1. NEW FACILITIES – OLD ROADS
ROAD SAFETY, URBAN DESIGN AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER IN FACILITY DESIGN
USING A SAFETY AUDIT AND NETWORK FUNCTIONALITY APPROACH
SAFETY VS.
EXPERIENCE
Christchurch, NZ
2. 2014 NZ Govt released NZ$400 M as the Urban
Cycleways Program (UCP)
Authorities had 3 years to spend the money
Christchurch City Council had NZ$185M program to
deliver
13 Major Cycleways to be delivered
9 Designed and consulted,
7 delivered for consultation,
5 complete
Perspectives:
3. The Journey…….
Born from a need
Why SANF?
Learnings
Successful Outcomes
User Ecology
4. Why SANF?
‘old approach’
The formal process
Separate tasks
giving varying
results
Teams of disciplines
doing individual
tasks
Standard Assessment
Safety
Directness
Coherence and connectivity
Attractiveness and social safety
Comfort
Unassessed
5. The NEW approach
Multi-discipline teams
Budgets
Timeframes
Scenarios / route
options
All multi-modal users
Key driver – ‘interested
but concerned’
Modified Assessment
Safety and Comfort
Directness and Coherence
Connectivity to Amenity within the corridor
Social Safety and Attractiveness
Local Business Impact
Local Resident Impact
Operational and Network Impacts
Ease of Construction and Costs
Land Requirements /Easements /Other Agreements
6. Key considerations
Access
Bus / PT
Parking
Services / Utilities
CPTED
Urban Design /
Streetscape
Business Opportunities
vs Future GrowthConsider the Ecological system
7. SANF process review
• Every step of the
project lifecycle
• Strong emphasis on
Network Elements and
User Impacts at earlier
stages, User Safety at
later stages
• Fresh Set of Eyes on
Project
• Elements considered
from all disciplines at
once
15. CONTACT DETAILS
Mike Smith
Principal - Road Safety
Emily Cambridge
Senior Landscape Architect
Beca
Wayne Rimmer
Principal Landscape Architect
wps - Opus
mike.a.smith@stantec.com emily.cambridge@beca.com wayne.rimmer@opus.co.nz
Editor's Notes
MIKE INTRO
MIKE INTRO
SANF development
Supplied a full paper to assist delegates in a deeper understanding of the SANF process – at the end of this presentation we will give the authors contact details if you have any questions or want a copy.
MIKE INTRO
SANF development
Supplied a full paper to assist delegates in a deeper understanding of the SANF process – at the end of this presentation we will give the authors contact details if you have any questions or want a copy.
MIKE:
The OLD APPROACH generally has a process whereby our network planners, along with key representatives from network operations and safety, may undertake the identification of a cycle route. We have an additional formal process for safety auditing that has a mandate to consider “safety” issues only, although broader considerations can be included as “comments”.
Reviews completed in isolation and not collaborative approach to reviews.
MIKE/EMILY:
This NEW APPROACH, Safety Audit and Network Functionality (SANF), expands on the conventional elements, and incorporates an assessment scoring process that allows a holistic and practicable assessment that tested different scenarios and route combinations that considered the balance between form and functionality, and all mode users. Elements considered included Safety and Comfort (Safety over route for cyclists GO/NO GO), Directness and Coherence, Connectivity to Amenity within the corridor, Social Safety and Attractiveness (based on worst feature), Local Business Impacts, Local Resident Impact, Operational and Network Impacts, Ease of Construction and Costs, and Land Requirements /Easements /Other Agreements.
As a comparison, the following two graphs give a graphical display of the difference between the OLD and the NEW.
EMILY?
MIKE
RSA process and develop
MIKE
MIKE
EMILY
EMILY
EMILY
Emily
Small changes in design have a larger impact than expected
Developments through design process have impacts
SANF process agreed trial in an enhanced road safety and network assessment – in absence of a SANF there would still be a req. for RSA in NZ. Affectively you are doing 80% of SANF anyway but this 20% extra is truly value add