DOCSLIB.ORG

Audit Report RR

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Audit Report RR Auditing public transport accessibility in New Zealand October 2010 NZ Transport Agency research report 417 Auditing public transport accessibility in New Zealand October 2010 C. O’Fallon Pinnacle Research & Policy Ltd, Wellington NZ Transport Agency research report 417 ISBN 978-0-478-36490-3 (print) ISBN 978-0-478-36491-0 (electronic) ISSN 1173-3756 (print) ISSN 1173-3764 (electronic) NZ Transport Agency Private Bag 6995, Wellington 6141, New Zealand Telephone 64 4 894 5400; facsimile 64 4 894 6100 [email protected] www.nzta.govt.nz O’Fallon, C (2010) Auditing public transport accessibility in New Zealand. NZ Transport Agency research report no.417. 150pp. Carolyn O'Fallon Pinnacle Research & Policy Ltd PO Box 12-483, Thorndon, Wellington 6011, New Zealand [email protected] www.pinnacleresearch.co.nz This publication is copyright © NZ Transport Agency 2010. Material in it may be reproduced for personal or in-house use without formal permission or charge, provided suitable acknowledgement is made to this publication and the NZ Transport Agency as the source. Requests and enquiries about the reproduction of material in this publication for any other purpose should be made to the Research Programme Manager, Programmes, Funding and Assessment, National Office, NZ Transport Agency, Private Bag 6995, Wellington 6141. Keywords: accessibility, audit, best practice, bus, guide, New Zealand, public transport, rail, regional council, report card, train, whole of journey. An important note for the reader The NZ Transport Agency is a Crown entity established under the Land Transport Management Act 2003. The objective of the Agency is to undertake its functions in a way that contributes to an affordable, integrated, safe, responsive and sustainable land transport system. Each year, the NZ Transport Agency funds innovative and relevant research that contributes to this objective. The views expressed in research reports are the outcomes of the independent research, and should not be regarded as being the opinion or responsibility of the NZ Transport Agency. The material contained in the reports should not be construed in any way as policy adopted by the NZ Transport Agency or indeed any agency of the NZ Government. The reports may, however, be used by NZ Government agencies as a reference in the development of policy. While research reports are believed to be correct at the time of their preparation, the NZ Transport Agency and agents involved in their preparation and publication do not accept any liability for use of the research. People using the research, whether directly or indirectly, should apply and rely on their own skill and judgement. They should not rely on the contents of the research reports in isolation from other sources of advice and information. If necessary, they should seek appropriate legal or other expert advice. Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding provided by the NZ Transport Agency without which this research project could not have been undertaken. We thank Adam Lawrence and Anke Kole at Greater Wellington Regional Council for their invaluable assistance and patience as we worked through piloting and refining the audit methodology. Adam, in particular, for his skills in mapping the bus stop routes; automating the Excel worksheets; and developing rating scales. We would also like to recognise the individuals within these and other organisations whose comments helped us to develop the output from this project to ensure its usefulness to them, particularly our steering group: David Peirse and Bruce Coleman (Human Rights Commission); Anna Southen (Ministry of Transport); Pania Elliott, Balt Gregorius, and Chad Barker (NZ Transport Agency); and Anthony James and his team (Auckland Regional Transport Authority). We also appreciate the input and advice the steering group sought from other colleagues and from their organisation’s advisory groups, as this input further enhanced our project output. We also appreciate the assistance from our peer reviewers: Professor Graham Currie (Chair of Public Transport, Institute of Transport Studies, Monash University, Victoria) and Tim Hughes (Senior Engineer, NZ Transport Agency). Their many valuable comments improved the clarity and accuracy of the final report and accompanying documents. Last but not least, thanks to Heather Carew, the very thorough and patient NZTA editor, whose work has improved the clarity and consistency of this report and appendices. Abbreviations and acronyms ARTA Auckland Regional Transport Authority BF Barrier Free New Zealand Trust COST European Cooperation in the Field of Scientific and Technical Research GIS geographic information system GW Greater Wellington Regional Council HRC Human Rights Commission PT public transport NZTA New Zealand Transport Agency NZTS New Zealand Transport Strategy PNCC Palmerston North City Council PPDG Pedestrian planning and design guide (NZTA 2008) Contents Executive summary .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................ 10 1 Overview and purpose .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 11 1.2 Project outputs ........................................................................................................ 12 1.3 Report structure ...................................................................................................... 12 2 Methodology ....................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.1 Overview .................................................................................................................. 13 2.2 Finalising the steering/stakeholder group............................................................. 13 2.3 Preparing the preliminary scoping paper and consultation .................................. 13 2.4 Developing a draft set of trial documentation and consultation .......................... 14 2.5 Piloting the audit methodology .............................................................................. 14 2.6 Preparing the audit documents and report ............................................................ 15 3 The public transport accessibility audit, report card and best practice guide ......... 16 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 16 3.1.1 Establishing parameters for the accessibility audit and report card ......... 16 3.2 Purpose of a public transport accessibility audit .................................................. 16 3.3 Definitions of accessibility ...................................................................................... 17 3.4 Scope of accessibility .............................................................................................. 18 3.5 Accessible to whom? ............................................................................................... 20 3.6 PT modes included .................................................................................................. 22 3.7 PT services included ................................................................................................ 22 3.8 Journey coverage ..................................................................................................... 22 3.9 Geographical scale .................................................................................................. 23 3.10 Structure of the audit .............................................................................................. 24 3.11 Ranking or scoring within the audit ....................................................................... 26 3.12 The PT accessibility audit and report card ............................................................. 27 3.13 The best practice guide .......................................................................................... 28 3.14 Source of factors used to assess public transport accessibility ........................... 28 4 Pilot of audit tool ............................................................................................................................................. 31 4.1 Selecting the PT routes for the pilot ...................................................................... 31 4.2 Creating the maps for the audit ............................................................................. 31 4.3 Selecting the fieldworker to complete the audit .................................................... 34 4.4 Out in the field – compiling the audit data ............................................................ 34 4.5 Summarising the audit data and creating the report card .................................... 34 4.6 Pilot audit findings .................................................................................................. 35 4.6.1 Report card results for route 11 .................................................................. 35 4.6.1 Report card results for routes 43 and 44
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Highlight / Progress Report
    HIGHLIGHT / PROGRESS REPORT PROJECT NAME: Kinloch Road Regeneration Project Manager: Ian Imlah Reporting Period: 28/03/2012 – 15/08/12 Date report prepared: 9 August 2012 Implementation of the Full Business Project stage: Project stage completion date: 31 May 2013 Case Tolerance levels for this stage: Project Plan + / - 15 working days Project budget + / - 10%, or £10,000 whichever is greater Progress – please refer to Project Plan Key products completed this period Key products outstanding this Revised Key products for next reporting Delivery date (including those completed ahead of schedule) period delivery date period (including brief explanation of why product outstanding) New Road Construction Works is underway Agreement on how to progress with 31/12/2012 Delivery of footway works 31 October land adjacent to former council 2012 depot site Detailed Design for Footway Works Completed Delivery of soft landscaping works 31 May 2013 Soft landscaping design agreed with ABC. Contract documents to be finalised and issued for tender. Royal Hotel Footway Works Complete. Risk Management – please refer to Risk Register (updates risks below in bold italic text) o:\a_campbeltown\cn03_kinloch_road\board_papers\l_150812\cn03_highlight_prog_rep_august 2012.doc Budget Management – please refer to Resource Allocation Schedule Total budget available to complete FBC stage: £100,000 Actual expenditure £102,209 Variance explanation if required: Revenue budget now used – Business Case developed and now progressing implementation stage (capital expenditure) Budget approved – implementation of public £2,080,000 realm and soft landscaping works: Actual expenditure to date (as at 31 July 2012) £715,013 Variance explanation if required: Budget approved - ACHA £800,000 Actual expenditure to date (as at 31 July 2012) £0 Variance explanation if required: Any further information Status update on elements: Public Realm - • Public realm associated with the new road has been procured through the road contract.
    [Show full text]
  • Road Drainage in This Chapter
    Road Drainage In this chapter 01 Introduction 3 02 Design principles 5 2.1 Water sensitive design (WSD) or Integrated Stormwater Management (ISM) 5 2.2 Integration of drainage 6 2.3 Tiered objectives for stormwater management design in road reserves 7 2.4 Major/minor drainage 11 03 Surface water management 12 04 Stormwater management devices 13 4.1 Treatment /Management Options Tool Box 15 4.2 Bio-retention swales, rain gardens and tree pits 16 4.3 Pervious paving 17 4.4 Sand filters, gravel trenches and rain tanks 18 4.5 Ponds and wetlands 18 4.6 Swales and vegetated swales 19 4.7 Soakage pits 20 4.8 Proprietary devices 20 05 Kerbs and channels 20 06 Catchpits 22 6.1 Catchpit location 22 6.2 Catchpit design 23 6.3 Catchpit approved types 25 6.4 Catchpit selection criteria 25 6.5 Catchpit inlet selection 25 6.6 Catchpit leads 26 07 Manholes 27 08 Rural road drainage 27 09 Subsoil drains 29 10 Minor culverts 29 11 Special areas 31 2 TDM | ENGINEERING DESIGN CODE Road drainage & surface water control 01 Introduction PURPOSE This chapter gives guidance for the design of drainage in the road reserve. It specifies limitations on design choices to achieve consistency across the region, while catering for local conditions. It aims to promote efficiency, effectiveness and economy of capital investment and operational management water sensitive design. SCOPE The situations covered include: • Drainage of surface water within road reserves. • Collection, conveyance and treatment of run-off from roads. • Management of stormwater discharging from land onto road reserves.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transport - VERSION 1 Bus Infrastructure Public Transport – Bus Infrastructure
    Public Transport - VERSION 1 Bus Infrastructure Public transport – bus Infrastructure In this chapter 01 Introduction 5 Bus stop types 35 07 02 Design parameters 6 Bus stop elements 40 08 2.1 Design vehicles 6 8.1 Bus stop kerbs 41 2.2 Design for bus drivers 11 8.2 Bus stop passenger area 44 2.3 Design for bus users 11 8.3 Bus shelters 46 8.4 Landscaping 52 03 Movement or upgrading of bus stops 15 Bus stop lighting 56 09 04 Bus stop location 15 4.1 Decisions about bus stop location 15 Bus stop branding 57 10 4.2 Bus stop spacing 16 Public transport interchanges 57 4.3 Bus stops for school bus routes 17 11 4.4 Bus stop capacity 17 Electric buses 57 12 4.5 Bus stop placement 19 4.6 Bus stop locations to avoid 23 Cycleways at bus stops 58 13 05 Bus stop layout 24 Bus layover and driver facilities 60 14 5.1 Bus stop layout types 26 14.1 Factors influencing bus layover location 61 14.2 Bus layover design 61 06 Bus stop signs and markings 33 6.1 Bus stop sign 33 6.2 Bus box road marking 34 6.3 No stopping at all times road marking 34 6.4 Bus stop road text 34 6.5 Coloured surface treatment 35 5794_16.04.21 2 TDM | ENGINEERING DESIGN CODE 3 Public transport – bus Infrastructure 01 Introduction PURPOSE Well-designed bus infrastructure must: • Provide easy access for buses through o accessible and safe walking routes to the bus stop o consider all user groups who will have different needs o making it easy and accessible to board and alight from the bus.
    [Show full text]
  • Accessibility to Public Transport: a Best Practice Guide October 2010
    Accessibility to public transport: a best practice guide October 2010 C. O’Fallon Pinnacle Research & Policy Ltd, Wellington Accessibility to public transport: a best practice guide Contents B1 Introduction to the best practice guide ..................................................................................... 4 B1.1 Overview ....................................................................................................................4 B1.2 Definitions .................................................................................................................4 B1.2.1 Users ...............................................................................................................4 B1.2.2 Modes, services and routes covered .............................................................5 B1.2.3 Source of best practice factors ......................................................................5 B1.3 Structure of the guide ...............................................................................................5 B2 Getting to the service by self ......................................................................................................... 5 B2.1 Introduction...............................................................................................................5 B2.2 Footpath ....................................................................................................................6 B2.2.1 Changes in surface level of accessible footpath...........................................6 B2.2.2
    [Show full text]
  • Dunkeld Court Spinner Street Dunmore Street Buchanan Street
    G G no kerb -as existing- RS WH no kerb -as existing- WT WH WT WT parking as existing WH NORTH WH G 70.00 0m 5m 10m 15m 20m MH no kerb -as existing- parking as existing as parking RSWH WT new cycle Street Buchanan stands RS THL G DOOR UK LIBRARY new seat MH UK 69.41 bin relocated WH UK ext 0.8m parking as existing MH MH G radius 69.02 DOOR 69.75 UK new seat G UCF Raised crossing at junction Paved area outside WH Spinner Street DOOR THL to provide a continuous UK ext library with seats, cycle radius LP 0.8m UK footway stands, raised planters FH new seat with trees and shrubs. PHARMACY UK Mk noticeboard UK retained Zebra WH UK crossing with WT flashing GAS DOOR lights UK GAS TK Footway widened, TK (hooded) GAS DK GAS carriageway narrowed GAS DK FH Mk GAS GAS TK TK MH MH 68.60 existing 4.50 68.60 UK GAS GASkerb GAS G 2.00 GAS UK Mk 0.8m radius UK ext PB UK 12.00 LP WH UK UCF parking as existing as parking UK ext UK Dunkeld Court radius 0.8m UK Raised crossing at 12.92 junction to provide a UK continuous footway G 6.50 UK Raised crossing at junction UK ext 0.8m to provide a continuous radius UK No kerb -as existing- footway UCF Buchanan Court UK ext 0.8m radius UK SV R6.45 SV G UK driveway G G WT TK TK Footway widened, MH WH 67.46 DK DK carriageway narrowed No kerb -as existing- UCC TK TK UK LP 5.79 TK DK TK WH no kerb -as existing- 1.27 6.60 14.80 DOOR G disabled space disabled WH DENTIST WT 2.70 driveway S5 Footway widened, WT WT WH WT new no kerb -as existing- carriageway narrowed.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to Conserving and Enhancing the Landscape Settings of Our Rural Highways
    A Guide to Conserving and Enhancing the Landscape Settings of our Rural Highways Cranborne Chase Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Craggatak Consulting November 2015 Acknowledgements This guidance was developed by the Cranborne Chase AONB Partnership through its Planning and Transportation Topic Group. The Partnership is grateful to Paul Tiplady of Craggatak Consulting who drafted this guidance. The AONB Partnership would also like to thank their partners’ staff for their helpful comments on the drafts, in particular: Stephen Hardy, Tony Harris of Dorset County Council and Sue Mitchell of Dorset AONB; and Graeme Hay and Fiona Elphick of Wiltshire Council. In addition, James Purkiss, a Senior Transport and Spatial Planner employed by the Halcrow Group Limited has supplied background material and invaluable comments. An initial draft was circulated for comment and was followed by detailed discussion at the Planning & Transportation annual seminar 10th May 2012. A formal consultation was undertaken during autumn 2012 and the AONB hosted a special meeting with representatives from the relevant highway authorities on the 26th February 2013 to review and discuss the final draft of this document. The partnership is grateful to Paul Garrod, Hampshire County Council, and Mike Winter and Tim Lawton from Dorset County Council for attending this meeting and providing invaluable comments and critique. Following this meeting a final version of this document was prepared by Emma Rouse, Wyvern Heritage and Landscape Consultancy. Richard Burden commissioned the project and undertook the editing of this report. The following people and organisations have provided photographs (as shown in the text) and given permission for their use.
    [Show full text]
  • Kassel Kerb Q10 115
    DATA SHEET KASSEL KERB Q10 115 Product Information Product specification A major advance in public transport access and convenience, Kassel Manufacturing process Manufacture and tested in a wet cast process in Kerb offers a unique solution for bus docking by providing a accordance with BS EN 1340 - 2003. (with the reduced gap between pavement and the bus platform. The results exception of determining the compressive strength) are safer, faster and easier passenger, wheelchair and pushchair Strength Compressive strength Mean concrete strength tested in accordance with access, providing a more efficient and accessible community BS EN 12390 - 2 transport service. Testing hardened concrete - making and curing specimens for strength testing The unique profile of the Brett Kassel Kerb, with its 75° face and Target strength ≥ 50N/mm2 bottom end radius, has been designed to minimise tyre wear when Bending strength buses are pulling into the bus stop, thereby reducing tyre Class 2 - Characteristic bending strength of 5 MPa replacement costs for bus operating companies. with no individual result less than 4 MPa Slip/Skid Resistance The slip resistance determined in accordance with The range BS 7976 - 2:2002 Average wet value = 59 160mm and 180mm standard kerbs • Abrasion Resistance Determined in accordance with BS EN 1340:2003 • Radii and Quadrants Mean = 19.5 • Flat blocks Class 4 Half kerbs Reaction to fire In accordance with BS EN 1340:2003 • Concrete kerb units are Class A1 reaction to fire • Transition units and Ramp sets without testing.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised BRT PSC Item #6 May 21, 2010
    Revised BRT PSC Item #6 May 21, 2010 BusBus GuidanceGuidance TechnologyTechnology PresentedPresented toto thethe EastEast BayBay BRTBRT PolicyPolicy SteeringSteering CommitteeCommittee MayMay 21,21, 20102010 WhatWhat isis BusBus Guidance?Guidance? TechnologyTechnology thatthat automatesautomates oror assistsassists thethe operatoroperator inin thethe steering,steering, docking,docking, accelerationacceleration andand decelerationdeceleration ofof thethe busbus ThereThere areare twotwo generalgeneral typestypes ofof guidance:guidance: MechanicalMechanical ElectronicElectronic FurtherFurther informationinformation -- WikipediaWikipedia BenefitsBenefits ofof BusBus GuidanceGuidance ImprovedImproved vehicularvehicular safetysafety inin traffictraffic BetterBetter rideride qualityquality andand improvedimproved passengerpassenger cabincabin safetysafety MayMay permitpermit narrowernarrower dedicateddedicated busbus laneslanes MayMay reducereduce longlong--termterm pavementpavement costcost AidsAids levellevel boardingboarding andand CreatesCreates narrownarrow horizontalhorizontal gapgap atat boardingboarding platformplatform toto complycomply withwith ADAADA BusBus GuidanceGuidance TechnologyTechnology Mechanical Guidance Kassel Kerb (England & throughout Europe) Concrete Guideway w/ Guide wheel (Essen, Manheim, Adelaide) Horizontal Guide wheel for Precision Docking (Cleveland, Eugene) Subsurface guide rail (Nancy, France) Electronic Guidance Optical Guidance (Rouen France, Las Vegas NV) Magnetic Guidance (Netherlands)
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Stop Infrastructure Design Guidelines May 2009
    Bus Stop Infrastructure Design Guidelines May 2009 www.arta.co.nz Published in May 2009 by: The Auckland Regional Transport Authority Private Bag 92 236 Auckland, New Zealand This document is available on the ARTA website: www.arta.co.nz CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... ii FOREWORD .......................................................................................................................... iii 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 2. PROVIDING AN ACCESSIBLE BUS NETWORK .................................................................. 7 3. BUS STOP LOCATION, SpaCING AND CapaCITY .......................................................... 10 4. BUS STOP TYPES AND LEVEL OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROVISION .................................. 19 5. BUS STOP LAYOUTS ..................................................................................................... 35 6. KERB PROFILE .............................................................................................................. 44 7. OTHER FACTORS TO CONSIDER ................................................................................... 47 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 49 ABBREVIATIONS AND GLOSSARY ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • TRANS-HUDSON COMMUTING CAPACITY STUDY Appendix A: Interstate Bus Network - Operational and Service Strategies
    TRANS-HUDSON COMMUTING CAPACITY STUDY Appendix A: Interstate Bus Network - Operational and Service Strategies September 2016 Version Final Prepared for: Submitted by: ---------------------------------------------------------------This page was intentionally left blank------------------------------------------------------------- TRANS-HUDSON COMMUTING CAPACITY STUDY CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES .............................................................................................. 2 2 LINCOLN TUNNEL CORRIDOR/PABT FACILITY STRATEGIES .............................................................................. 4 2.1 IMPROVED CORRIDOR OPERATIONS ......................................................................................................................... 5 Second XBL or Route 495 HOT Lane ............................................................................................... 5 Enhanced Bus/HOV Priority Network .............................................................................................. 9 Bus Platooning through Connected and Automated Vehicle Technologies ........................... 12 Connected and Automated Bus Applications
    [Show full text]
  • Transport for London. "Accessible Bus Stop Design Guidance."
    Transport for London Accessible bus stop design guidance Bus Priority Team technical advice note BP1/06 January 2006 MAYOR OF LONDON Accessible bus stop design guidance Further information For further details or advice on the design of accessible bus stops, contact: Bus Priority Team Transport for London Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street London, SW1H 0TL Tel 0845 300 7000 Website: www.tfl.gov.uk Contents 1. Introduction...................................................................................................................2 2. Fully accessible bus services..........................................................................................4 3. Bus stop locations.........................................................................................................9 4. Passenger waiting area .................................................................................................15 5. Bus stop area...............................................................................................................23 6. Bus stop layouts..........................................................................................................24 7. Bus boarders................................................................................................................31 8. Bus bays ......................................................................................................................39 9. Kerb profiles and heights .............................................................................................43
    [Show full text]
  • Specialist Kerbs & Permeable Paving
    CI/SfB (90.41) Ff2 November 2014 SPECIALIST KERBS & PERMEABLE PAVING LANDSCAPING AND BUILDING PRODUCTS www.brettpaving.co.uk COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPING SOLUTIONS The Brett Group is a leading independent manufacturer of building materials. Our business is built on sustainable and lasting relationships with customers, suppliers and local communities. Our focus on service has enabled us to become a market leader in the design, manufacture and supply of high quality solutions for hard landscaping, transport, infrastructure and construction projects of all sizes. Everything we do is designed to enhance the built environment and the lives of those who use it. All of our products are enhanced by a comprehensive technical support service from concept through to installation and ultimate use. 2 Commercial Support 0845 60 80 579 www.brettpaving.co.uk Q10 110 Contents About Brett 4 Specialist kerbs Trief kerb systems 8 Kassel 20 Slimline Kassel 24 Case Studies 26 Permeable paving Permeable paving systems 28 Alpha Flow 32 Beta Flow 33 Omega Flow 34 Grass Flow 35 Case studies 36 Machine lay paving Machine lay paving systems 40 Omega ML and Alpha ML 41 Zeta Lock ML 42 Omega Flow ML and Grass Flow ML 43 Safe handling Safe handling 44 KEY Consider for mobility access projects Consider for surface water source control Machine lay option available 3 COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPING SOLUTIONS People and Partnerships PEOPLE The development of our people is high on our list of priorities. By employing the highest calibre personnel and continually adding value to their performance, we strive to exceed our customers’ expectations and requirements - this is integral to the partnerships we forge.
    [Show full text]