SAFER CYCLING NETWORKS IN AUCKLAND RAHELEH JAHANBANI A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Landscape Architecture at Unitec Institute of Technology, New Zealand, 2020 1 by Raheleh Jahanbani ID: 1525556 Master of Landscape Architecture Department of Landscape Architecture Unitec, New Zealand No material within this thesis may be used without the permission of the copyright owner ii2 ABSTRACT High-density cities worldwide are trying to reduce the amount of motorised transportation mode usage and use a sustainable alternative such as cycling. It is clear that cycling offers significant environmental, financial, and health benefits. This paper is set up to investigate how the cycling network can be made safer in Auckland. Auckland is the largest urban region in New Zealand and has the challenges of a growing population and, accordingly, ongoing urban growth. A Snapshot of Cycling in Auckland (2017), released annually by the Ministry of Transport, shows the rate of cycling in 2016 was only two percent, in comparison to the other travel modes, such as motorised vehicles, public transport, and so on. In a recent report, The Stuff (Flahive, 2019) comments that Auckland riders had increased by 8.9 percent in a year, compared to the previous 12 months. The increasing trend in biking requires more facilities, safer cycleways, and convenient routes. As well, reducing car dependency can preserve Auckland’s green network and help keep future growth ecofriendly and sustainable. This thesis concludes with pragmatic solutions to enhance the biking corridor’s safety and make cycling an irresistible option. In this paper, Auckland’s current characteristics and its future challenges and plans are investigated. The project method defines appropriate environmental, social, and technical criteria drawn from the literature relating to New Urbanism and Sustainable Mobility and tests three different case studies. Furthermore, relevant road codes and Te Aranga principles are studied. This paper offers a safe practical design that is evocative of interest in cycling as a prime form of transportation by retrofitting five high-risk zones including intersections, T-junctions, driveways, parallel parking, and bus stops. Moreover, an entertainment/ social zone is promoted to expand social willingness and economic growth. ii3i i4v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This thesis could not be completed without the tremendous help I received from many people. First, I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Nikolay Popov, for all his support, comments and motivation during the learning process. His help and encouragement motivated me to complete my academic paper. Furthermore, I would like to extend my thanks to Matthew Bradbury for his knowledgeable guidance that led me to widen my point of view. He helped me to look at my research from various perspectives. I am also grateful to all the critics for their insightful comments and encouragement that extended my research from different views. And my special thanks go to my beloved husband, Masoud, and two sons, Bardia and Parsa, for their immense support throughout this journey. تقدیم با عشق به همسرم، مسعود، و بزرگترین نعمتهای زندگانیم، بردیا و پارسا، که گر یاری اینها نبود، م ار چه یا اری رفتن. 5v vi6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract iii Acknowledgements v List of Abbreviations x List of Tables and Figures xi Part I, Introduction 14 1.1 Research Question 15 1.2 Research Rationale 15 Current Characteristics of Auckland 15 Future Challenges 15 Safety Analysis 16 Urban Cycling Crashes 17 1.3 Aim & Objectives 20 1.4 Methodology 20 1.5 Summary of the Chapter 21 Part II, Theoretical Background 22 2.1 Literature Review 22 New Urbanism 22 Sustainable Mobility 25 2.2 Case Studies 27 Copenhagen, Denmark 27 Vancouver, Canada 30 vi7i Auckland, New Zealand 33 2.3 Design Strategies & Principles 35 New Zealand Cycle Trail Design Guide 35 Auckland Transport Code of Practice 37 AT Roads and Streets Framework 39 2.4 Te Aranga Principles 42 2.5 Summary of the Chapter 43 Part III, Site Assessment and Analysis 46 3.1 Context Analysis 46 Background 46 Social structure 47 Manukau Harbour 50 Great South Road 50 3.2 Traffic Analysis 51 3.3 Land Use Analysis 54 3.4 Geography 55 3.5 Cycling Catchments 58 3.6 User Target 59 3.7 Summary of the Chapter 60 Part IV, Design 61 4.1 Design Scope & Objectives 61 4.2 Preliminary Tests 61 Conceptual Scheme 1 61 Conceptual Scheme 2 63 Conceptual Scheme 3 65 4.3 Design Development 66 Intersection of Great South Road with Kerrs Road 67 Bus Stop 70 vi8ii Parallel Parking and Driveways 71 Social Zone 73 T-Junction of GS Road with Lakewood Court 74 Manukau Crossing Zone 75 4.4 Summary of the Chapter 76 Part V, Design Proposal 78 5.1 Great South Road 80 5.2 X-Intersection 82 5.3 Bus Stop 85 5.4 Parallel Parking and Driveways 89 5.5 Entertainment Zone 94 5.6 T-Junction 98 5.7 Manukau Crossing 100 5.8 Summary of the Chapter 102 Part VI, Conclusion 103 References 105 ix9 I LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AT - Auckland Transport CAS - Crash Analysis System DSI - Death and Severe Injury GIS - Geographic Information System GS Road - Great South Road NZ - New Zealand RbD - Research by Design 10x I LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 2.3.1. Gradient requirements for on-road trails (NZCT Design Table 2.3.4. Minimum cycle lane width (Auckland Transport Code of Guide, 2019). Practice 2013). Table 2.3.2. Gradient requirements for off-road trails (NZCT Design Chart 3.1.1. Comparison of Various Factors Between South Auckland Guide, 2019). and NZ (Author’s own, 2020). Table 2.3.3. Recommended surface types for off-road trails (NZCT Design Guide 2019). Figure 1.1. The Volume of Trips Among all Aucklanders in 2016, Source: Figure 2.2.13. Arbutus Greenway Map in Vancouver (City of TRA (Author’s own, 2020) Vancouver, 2021). Figure 1.2. Death Serious Injury (DSI) in Auckland 2008 - 2018 (Author’s Figure 2.2.14. Arbutus Greenway Project (City of Vancouver, 2021). own, 2020) Figure 2.2.14. Beach Road Walking and Cycling Project (Auckland Figure 1.3. Junction Type in Urban Cyclist Fatal, Serious and Minor Transport, 2014). Crashes 2008–2018 (Author’s own, 2020). Figure 2.2.15. Beach Road Typical Section (Auckland Transport, 2014). Figure 1.4. Risk of injury to cyclists based on impact speed (source: Figure 2.2.14. Beach Road Cycleway Map (Auckland Transport, 2014). Mackie Research Ltd) Figure 2.3.1. Cycle operating space (NZCT Design Guide, 2019). Figure 1.5. Vehicles Involved in Urban Cyclist Deaths in All New Zealand 2008–18 (Author’s own, 2020). Figure 2.3.2. Summary of facility types by category (Auckland Transport Code of Practice, 2013). Figure 2.1.1. Traditional Neighbourhood Structure proposed by Duany (Newurbanism.org, n.d.). Figure 2.3.4. Cycle Facilities (Auckland Transport Code of Practice 2013). Figure 2.1.2. Walkability, New Urbanism (Hazel Borys, 2017). Figure 2.3.4. Nine typologies for Auckland (AT Road and Street Figure 2.1.3. Green Transport (SOM, 2019). Framework, 2020). Figure 2.1.4. Perry’s Version of Neighborhood Unite (Perry, 1929). Figure 2.3.5. Modal Priority Assessments (AT Road and Street Figure 2.1.5. Duany Pater-Zyberk’s Verssion of Neighbourhood Unite Framework, 2020). (Duany,2002). Figure 2.3.6. Urban Street and Road Design Guide (AT Road and Street Figure 2.2.1. The Development of Pedestrian Areas in Copenhagen (Gehl Framework, 2018). & Gomzoe, 2000). Figure 2.3.7. Urban Street and Road Design Guide (AT Road and Figure 2.2.2. A nation of cyclists (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, Street Framework, 2018). n.d.) Figure 3.1.1. South Auckland (Te Ara, n.d.). Figure 2.2.3. Bicycle Traffic and Policy Strategy in Copenhagen (Gehl & Figure 3.1.2. GIS Mapping of Local Board Areas South Auckland Gomzoe, 2000). (Author’s own, 2020). Figure 2.2.4. Danish separated bicycle tracks segregated by a curb (The Figure 3.1.3. Papatoetoe Omnibus (Te Ara, n.d.). City of Copenhagen, 2011). Figure 3.1.4. Auckland Botanic Garden (Te Ara, n.d.). Figure 2.2.5. Safety through design (The City of Copenhagen, 2011). Figure 3.1.5. South Auckland Youth (Te Ara, n.d.). Figure 2.2.6. Green and Blue Bicycle Connections (The City of Copenhagen 2011) Figure 3.1.6. GIS Mapping of Traffic Crashs South Auckland 2008- 2018. Source: GIS & CAS (Author’s own, 2020). Figure 2.2.7. Bicycle Snake Project (ArchDaily, 2014). Figure 3.1.7. Members of the Royal Artillery working on Great South Figure 2.2.8. The Bicycle Snake (awol.junkee.com). Road, 1863. (Photo by William Temple, Urquhart album, Alexander Figure 2.2.9. AAA Guideline (The City of Vancouver, 2017) Turnbull Library). Figure 2.2.10. Bike Paths in Vancouver (The City of Vancouver, 2017). Figure 3.1.8. The Project Zone (Author’s own, 2020). Figure 2.2.11. Before and After of Hornby Street Project (Vancouver.ca, Figure 3.2.1 Speed Limits of Project Zone (Author’s own, 2020). 2017) Figure 3.2.2 Cycle Facility Network (Author’s own, 2020). Figure 2.2.12. Hornby Street Project (Vancouver.ca, 2017) Figure 3.3.4. Site Location and Context (Author’s own, 2020). Figure 3.2.3. The Relation of Cycle Crash Severity with Cycle Facilities Figure 3.3.5. Current Land Use of Site (Author’s own, 2020). (Author’s own, 2020). Figure Figure 5.4.4. 3D View of Driveway (Author’s own, 2020). 11xi Figure 3.4.1 Digital Elevation Model (Author’s own, 2020).