they need to. Relevant design treatments to assist locational awareness and legibility include adequate lighting, clear sightlines, and clear signage. Information maps could include a close-up of the immediate environment as well as a larger map showing relevant information about the surrounding area. Signs should be located at entries and exits, and where there are path choices. Signs can also indicate the locations of nearby activities and how long it takes to reach exit points. Signs should be easy to read and illuminated at night (if used at night time).
Photo 4: Washbourn Gardens: A map located at the entrance from the carpark shows paths and facilities in the gardens.
Design to Maximise Surveillance This involves maximising observation of pedestrians and cyclists, of each other and by those nearby, while they are using an area. Good surveillance can be facilitated through the strategic location of activities, ensuring sightlines are unimpeded, and having a mix of land uses. Where movement predictors are unavoidable, surveillance should be maximised. For example, having a wider path and using light colours on walls or fences may feel less enclosed. Design treatments include appropriate lighting, landscaping that does not obscure opportunities for surveillance, visually permeable fencing, and ensuring that views from nearby buildings (where these exist) are maintained. This can discourage criminal activity by increasing the risk of detection and reducing opportunities for crime. Knowing there are people nearby who are ‘keeping an eye on things’ provides a source of help for people if they need it, and reduces feelings of isolation. Surveillance can be informal, by people carrying out normal activities who can keep an eye on the people and property within an area. Surveillance can also be formal, by Police, security patrols, or monitored closed-circuit television.
PAGE
43
Photo 5: Ben Cooper Park: This house has a visually permeable wire and post fence at its boundary with the park, and its windows overlook the park. Trimming shrubs to below window level and tree foliage to above window height would allow the residents to keep an eye on the park and carpark.
Photo 6: By locating tables in the adjacent alleyway, the Swiss Bakery (Queen St, Richmond) has generated activity and the opportunity for customers at these tables to keep an eye on activity in the alleyway.
Design for Management and Maintenance An area with high quality design and regular maintenance creates a sense of ownership and sends a signal to users that the area is cared for and some surveillance occurs. An area that has been vandalised or needs repairs gives the impression that the area is not cared for and criminal activities may be carried out unobserved. A program of detection, repair and regular maintenance will help create a sense of safety and reduce the likelihood of crime or vandalism. Signs can be used to provide contact details to report needed maintenance. Long expanses of blank walls or fences should be avoided because they lack a sense of ownership and tend to attract graffiti. They also lack interest for pedestrians and cyclists.
PAGE
44
Photo 7: Washbourn Gardens: In this picture the Gardens look attractive and well maintained.
Photo 8: Washbourn Gardens: The break in the log fencing at the edge of the Gardens suggests a designated entry point, but the overgrown bushes block sightlines into the park and could provide hiding places. Such bushes should be kept trimmed.
References •
Hawes, A. & Bingham, A. (2002). Quality of Life in Nelson: Social Indicators Report 2002 – Comparisons between Napier, Nelson, Tasman and Timaru. Prepared for the Nelson City Council Community Development Working Party, September 2002.
•
“Quality of Life in New Zealand’s Eight Largest Cities” (2002). www.bigcities.govt.nz
•
New Zealand Transport Strategy, Ministry of Transport, 2002.
•
NZ Police Tasman District Crime Statistics 2002/2003
PAGE
45
Appendix C: Indicative 5-Year Programme of Works The attached programme shows the primary cycling and walking routes identified in this strategy, and the two phases of implementing any particular project; investigation and construction. These are colour coded green for investigation and red for construction.
Investigation ●
This phase primarily involves looking at the feasibility of a particular cycling or pedestrian project. If it is not feasible to construct a project, then Council will look at alternatives to the route proposed. Investigation will include cycle and pedestrian counts, consultation with user groups costing of routes and, where appropriate, preparation of funding applications from Land Transport New Zealand. For major projects, Council is heavily reliant upon Land Transport New Zealand for up to 59% of funding for the project. If a project is feasible it will have detailed design and a safety audit completed prior to letting the contract for construction.
Construction ●
This phase involved the building of the cycling or walking project in accordance with accepted engineering practice. Construction will include detailed design, audit, tender (if appropriate) and letting of contract to construct the proposed cycle lane. Construction is subject to funding being secured for the project following investigation.
Council acknowledges that it already undertakes works on the road network that can include particularly cycling facilities. The programme proposed in this strategy has identified where maintenance activities are proposed (resealing, seal widening, seal smoothing etc) is programmed for a particular stretch of road, and has sought to include the cycle facility construction during these activities.
PAGE
46
5-Year Indicative Programme of Works PROJECT
Priority 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
Richmond Cycle Facilities Salisbury Road (Entire length including Reservoir Ck Underpass)
1
Oxford Street (Entire length)
2
●●
Wensley Road (Oxford St to Waverly St) Intersection Treatments tie in with reseal
3
●●
●
Wensley Road (Waverly St to Chelsea Av) Intersection Treatments tie in with reseal
●●
Wensley Road (Chelsea Av to Bateup Rd)
●●
SH6 Gladstone Road (Queen St to SH60) Intersection Treatments
4
●●
Hill Street (Champion Rd to Queen St) Intersection Treatment
●
Hill Street (Queen St to Hart Rd) Intersection Treatment
●
Queen Street (Salisbury Rd to Hill St) Intersection Treatment
●
Richmond Off-Road Walking/Cycling Tracks Railway Reserve (Queen St to SH60)
●
Nelson to Kawatiri Rail Trail
●
Richmond Deviation
●
Reservoir Creek Walkway complete network
●
Wakefield, Brightwater and Waimea Walking/Cycling Facilities SH6 (Three Brothers Cnr to Wakefield) Note: Depends on current status of Railway Reserve land as an alternative option Ellis Street (SH6 to 50k boundary) Edward Street (Pitfure Rd to SH6) Pitfure Road (SH6 to Edward St) Possible Combined facility on eastern side Queen Street (Gladstone Rd SH6 to McShanes Rd)
●
●
Queen Street (McShanes – Appleby River)
●
Appleby River Cycle Bridge SH60 Appleby Overbridge
●
Mapua Walking/Cycling Facilities SH60 (Aranui Rd to McKee Domain)
●
Aranui Road (Port to Higgs Rd)
●
Aranui Road (Higgs Rd to SH60)
●
SH60 (Seaton Vly Rd to Aranui Rd) Seaton Valley Road Motueka Walking/Cycling Facilities SH60 (Staple St to Lodder Lane)
1
●
●
SH60 (Lodder Lane to School Rd)
●
High Street SH60 (Calm Zone)
●
High St SH60 Intersection treatments
4
● ●
●
safety ● ● Minor projects
Fearon Street (Entire Length) PAGE
47
5-Year Indicative Programme of Works PROJECT
Priority 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
Thorpe Street (Faeron St to Staple St)
●
Staples Street (Entire length)
●
Queen Victoria & Moutere Hwy (As far as Community Rd) Note: Some work may be done beforehand to improve access to School
3
●●
●
●
Off-road path (Whakarewa St to Parker St)
●
Whakarewa Street (High St to Grey St)
●
Pah Street (High St to Talbot St)
●
Poole Street (High St to Off Road Path)
●
Parker Street (High St to Off Road Path)
●
King Edward St (SH60 – Queen Victoria St)
●
Old Wharf Rd (SH60 – Trewavas St)
●
Wharf Road (SH60 – Trewavas St)
●
Trewavas St to Decks Reserve (Via Goodman Park) This is in place but needs signage and surface improvements
●●
●●
SH 60 (Motueka – Tasman)
●●
●
●●
●
Riwaka Walking/Cycling Facilities Lodder Lane including School Road
2
●
●
Factory Road Walkway
●
Swamp Road (Investigated as part of Swamp Road upgrade)
●
SH60 (Swamp Rd/Dehra Doon Intersection to Riwaka Kaiteriteri Rd Intersection) Walkway to Motueka Wastewater Plant
● ●
Golden Bay Cycle/Walking Facilities SH60 (Birds Hill)
●●
SH60 (Town Boundary to Takaka River)
●
SH60 (Birds Hill to Collingwood)
●
SH60 (Town Boundary to Paynes Ford)
●
Commercial Street (Calm Zone)
●
Meihana Street (Entire Length) Motupipi Street (Part Length)
●
●
●
Abel Tasman Dr (Takaka to Motupipi)
●
Abel Tasman Dr (Motupipi to Pohara)
PAGE
48
● ●
Abel Tasman Dr (Pohara to Ligar Bay) Pohara Footpath at Band Rotunda proposed for 05/06
●
●
Abel Tasman Dr (Ligar Bay to Wainui) Seal widening through Liger Bay township proposed for 2004/05
●
●
Rototai Road (Primarily Meihana to Boundary Rd and then beyond)
●
Combined off road facility from Parker Ave to Glenview Rd Motupipi
●
●
