CITY BIKEWAYS: ROUND 1 NORTH SOUTHOFFER ENGAGEMENT OF BIKEWAY SERVICESOUTCOMES CAR PARKING CITY BIKEWAYSCONTRIBUTION SCHEME REVIEW NORTH-SOUTH BIKEWAY PREPARED FOR ADELAIDE CITY COUNCIL 21 FEBRUARY 2017 NS BIKEWAY: ROUND 1 ENGAGEMENT OUTCOMES Page ii NORTH-SOUTH BIKEWAY ROUND 1 ENGAGEMENT FEEDBACK EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PAGE 1 OF 4 PROJECT BACKGROUND ROUND 1 ENGAGEMENT The City Bikeways project is a visionary partnership The engagement was carried out for the North-South between the South Australian State Government and Bikeway (route section from Carrington St to North the City of Adelaide. It will introduce two continuous Tce). The objectives for this stage of engagement were and separated bikeways through the City of to tell about the project and to invite ideas and Adelaide, from north to south, and from east to west. feedback on the general design approach for the The bikeways will create a separated environment for North-South Bikeway. Cross section design treatments people who ride bikes along these routes. were the main discussion element for this engagement. The engagement will influence the design proposal for the North-South Bikeway route. ENGAGEMENT RESPONDENTS approximately Engagement activities included: the Bikeways 2,400 Summit, a series of stakeholder and community accessed project workshops, face-to-face interviews with residents information during the and property owners along the route (from engagement Carrington St to North Tce). In parallel, RAA conducted a survey with their members. Discussions were held with industry groups and a number 1,074 of submissions were received and heard by the provided feedback Council. via engagement activities This report summarises feedback received from 1,074 engagement participants, combined for reporting purposes into the following groups: GROUPINGS FOR INDIVIDUAL GROUP RESPONDENTS RESPONSES RECEIVED Businesses 71 Stakeholder Industry workshop 11 Residents 70 Community workshops 18 Design professionals 28 RAA (online survey) 704 Council deputations 8 Bike SA Individual submissions 38 Bicycle Institute of South Australia (BISA) Bike riders 55 Centre for Automotive Safety Research (CASR) Internet forum 71 Australian Institute of Landscape Architecture - SA Chapter (AILA) Page iii NS BIKEWAY: ROUND 1 ENGAGEMENT OUTCOMES PAGE 2 OF 4 VIEWS ON REINSTATING FOUR LANES OF TRAFFIC IN THE EXISTING BIKEWAY SECTION (FROM CARRINGTON TO PIRIE ST) Businesses 27% 27% 30% 3%14% Group feedback from industry representatives, community, BISA Residents 31% 29% 17% 9% 14% and CASR showed preference for making minor modifications to Design professionals 43% 21% 14% 14% 7% the existing bikeway rather than proceeding Council deputations 88% 13% with reinstating 2 traffic lanes in each direction. Bike SA commented Individual submissions 58% 11% 32% that if reconstruction proceeds, funding should not come out Bike rider 58% 5%5% 29% 2% of the existing City Bikeways budget, while Internet forum participants 79% 8% 13% CASR recommended that a thorough assessment of benefits No changes are needed and dis-benefits be Minor improvements only are needed carried out. Uncertain Did not discuss Reinstate to four traffic lanes RAA survey: extract of questions and feedback Q: Are you happy with the current traffic Q: Are you supportive of reinstating 4 traffic lanes arrangements in the southern section of Frome St in the southern section of Frome St? that accommodate the existing bikeway? 9% 18% 14%14% 9% 18% 16% 16% 15% Very happy 54%54% 15% VeryHappy happy 31%31% HappyNeither happy nor unhappy NoNo Neither happy nor unhappy Unhappy Unsure/Unsure/ need need further further info info 41% Unhappy 41% VeryVery unhappy unhappy YesYes NS BIKEWAY: ROUND 1 ENGAGEMENT OUTCOMES Page iv NORTH-SOUTH BIKEWAY ROUND 1 ENGAGEMENT FEEDBACK EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PAGE 3 OF 4 TOP REASONS FROM RESPONDENTS TOP REASONS FROM RESPONDENTS WHO DID NOT SUPPORT REINSTATING WHO SUPPORTED REINSTATING FOUR FOUR LANES OF TRAFFIC LANES OF TRAFFIC • Bikeway is functioning well • More consideration of traffic flow is needed • Spend is not warranted • Traffic flow and capacity is more important than car parking • Complete bikeway reconstruction is not necessary or warranted • Traffic is congested during peak periods • Car parking loss in peak hours is not supported • Bikeway is too wide • On-street car parking is more important than • Placement of car parking in the middle of the increasing traffic capacity road is not supported • Bikeway width of 2.7 metres should be • Visibility of bike riders to motorists is poor maintained • Bike riders should not be prioritised over drivers • It will be better to invest funding into building • There are not enough cyclists to justify this new bikeway infrastructure infrastructure • There are no concerns with traffic capacity here • Bikeway is over-engineered • Reinstating 4 traffic lanes contradicts Council’s and State Government policies • Independent evaluation confirmed no real impact on traffic VIEWS ON THE PREFERRED DESIGN TREATMENT FOR THE NEW BIKEWAY SECTION (FROM PIRIE ST TO NORTH TCE) Only 28% of individual engagement participants 4% had an opinion about bikeway treatment options and provided views on their preference. Majority of these 33% respondents were interviewed at the Bikeways Trial site. 43% Treatment 1 Treatment 2 Treatment 3 received the highest number of Treatment 3 preference votes and it was most popular with 20% design professionals and bike riders. More residents Treatment 6 preferred treatment 2 than other treatments. Page v NS BIKEWAY: ROUND 1 ENGAGEMENT OUTCOMES Businesses 25% 44% 4% 27% PAGE 4 OF 4 Residents 50% 4% 27% 19% Design professionals 96% 4% VIEWS ON THE PREFERRED TRAFFIC LANE ARRANGEMENTS Council deputationsFOR THE NEW BIKEWAY100% SECTION (FROM PIRIE ST TO NORTH TCE) Individual 3% 97% submissions 50% of residents and 25% of Bike riders 16% 84% businesses indicated that they Businesses 25% 44% 4% 27% would prefer if 1 traffic lane in each direction was continued for the Internet forum 100% entire length of Frome St. Majority participantsResidents 50% 4% 27% 19% of businesses with walk-in trade indicated they would prefer this arrangement. The main reason Design professionals 96% 4% Preference for one lane of through traffic in each direction behind these views was the Uncertain preference to keep a dedicated Council deputationsDid not discuss 100% on-street car parking lane at Preference for two lanes of traffic in peak hours in each direction all times over additional traffic capacity. Individual 3% 97% submissions DESIRABLE OTHER KEY DESIGN BIKEWAYBike riders 16% WIDTH 84% SUGGESTIONS FOR THE NEW Internet forum BIKEWAY SECTION 100% participantsThe views from the professional bike design experts • Maximise landscaping and tree plantings and design community on the bikeway design • Create physical separation between bike riders width are as follows: Preference for one lane of through traffic in each directionand other road users • 2.5 metres is considered to be the minimum Uncertain • Use lower kerb profiles and rounded edges to appropriate bikeway design width. Did not discuss minimese kerb strike • 2.4 metres is considered to be the minimum Preference for two lanes of traffic in peak hours in each • directionMinimise construction costs effective bikeway width (once the pedal strike or any other limiting factors are taken into • Optimise traffic signals account). • Maximise retention of on-street car parking • In isolated instances where the width has to be • Focus on resolving intersection safety reduced down due to localised constraints, the width should not be less than 2 metres. • Ensure bikeway design is easy to understand visually, with a contrasting surface and with The report contains other individual opinions on signage installed in the buffer this topic, with little consensus on the design • Ensure trees are easy to maintain dimensions. • Use natural and sustainable materials • Work on initiatives and promotions to raise awareness of the road rules, improve awareness of new (for SA) bikeway design arrangements and to promote cycling E: [email protected] T: 08 7120 2574 M: 0413 570 229 Page i NS BIKEWAY: ROUND 1 ENGAGEMENT OUTCOMES CONTENTS NORTH-SOUTH BIKEWAY PROJECT BACKGROUND �������1 THE PROJECT .....................................................................................................1 ENGAGEMENT ROUNDS AND THEIR PURPOSE ..............................................2 ENGAGEMENT PARTICIPATION AND ACTIVITIES ����������� 3 ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES .................................................................................3 OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES AND ATTENDANCE .......................................................... 3 PHOTOS FROM SOME THE ENGAGEMENT EVENTS ................................................. 5 BUSINESSES AND PROPERTY OWNERS INTERVIEWED ........................................... 7 ENGAGEMENT RESOURCES ...................................................................................... 8 RESPONDENT TYPES IN THIS REPORT ..........................................................10 ENGAGEMENT FEEDBACK �������������������������������������������������� 11 FEEDBACK ON THE EXISTING BIKEWAY SECTION ........................................11 INDIVIDUAL FEEDBACK ............................................................................................ 11 GROUP FEEDBACK ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 18 FEEDBACK ON NEW BIKEWAY SECTION ........................................................20