0008marrickville pamp review final report

Microsoft Word - 0008Marrickville PAMP Review Final Report.docNovember 2009
particular instructions and requirements
relied upon by any third party and no
responsibility is undertaken to any third
party Ove Arup & Partners Ltd
13 Fitzroy Street, London W1T 4BQ
Tel +44 (0)20 7636 1531 Fax +44 (0)20 775 Extn www.arup.com
Job number 206184
J:\206184-00 MARRICKVILLE PAMP REVIEW\04 ARUP PROJECT DATA\02 REPORTS\0008MARRICKVILLE PAMP REVIEW FINAL REPORT.DOC
Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Issue 12 November 2009
Document Verification
Page 1 of 1
Job title Marrickville Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan Review Job number
206184
Document ref
Name JOL/SM CCH CCH
Description Final
Name JOL/SM CCH CCH
Name
Signature
Filename
Description
Name
Signature
Marrickville Council Marrickville Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan Review Final Report
Contents
Page
1.3 The review of the 2001 PAMP 2
1.4 Aims 2
1.5 Objectives 3
1.7 Universal Access Principles 4
1.8 Methodology 5
1.9 Evaluation 8
2.1 Population 10
2.3 Road Hierarchy 12
2.4 Public Transport 13
3.2 Data Review 19
3.4 Council’s Current Road Safety Program 22
4 COMMUNITY CONSULTATION 25
4.2 Questionnaire Surveys 25
5.1 Pedestrian Route Network 31
5.2 Facilities Standard 31
6 ROUTE AUDITS AND RECOMMENDED ACTIONS 38
6.1 Prioritising Facilities 38
6.3 Issues Arising from the Audit 47
6.4 Design of Pedestrian Facilities 51
6.5 Cost Estimates 51
6.7 Estimated Cost 52
7 CURRENT ISSUES - PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, MOBILITY AND SAFETY 54
7.1 Walking as a Sustainable Mode of Transport 54
7.2 Council Policy 54
7.3 Funding Sources 56
8.1 Conclusion 58
8.2 Recommendations 58
9 REFERENCES 60
Table 1 Traffic Volumes on Major Roads
Table 2 Marrickville Pedestrian Accidents/ Injuries 2007 (within the study area)
Table 3 Location of Pedestrians Involved Accidents, 2007
Table 4 Footpath Surface Texture Traversable by Wheelchair
Table 5 Width Requirements for Paths
Table 6 Design Requirements for Sloped Walkways
Table 7 Suitability of Crossing Type
Table 8 Problem Ranking and Solution Assessment Method
Table 9 Solution Assessment Chart
Table 10 Crossing Opportunities Identified
Table 11 Estimated Unit Costs of Actions
Table 12 Estimated Cost of Works from Route Audit
Table 13 Identified PAMP Works Sorted by Action Type
Figures
Figure 2 Universal Access Principles
Figure 3 Marrickville PAMP Study Area – Five Focus Centres
Figure 4 PAMP Methodology
Figure 6 Marrickville Pedestrian Accidents 2007
Figure 7 Marrickville Pedestrian Accident History 2003-2007
Figure 8 Mode of Transport
Figure 9 Issues and Main concerns expressed in Questionnaires
Figure 10 Locations of issues and concerns gathered from Questionnaires
Figure 11 Marrickville PAMP Route Network
Figure 12 Footpath Audit – Footpath Issues
Figure 13 Footpath Audit – Footpath Obstruction, Drainage and Lighting Issues
Figure 14 Footpath Audit – Kerb Ramp Issues
Figure 15 Footpath Audit – Bus Stop Issues and Crossing Opportunities
Appendices
Appendix B
Appendix D
Appendix F
Page 1 Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Issue 12 November 2009
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Marrickville Council engaged Arup Planning (Arup) to undertake a review of the 2001
Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan (PAMP). The study area includes the whole local
government area (LGA). The suburbs include Petersham, Lewisham, Stanmore, Newtown,
Enmore, Dulwich Hill, Marrickville, St Peters, Sydenham and Tempe.
1.2 2001 Marrickville PAMP
Background
In 1999, Marrickville Council has initiated the pioneer PAMP project in NSW. The first
Marrickville PAMP study was conducted and completed by Arup in 2001. The 2001 study
identified high pedestrian activities area (Figure 1) and developed a prioritised work program
to implement the proposed PAMP works. Council has been working through the
implementation of the program since 2001.
Recommendations
The 2001 PAMP recommended the Council to adopt the proposed 2001 PAMP routes and
the corresponding work program to improve the footpath accessibility within the study area.
Work Progress
The council has approved and adopted the 2001 PAMP recommendations, acquired funding
from the RTA and implemented most of the works identified by the 2001 PAMP. Council
has since developed the Accessible Footpath Program to further extend the accessible
footpath network. Recently, Council has carried out proactive measures like footpath
grinding to remove trip hazards within 20-25mm height produced by lifted concrete slab on
major streets.
Review
It has been eight years since the first PAMP was completed. Some original PAMP routes
have experienced new issues with the rise of new development and increase in pedestrian
flow. In considering pedestrian issues in the development of the 2007 Marrickville
Integrated Transport Strategy, the need to review the 2001 PAMP and develop a new
PAMP was identified. This resulted in Recommendation No.5.1: “Evaluate and review
implementation of Pedestrian Access & Mobility Plan (PAMPs) and undertake further
pedestrian and access improvements with a focus on commercial centres, public transport
stops and other areas with high levels of pedestrian activity”.
This 2009 PAMP review study is a response to the recommendation made in the
Marrickville Integrated Transport Strategy 2007.
Figure 1 Marrickville PAMP Routes 2001
1.3 The review of the 2001 PAMP
This PAMP review is build on the lessons learned in implementing the 2001 PAMP. The
review also reflects the community responses received by the Council on pedestrian safety
and amenity issues since 2001. The PAMP review has redefined the study area whilst
retaining the focus on areas of high pedestrian activity.
1.3.1 Redefining Study Area
During the inception meeting of the study, study team has refined the study area to focus on
the five major centres for the PAMP development. The five centres in the order of priority
are:
3. Dulwich Hill Village
5. Parramatta Road
1.4 Aims
The main aim of the Marrickville Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan Review is to improve
the pedestrian network's:
• equity of access;
• comfort; and
1.5 Objectives
This PAMP review is aim to redefine (widen) the study area to include new areas, whilst
retaining the focus on areas of high pedestrian activity. The main objectives of the PAMP
as identified in the Marrickville Council Brief are to:
• Facilitate improvements in the level of pedestrian access and priority, particularly in
areas of high pedestrian concentrations;
• Reduce pedestrian access severance and enhance safe and convenient crossing
opportunities on major roads;
• Further Council's obligations under the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act
1996.
• Facilitate improvements in the level of personal mobility and safety for pedestrians with
disabilities and older persons through the provision of pedestrian infrastructure and
facilities which cater to the needs of all pedestrians;
• Provide links with other transport services to achieve an integrated land use and
transport network of facilities that comply with best technical standards;
• Ensure pedestrian facilities are provided in a consistent and appropriate manner, both
within the Marrickville LGA and compared to other councils in NSW;
• Ensure that pedestrian facilities remain appropriate and relevant to the surrounding land
use and the user group;
• Facilitate the integration of walking into the transport system as a legitimate transport
mode in its own right
• Accommodate special event needs of pedestrians; and
1.6 Walking as a Sustainable Mode of Transport
In recent years, there is an increasing recognition of walking as a sustainable mode of
transport globally. Current issues related to traffic and climate change have challenged
traditional traffic oriented development to recognise the importance of sustainable transport
modes like walking.
There are significant benefits to be derived from encouraging walking and creating walkable
neighbourhoods, particularly for shorter distance trips. The benefits of walking include
better access for all including access to schools for children as well as safer integrated
transport between private and public modes. Highlighting the importance of the pedestrian
within neighbourhood planning relates to the essential role of public spaces in the
community. Pedestrian routes are planned to provide links between commercial and
residential uses and act as a source of activity in the community to provide a sense of
belonging. Encouraging pedestrian activity in the community benefits not only residents, but
encourages activity in commercial areas that benefits local businesses.
Broader benefits of walking and pedestrian activity include improved health, better
environmental conditions, decreased traffic congestion and improved safety. Increasing the
proportion of journeys that are undertaken on foot can make a significant contribution to
achieving a better quality of life and environment for all, and relate to wider sustainable
transport themes of promoting alternatives to the private motor vehicle.
1.7 Universal Access Principles
Universal Access Principles highlight the rights of all citizens in relation to all transport
needs, including non-vehicle forms of transport. These are presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2 Universal Access Principles
• Universal Access is the ability of all citizens to reach every destination served by the
public road and transit system.
• Every local road and intersection should be designed and regulated to preserve
reasonably safe access to all lawfully behaving citizens as intended and expected
users (i.e. all citizens are Design Users.)
• Engineering designers and policy should aim for acceptable Level of Service
measures, such as delays, that are similar for all road users – motorists,
pedestrians, cyclists and mobility-impaired persons.
• Avoid road “improvements” which reduce the Level of Service below acceptable
levels for pedestrians, cyclists and mobility-impaired persons.
• Provide footpaths on at least one side of all streets so that wheelchair users have
accessible routes outside of vehicle travel lanes.
• Public facilities or policies that discriminate against the “car-less” violate the most
basic rights described in law.
(Acknowledgments to S.B. Goodridge)
Existing and Potential Users
1.8 Methodology
1.8.1 Study Area
The original 2001 PAMP focused on the following high pedestrian use areas:
• King Street/ Enmore Road
• Marrickville Road/ Illawarra Road
• Parramatta Road
Since then, Council has been implementing the works recommended in the 2001 study.
The latest Accessible Footpath Program (Figure 1) implemented by the Council has further
extended the accessible footpath network. Accessible Footpath Program is an ongoing
works program that aims to create an accessible footpath network across the LGA. The
Program’s aim has been to create a course network of footpaths that are sealed and
maintained to ensure they provide comfortable and unobstructed passage for wheelchair
users and others with mobility impairments. Provision of kerb ramps at all road crossings is
an important element of the program. There were gradual renewals of the Marrickville area
with new mixed residential/commercial development along major roads in the town centres
since 2001 PAMP.
This PAMP review includes all the original 2001 PAMP routes, with a focus on the five major
business centres as shown in Figure 3. Overall, the high risk, high concentration routes
have not changed significantly. The community consultation conducted for this study shows
that the public’s major concerns remain at the high pedestrian use areas. This review has
identified new issues arising since the 2001 PAMP routes were developed.
Figure 3 Marrickville PAMP Study Area – Five Focus Centres
1. King St / Enmore Rd 2. Marrickville 3. Dulwich Hill 4. Petersham 5. Parramatta Road
1.8.2 Outline of Study Methodology
The methodology for the study involved a number of components including the following:
• Define the study area;
• Conduct a data review;
• Develop action recommendations; and
• Consider Council policies and funding sources.
The process is illustrated in Figure 4. All components of the study have been discussed
within this report.
Define Study Area
Research and Review
Develop PAMP Routes
Implementation Monitoring
P A M P S tu d y
Im p le m e n ta ti o n
Define Study ObjectivesDefine Study Team
Define Study Area
Research and Review
Develop PAMP Routes
Implementation Monitoring
P A M P S tu d y
Im p le m e n ta ti o n
1.9 Evaluation
1.9.1 Introduction
Planning specifically for pedestrians is a relatively new activity in Australia. Authorities such
as Local Councils and the RTA have difficulty in addressing pedestrian problems and
solutions without a clearly established framework for assessing problems, evaluating
potential actions and developing priorities and implementation programs.
The PAMP process provides authorities with a framework which is leading the way to a
systematic evaluation of pedestrian facilities improvement and provides a foundation for the
facilitation of funding for pedestrian improvements.
The objectives for PAMPs include:
• Economic objectives
travel time savings for other road users;
accident cost reduction; and
redistribution of costs and benefits within community groups;
redistribution of costs between community groups;
effect on mode split;
decrease in fuel consumption;
healthy lifestyle; and
personal physical safety.
sustainability;
Measurements of PAMP performance against these objectives is challenging because the
objectives are qualitative and hence subjective, and rating of the importance of different
(and in some cases, conflicting) objectives proves difficult at times.
1.9.2 PAMP Actions
Possible actions for Council to be developed as part of the PAMP process are wide-
ranging, and perhaps can be categorised in the same manner as planning for bicycles, the
so - called 4E's approach:
This PAMP study and the resulting Action Recommendations focus on engineering actions
and recommendations. The Action Recommendations have been developed primarily
through pedestrian audits undertaken on selected routes throughout the study area. The
Action Recommendations are presented in Appendix E in this report.
The main considerations of the audit included:
• paths of travel;
• fixtures/furniture - seating, bus stops, rubbish bins, Decaux ad shell etc;
• barriers to pedestrian movement;
• general comments (land use, road user behaviour, road environment).
It is recommended that a Pedestrian Strategy be developed by Council to address and
prioritise pedestrian planning under a strategic plan for the whole-of-area approach within
Marrickville.
1.9.3 Implementation
A method for problem ranking and solution assessment has been developed as part of the
PAMP methodology. The method identifies problems, audits problems in the field, identifies
potential solutions, ranks these and recommends a set of actions in the form of Action
Recommendations.
2 CHARACTERISTICS OF MARRICKVILLE
2.1 Population
The 2006 ABS Census indicates the Marrickville population was close to 71,800, which has
decreased by 1.8% since the 2001 Census. Marrickville population’s age profile suggest
the largest age groups in Marrickville in 2006 were people 30 -34 (3.7% increase from
2001), 35 – 39 (increase of 3.0% from 2001) and 25 – 29 years (2.9% increase from 2001).
There was a slight decline in the proportion of people aged 10 – 14 (2.8% decrease from
2001). Pockets of high density populations in the suburbs of Newtown, Marrickville, Dulwich
Hill and Petersham have been identified. The pedestrian routes within these areas were
considered in the PAMP route development.
2.2 Geographic Features of the Study Area
The Marrickville Local Government Area covers an area of 15.4 km² and is located
approximately 8 kilometres south west of the Sydney CBD. Suburbs in Marrickville include
Stanmore, Lewisham, Petersham, Enmore, Dulwich Hill, Marrickville, St Peters, Sydenham,
Tempe, and parts of Newtown and Camperdown. There are wide socio-economic
differences throughout the suburbs and a high percentage of rented accommodation
compared to the Sydney average.
Marrickville is contained by both natural and built features. Parramatta Road (Great
Western Highway) forms the northern boundary of the municipality. The Princes Highway
cuts through the municipality a short distance from the eastern boundary. An extensive rail
network runs through the municipality with both passenger and goods lines. The Cooks
River system forms the southern boundary of the municipality. The Cooks River presently
offers four vehicle/pedestrian crossings, limiting access to neighbouring municipalities. A
pedestrian bridge over the Cooks River is located between the Marrickville Golf Club and
Flinders Road in Earlwood.
Marrickville is a densely populated and historic inner city area. Marrickville’s urban form has
in the main developed prior to the need for consideration of the provision of access and the
importance of safety and access of the pedestrian. Many areas of Marrickville are dense
building form, narrow frontages and raised footpaths.
Potential pedestrian attractors in the municipality include schools and colleges; shopping
centres including Marrickville Metro, Parramatta Road, Marrickville Road, Dulwich Hill and
King Street shopping areas; and parks, sporting and recreational areas. The Cooks River
provides an important open space corridor for recreational walkers through the LGA.
Marrickville Council is predominantly residential in nature with the exception of a large
industrial component in the south-east corner of the municipality. Pockets of industrial and
light industrial activities also exist along Parramatta Road and in areas surrounding New
Canterbury Road and Old Canterbury Road.
Major retail centres are located along arterial and collector roads such as King Street,
Enmore Road, Marrickville Road, Illawarra Road and Victoria Road. Figure 5 shows the key
pedestrian attractors and generators in Marrickville Municipality.
Figure 5 Marrickville Pedestrian Attractors and Generators
2.3 Road Hierarchy
Arterial Roads
• Parramatta Road
Arterial roads often present problems for crossing opportunities for pedestrians due to high
traffic volumes. Arterial roads are often the most direct route to retail and commercial
centres and therefore are suitable for pedestrians.
Sub-Arterial Roads
• Frazer Street
Traffic Volumes
Traffic volume data (average annual daily traffic - AADT) on the major roads within the study
area was available from the RTA for year 2005 and is summarised in Table 1. The traffic
volume in the study area was steady over the period between 1996 and 2005.
Table 1 Traffic Volumes on Major Roads
Location 1996 Volume
King Street, St Peters 33,272 28995 32699
Crystal Street 34,202 31840 30938
Enmore Road 28,241 26009 25208
Stanmore Road 29,975 23243 22696
New Canterbury Road,
Salisbury Road, Stanmore 25,063 21268 21447
Unwins Bridge Road,
2.4 Public Transport
The majority of the area is relatively well connected to public transport with buses, trains
and taxis operating in the area.
2.4.1 Rail
Within the Marrickville LGA are eight train stations that provide access to areas along three
suburban rail lines (see Figure 5). Newtown Station is located in the City of Sydney but
serves the suburbs of Newtown and Enmore that are part of the Marrickville LGA. All
railway stations and bus routes provide opportunities for dual mode travel.
Full disabled access to the rail network, as defined by the State Rail Authority/RailCorp, is
where the station has either a lift, level access or a compliant ramp (1:14 grade) from street
level to all platforms, and a portable platform to train ramp.
2.4.1.1 Easy Access Stations
In March 2007, the Minister for Transport announced upgrades would be undertaken on
Newtown and Sydenham Stations along with 9 other stations, with $12 million being
allocated to the works over four years.
Marrickville Council has produced an Accessible Transport Strategy 2008 that identifies the
need for upgrades to the rail stations within the Marrickville LGA to meet Easy Access
requirements. The stations listed in order of priority are:
• Newtown
• Sydenham
• Marrickville
• Petersham
• Stanmore
• St Peters
• Dulwich Hill
• Tempe
• Lewisham
The patronage estimates for railway stations within Marrickville are as follows:
Station 2007 Ranking
St Peters 84 5760 -11% 5180
Stanmore 76 5360 3% 5540
Lewisham 114 3200 1% 3220
Dulwich Hill 117 3120 5% 3280
Tempe 142 2060 6% 2180
Sydenham Station will be the first station to undergo the easy access upgrade. Tenders
were received for the design and construction of Sydenham Station in late April 2009.
2.4.2 Bus and Taxi
Marrickville is within the bus service contract Region 6. There are more than 18 bus
services operate by STA throughout the Marrickville LGA. These routes generally serve
pedestrian attractors such as those identified on Figure 5. There is also taxi zones located
within Marrickville LGA.
Due to the gradual nature of improvements to bus fleets across NSW there is a variety of
buses operating within the study area. These can be summarised as follows:
1) Original Buses - these have a two-step entry and are the least accessible of the fleet;
2) Kneeling Buses - these have a two-step entry, however they can be lowered, or kneel,
so that the bottom step can be made effectively level with the kerb. These buses also
have bright yellow handrails, easier to read signs, better lighting, filtered air conditioning
and elderly/frail priority seating. These buses therefore offer improved access for less
mobile or visually impaired members of the community;
3) Scania Buses - These offer all the features of Kneeling Buses, but with a level entry
rather than two steps, making them more easily accessible; and
4) Easy Access Buses - In terms of accessibility these buses offer all the features of a
Scania Bus. In addition, they offer ramp access to allow for passengers in wheelchairs
and parents with prams. Within the bus, room is provided for people in wheelchairs, or
alternatively babies in prams. These buses therefore provide access to the entire
community.
It is recommended that Marrickville Council lobby State Transit Authority to introduce more
Easy Access buses into the area. Council should also give consideration to the
requirements of Easy Access buses including:
• minimum kerb height of 150mm 1 ;
• clearances and unobstructed spaces at bus stops to meet Australian Standards
AS1428;
• bus zones for kerb side bus stop with capacity for one standard bus, as described in the
State Transit Bus Stop Style Guide 2 .
• a full 27m length as stipulated in the Australian Road Rules;
• bus zones on the departure side of signalled intersections or no standing zones on the
approach side of bus zones to increase the opportunity of buses making straight-in
approaches to bus stops; and
• low floor bus friendly road geometry e.g. careful choice of traffic calming devices and
elimination of dish gutter drains.
All bus stops in the study area will require auditing to ensure that they meet these
requirements for the successful use of Easy Access buses.
2.4.3 Other Transport Mode Initiatives
The Marrickville LGA had a comprehensive tramway network until trams were removed from
Sydney in the late 1950s and largely replaced by buses. Trams played a key role in
creating the long mainstreet commercial centres that are characteristic of inner-Sydney.
Over many years there have been discussions about new light rail extensions in the inner
west. The main project discussed has been the Lilyfield to Dulwich Hill extension which
would utilise the now disused Rozelle Freight Line. In June 2009, the NSW Minster for
Transport wrote to Marrickville, Leichhardt, Ashfield and City of Sydney Councils proposing
to undertake a feasibility study for the Lilyfield to Dulwich Hill light rail extension. A Steering
Committee for the Study was formed and held its first meeting on 7 October 2009. A
consultant will soon be appointed to undertake the study. This project, when implemented,
will have a significant impact on pedestrian behaviour in the vicinity of light rail station. This
project however, is located well beyond the study area for this PAMP review, so does not
have a direct impact.
1 The preferred kerb height of 150mm coordinates with the minimum requirements of ‘kneeling’ and hoist bus, and
providing reasonable access to the step height of STA buses (step height of 12.5m bus ranges between 320mm and
380mm). 150mm is also the recommended maximum kerb height by the RTA. Higher kerb height can impact on the
approach angle of buses due to the front overhang clearance. It also impacts on kerb ramp size and slope at
crossings. Higher kerb of up to 300mm can be provided at specific high demand accessible bus stop. Such raised
bus stops should be designed in consultation with authorities and transport provider to ensure that the ramp access
system, provision for bus approach angle and the surrounding footpath complies with relevant design standards.
2 The length of the bus zone is calculated from the length of the design bus (12.5m) + associated pull in and pull out
zone. Stops for a longer bus or stop for multiple buses would require a longer bus zone, e.g. a bus stop for single
14.5m bus would require a 26.5m bus zone. According to the Australian Road Rules, all non-public bus vehicles are
not allowed to stop within the bus zone. Therefore, the minimum bus stop and pull-in pull-out distance can be
provided for with adequate “no stopping” zones before and after the bus stop.
3 DATA COLLECTION AND REVIEW
3.1 Review of Relevant Documents
This section places the PAMP study in its broader context. The documents listed below
were reviewed as they inter-relate with the PAMP, either because the PAMP study works
towards meeting their aims and objectives or because they outline ideas and issues that are
relevant to the development of this PAMP.
3.1.1 Key NSW Government Planning Policies and Guidelines
Following are the key NSW Government planning policies and guidelines designed to
improve the pedestrian environment:
• Recently released 2009 NSW State Plan, which includes an action to Increase walking
and cycling. Further detail on this action will be in the forthcoming Transport Blueprint
for NSW;
• 2005 Sydney Metropolitan Strategy, which includes an action to Improve local and
regional walking and cycling infrastructure through implementation of the Planning
Guidelines for Walking & Cycling;
• 2004 Planning Guidelines for Walking & Cycling includes information, case studies and
illustrations designed to assist planners to integrate walking and cycling into all aspects
of their work;
• 2002 Integrating Land Use & Transport policy includes an accessible development
principle to Improve pedestrian access; and
• 2002 How to Prepare a Pedestrian Access & Mobility Plan (PAMP) aims to assist NSW
councils to provide safe, convenient and connected pedestrian routes that encourage
people to walk. This PAMP review is instructed by this document.
There are also general walking policy and guideline documents used by pedestrian planners
around Australia, including:
• 1995 Austroads Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice Part 13: Pedestrians. These
guidelines inform several of the NSW Government and Marrickville Council pedestrian
policies;
• 2007 Active Living Statement by the NSW Premiers Council for Active Living (PCAL)
and associated guidelines information
• 2001 Active Everyday: A plan to promote physical activity in NSW by NSW Health
3.1.2 Marrickville Integrated Transport Strategy 2007 (MITS)
To provide framework for Marrickville to move towards a sustainable transport system, the
Marrickville Integrated Transport Strategy considers improvements not only in public
transport, walking and cycling facilities but also elements of land use and urban form, roads
traffic and parking and council policies and processes as integral in working towards
reduced car use and increasing use of public transport, walking and cycling.
The Strategy makes recommendations specific to walking and cycling:
• Evaluate and review implementation of Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plans and
undertake further pedestrian and access improvements, with a focus on commercial
centres, public transport stops and other areas with high levels of pedestrian activity.
• Plan and implement a network of functional cycling routes and bicycle parking facilities
through the Marrickville Bicycle Strategy
• Plan and implement active transport improvements in green corridors along the Cooks
River, GreenWay and Alexandra Canal
• Implement active travel to school projects, supported by TravelSmart and related
programs, in partnership with the NSW Government and P&C associations
3.1.3 2001 Marrickville Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan (PAMP)
The 2001 Marrickville PAMP has been Council’s key plan for improving the walkability. It is
a pioneering PAMP in NSW, and most of the works proposed in the document have been
completed. This review is intended to update and carry forward the work of the 2001 PAMP
into future years.
3.1.4 Marrickville Bicycle Strategy 2007
The bicycle plan proposed an extensive network of local and regional cycling routes for the
whole Marrickville LGA. The plan aims to facilitate increased bicycles use in Marrickville
over the next ten years and beyond. The four key action plans consist of:
• A bicycle network plan
• A bicycle parking plan
• Bicycle friendly streets neighbourhoods
The PAMP development is in line with the bicycle plan as certain bicycle strategy facilities
improve conditions for pedestrians as well as cyclists, e.g. installation of refuges which can
be used by pedestrians and cyclists, installation of No Standing signs to prevent parking in
front of kerb ramps. Installation of signage and centreline marking on shared pathways
through parks to can also improve path use behaviour by pedestrians and cyclists. Bicycle
planning also runs parallel to pedestrian planning as it promotes alternative transport modes
to cars and facilitates the integration of transport modes.
3.1.5 Marrickville Village Centres Urban Design Study 2009
The Study has investigated opportunities for sites and precincts renewal and increase in
residential and commercial uses for Marrickville’s various town centres. The identified
precincts with future development opportunities include:
Centres Sites Location
Marrickville
Arthur Street)
The sites identified are incorporated into the PAMP route development.
3.1.6 2007 Marrickville Urban Strategy
This document is a basis for the preparation of a new Local Environmental Plan (LEP) for
Marrickville. It includes Transport and Access actions to “consider local transport [including
walking and cycling] in the centre planning process and to “review development controls to
prioritise walking, cycling and access to public transport”.
3.1.7 Marrickville Community Plan 2025 and Marrickville Council Strategic Plan
2006 - 2011
The Community Plan includes three goals closely relevant to the development of the PAMP:
“Develop a community which is more liveable, safer and accessible to all citizens; Promote
a vibrant street-life that encourages the community to engage and welcomes visitors, where
local businesses flourish, and local village shopping precincts are attractive and sustainable;
and plan, promote and lobby for a sustainable and integrated transport system that
improves the quality of life for the people of Marrickville.”
The Council Strategic Plan includes a number of specific Council objectives, actions and
targets designed to guide all of Council’s activities and budgets for the forthcoming five
years. Several of the objectives, actions and targets are relevant to pedestrian planning.
For example, in the section on Guided Development & Sustainable Transport, there is a
Strategy to “reduce traffic on local roads and increase pedestrian safety” and an associated
Target “reduction in pedestrian accidents”.
3.1.8 Current review of the 2001 Marrickville Local Environmental Plan
All LEP and DCP objectives and provisions are being reviewed and sustainable transport
objectives/provisions have been included. Behind the review are design studies which are
intended to guide proposed zonings and other planning controls for Marrickville’s centres.
Key studies are the Marrickville Village Centres Urban Design Study, described in Section
3.1.5 above, the St Peters and McGill Street Urban Design Studies & Draft Masterplans.
These studies are good practice case studies in providing an improved pedestrian
environment through appropriate redevelopment. The first of these studies – the
Marrickville Village Centres Urban Design Study - is most relevant to this review as it
applies to sites within the PAMP review study area.
3.1.9 Sustainable Sydney 2030 Strategic Plan, City of Sydney, 2008
Neighbouring Marrickville Council, the City of Sydney developed a Strategic Plan to guide
development towards 2030. The Plan outlines ‘A liveable green network’ that identifies
routes for pedestrians and cyclists that connect green space through the City of Sydney and
that link to neighbouring LGAs, including Marrickville.
Relevant to the development of the PAMP, City of Sydney identifies two corridors;
Corridor 8 Newtown to Randwick Education and Health
‘Providing a southern City connection from the Inner West tot eh Easter Suburbs and
beaches. Connecting Newtown through Erskineville, to Green Square along the Green
Square Boulevard and water channel beneath Southern Cross Drive to Kensington and the
University.’
Corridor 9 Cooks River to Centennial Park
‘Connecting Cooks River and Botany Bay to Green Square, Centennial Park and beyond to
the Eastern Beaches. A green corridor along the tributary channels of the Alexandra Canal
that over the long term could be investigated for mixed–use residential and business
activities.’ The Alexandra Canal master plan has been marked for transformation info a
‘recreational and ecological asset, part of a green, regional spine linking the Cooks River
with Sydney and Moore Parks. The Corridor would feed into pedestrian routes into
Marrickville.
3.1.10 2004 Access Policy & Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) Access Action
Plan and 2008 Marrickville Accessible Transport Information Kit
These are Council’s key policies in relation to equity of access and inclusion. This review
furthers the aims of these documents as it will in most instances lead to improvements in the
pedestrian environment for all of Marrickville’s residents.
3.1.11 Others
Beyond this list, there are a number of other Council policies that indirectly relate to
pedestrian planning in Marrickville. For example, Council’s 2008 Ageing Strategy includes a
goal “To work towards creating an age-friendly built environment to enhance the health and
wellbeing of all members of the community” and an associated action to “Implement the
PAMP to ensure roads, footpaths, parks and other public areas are maintained to provide a
safe, clean and accessible environment for all.”
3.2 Data Review
3.2.1 Existing Facilities
There are many existing pedestrian facilities located within the study area including:
• footpaths,
• pedestrian footbridge
The study area faces two key challenges. Within the study area the age of infrastructure in
general, and footpaths in particular, means that many are either in poor condition because
of their age and repeated repair over the years, or are of old-style designs with high barrier
kerbs, no pram ramps and no tactile warning devices. The Council has recently developed
the Accessible Footpath Program to improve pedestrian access on major routes.
All traffic management devices should consider the use of areas by pedestrians. Local Area
Traffic Management (LATM) devices, with careful design, can be beneficial to pedestrians.
Local streets often provide attractive routes for pedestrians, particularly when running
parallel to State or Regional roads.
3.2.2 Trip Generators and Attractors
A number of trip or pedestrian generators and attractors are located within the study area as
identified in Figure 5. Pedestrian generators and attractors include schools, child care and
aged care centres, community centres, shopping centres and retail strips, recreation
facilities (e.g. pools, sports facilities and parks), licensed clubs, places of worship and public
transport facilities (railway stations and bus stops). The prioritisation of the pedestrian
network is closely linked to the proximity to facilities as discussed in Section 5.
Major generators and attractors located within the study area include:
• train stations;
• Retail and restaurant uses along the five key focus centres (King Street/ Enmore Road,
Marrickville Road/ Illawarra Road; Dulwich Hill village, Petersham/ New Canterbury
Road, and Parramatta Road
• Marrickville Metro Shopping Centre;
• Parks; and
• Recreational reserves.
The location of trip generators and attractors was central to the PAMP network development
and the prioritisation of the Action Recommendations.
3.2.3 Proposed Developments
Marrickville has a long history of urban development. Some old developments are gradually
undergoing a renewal process. There are opportunities for some sites to be redeveloped in
the future as identified in the Marrickville Village Centres Urban Design Study 2009. The
revision of the Local Environmental Plan (LEP) would also create further opportunities for
commercial and residential development in the commercial centres.
3.2.4 Opportunities
Recreation Reserves
Reserves, waterfront reserves and open space facilities throughout the study area provide
some opportunities for walking paths, as well as passive and active recreational areas for
walking. Larger parks present opportunities for pedestrian paths whilst smaller parks are
useful in providing on-road routes with off-road access, improving the safety and aesthetic
quality of the route. Open space facilities throughout the study area are shown Figure 5.
The major parks that can be found within the study area include Camperdown Park, Enmore
Park, Henson Park, Marrickville Park, Petersham Park and along Cooks River. Larger parks
in the area include: Camperdown Park, Camperdown Memorial Rest Park, O’Dea Reserve,
Petersham Park, Johnston Park, Arlington Reserve, Steel Park, Mackey Park, Tempe
Reserve, Enmore Park, Marrickville Park and Henson Park.
Road Crossing Opportunities
Opportunities for pedestrians to cross major roads safely occur at pedestrian crossings and
central refuges. Crossing opportunities are particularly important on busy State and
regional roads.
Through the community consultation process, as part of the PAMP development, concerns
were raised regarding road crossing facilities at a number of locations throughout the study
area. All issues raised during the consultation process have been included in Section 4.2.
In determining appropriate pedestrian crossing facilities, the recommendations of Section 3 -
Treatments for Pedestrians Crossing Roads of AUSTROADS Part 13, Pedestrians, 1995
should be taken into consideration.
3.2.5 Constraints
Railway Lines
Walking is constrained in the study area by the railway line. The railway lines run through
Marrickville around almost all sides of the LGA boundary. Either over bridges or
underpasses for vehicles and pedestrians are provided at major crossover of the railway line
and the roads. Additional crossings are also provided by a small number of pedestrian -
only underpasses, such as Stanmore, Petersham and Lewisham Stations and at Bedford
Street, Newtown. Pedestrian opportunities may be improved in the future through
construction of a pathway along the discussed Rozelle Goods Line – known as the
‘GreenWay Trail.’
Major Roads
Pedestrian activities within the study area are also significantly restricted by major traffic
routes. There are routes with high traffic volumes and high street side activities such as
Parramatta Road, King Street and Princess Highway.
Pedestrian Hazard Spots
Hazardous locations for pedestrians have been identified through community consultation
and crash data. These are shown in Section 4.2 and presented in Appendix C.
3.3 Pedestrian Accident Statistics
3.3.1 Pedestrian Accident Distribution and Type - 2007
The accident data was central to the PAMP network development and the prioritisation of
the Action Recommendations.
RTA pedestrian accident data has been reviewed for 2007 for the Marrickville LGA. In 2007,
47 pedestrian accidents were recorded in the study area. One of these accidents involved a
fatality. It occurred in 2007 at the Enmore Road / Station Street intersection at Newtown.
The distribution of these pedestrian accidents through the areas is detailed in Table 2:
Table 2 Marrickville Pedestrian Accidents/ Injuries 2007 (within the study area)
Degree of Accident Total % Total
1 Fatal 1 2%
2 Injury 46 98%
Total 47 100%
Most of the accidents involving pedestrians occurred near to the side of the road (52%).
The far side accidents are the second most common type of accident. Table 3 summarises
the pedestrian accidents by the location of pedestrians.
Table 3 Location of Pedestrians Involved Accidents, 2007
RUM code Location of Pedestrian Total % Total
00 Near Side 24 52%
01 Emerging 5 11%
03 Playing, Working etc. 1 2%
04 Walking with Traffic 0 0%
05 Facing Traffic 1 2%
06 On Footpath/Median 1 2%
07 Exiting/Entering Driveway 1 2%
09 and others Others 1 0%
Total 47 100%
Note: RUM refers to the Road User Movement coding used by the RTA to categorise accident types, an
explanation of terms: near side, emerging and far side are shown in the diagrams below.
3.3.2 Pedestrian Accident History 2003-2007
The locations of the reported pedestrian accidents history for year 2003 – 2007 are shown
in Figure 7. Figure 7 shows the major accident clusters tend to occur in or near major
commercial areas where the number of pedestrian and motor vehicle traffic movements are
at its highest.
Pedestrian Accident Clusters
From the five years accident data, it can be summarised that major pedestrian accidents
clusters are located at:
• Intersection of Stanmore Road and Crystal Street
3.4 Council’s Current Road Safety Program
Marrickville Council has an ongoing Road Safety Program. It encompasses road safety
education (behavioural as well as implementation of infrastructure designed to improve
safety for all road users.
New pedestrian crossing facilities are investigated as the demand for crossing facilities
arises from the community. Council also conducts site visits at locations where there is an
opportunity for new crossing provision. RTA’s warrant for traffic facilities are observed in
considering the appropriate type of crossing to be provided.
Figure 6 Marrickville Pedestrian Accidents 2007
Figure 7 Marrickville Pedestrian Accident History 2003-2007
4 COMMUNITY CONSULTATION
Consultation was considered to be an essential part of the PAMP development to ensure
public needs were considered and incorporated into the PAMP route development and
action recommendations.
4.1 Media and Web Site Coverage
A web site information page were prepared by Arup and issued to Marrickville Council for
release (Appendix A). The information about the PAMP study was published on the
Council’s web page From March to April 2009. These items sought input from the
Marrickville community in the preparation of the PAMP.
Direct feedback was received from members of the public, raising issues regarding the
pedestrian environment. Ninety five online submissions and five mail back questionnaires
were received from individuals and community groups.
4.2 Questionnaire Surveys
Questionnaires were distributed throughout the study area to capture the community’s
comments on pedestrian access issues. A sample of the questionnaire is included in
Appendix B. About 85 questionnaires were posted to community groups and businesses in
Marrickville schools, churches, day care centres, health centres and Chamber of Commerce
etc. The list of organisations contacted was provided by Marrickville Council. The
questionnaire was also made available on Marrickville Council’s website to allow resident
feedback.
A total of 100 completed questionnaires were received (95 from online submissions, 5 from
mail back questionnaires). In general, the questionnaires focussed upon the following
issues:
• What are the travel patterns of Marrickville residents?
• Where are the major problem locations in relation to pedestrian safety, access and
mobility in the study areas?
• What facilities (and where) could be upgraded/provided in the study area to improve
pedestrian safety, access and mobility?
Key issues were identified through questionnaires and summarised below.
Mode of transport
When asked about the modes of transport the Marrickville community used to travel within
the LGA, walking was indicated as the main transport mode. Private vehicle and bus were
indicated as second and third respectively most popular transport options as indicated by
Figure 8.
What are your main modes of transport?
private vehicle, 23%
Concerns over facilities
In general the community have concerns regarding the safety of Marrickville’s footpaths and
pedestrian facilities that they are not easy to use.
The five main facilities community members were concerned about included:
• Pedestrian safety on footpaths and crossings
• Footpath design – width and clutter
• Uneven footpath surfaces
• Cars travelling at high speeds
Examples of pedestrian concerns are shown in the following images. A summary of
comments and issues are represented on the chart below in Figure 9.
Photograph 1 Footpath obstructed by parked vehicles on Murray Street near Smidmore Street
Photograph 2 Cracked footpath on Victoria Road near Mitchell Road
Issues and main concerns from Questionnaires
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Figure 9 Issues and Main concerns expressed in Questionnaires
The questionnaire also asked respondents to map and locate areas that were of particular
concern. The locations of the pedestrian issues are mapped in Figure 10. Areas where a
high number of concerns were indicated include:
• King Street surrounding Newtown Station
• Along Illawarra Road near Marrickville Station
• Marrickville Road and New Canterbury Road near Dulwich Hill shopping area
• Marrickville Road near Sydenham Station
• Enmore Road near Enmore Park
• Salisbury Road near Stanmore Station
Figure 10 Locations of issues and concerns gathered from Questionnaires
Improvements needed
These concerns were reflected in the facilities that community members felt needed
improving. The five main improvements included:
• Increased pedestrian crossing opportunities
• Improved lighting and security
• Providing pedestrian barriers on busy roads to stop illegal crossings
5 PEDESTRIAN NETWORK AND FACILITIES STANDARD
5.1 Pedestrian Route Network
The Marrickville PAMP route network is shown on Figure 11. The high and low priority
routes were established by examining the following factors:
• the location of pedestrian accidents;
• hazardous locations identified through the community consultation process;
• key pedestrian routes identified through the community consultation process;
• the location of pedestrian generators and attractors; and
• path nature / function.
5.2 Facilities Standard
A general facility standard guideline was developed for this study area in the Marrickville
based on the literature review, comments from the public consultation process and nature of
the pedestrian demand and environment in the study area. General standards and
recommendations are presented in this section while recommendations for high priority
routes and low priority routes are presented in Sections 5.4 - 5.3. These pedestrian network
and facilities standard are aimed to assist council in developing a consistent approach to
pedestrian provision within the study area.
The Standards and Guidelines are subject to revision by Australian Standards,
AUSTROADS and other authorities. It is to be noted that new Australian Standards for traffic
management are being developed to be released in February 2010. Current AUSTROADS
standards apply but should be regularly updated against the latest source documents.
5.2.1 Path Surface and Dimension
5.2.1.1 Path Provision
Path surface and dimensions standards and guidelines are addressed in AUSTROADS Part
13: Pedestrians, AUSTROADS Part 14: Bicycles and in the Australian Standard 1428
series. According to AUSTROADS, all roads (with the exception of an Access Place)
should have some type of walking facility out of the vehicle path. A separate walkway is
preferable; however a roadway shoulder can also provide safer pedestrian accommodation
than walking in traffic lanes.
The building edge should be kept clear of any obstructions such as outdoor dining areas,
retail activities, and other structures, to provide for a consistent walking path. For locations
where such obstruction is necessary, the clear width of the remaining footpath should meet
the minimum standard and the obstruction should be delineated from the footpath with
structure, texture, or colour where feasible to warn and direct all users including vision-
impaired persons.
5.2.1.2 Path Surface
Surface treatments should be stable, firm even and relatively smooth but slip resistant. It is
also important for many people that surfaces be flat. The AS 1428.1 states that “All
continuous accessible paths of travel shall have a slip-resistant surface. A continuous
accessible path of travel shall have a texture that is traversable by a wheelchair. Grates on
an accessible path of travel shall have spaces not more than 13mm wide and not more than
150 mm long.”
Figure 11 Marrickville PAMP Route Network
Table 4 Footpath Surface Texture Traversable by Wheelchair
Non-Slip Surface Texture
2) Concrete with exposed aggregate finish
3) Bituminous concrete
5) Paving bricks with special abrasive finish
6)Slip- resistant tiles
5.2.1.3 Path Dimensions
Path dimensions are addressed in AS 1428 and AUSTROADS Part 13 & 14. The clear
requirements outlined in these documents are provided in Table 5.
Table 5 Width Requirements for Paths
Type of Use Required width General minimum width Absolute minimum width
1.2m 0.9m
High pedestrian volumes 2.4m or greater depending on demand For wheelchairs to pass Absolute minimum
1.8m 1.5m
For people with disabilities 1.0m to 1.8m For shared (joint use with bicycles) where Cyclist passing in opposite directions are rare Two way cyclists are common, minimal pedestrians Two way cyclists and pedestrians are common
2.0m 2.5m 3.0m
Source: AUSTROADS Part 13: Pedestrian, p18
In general a minimum footpath width of 1.2m is considered adequate. However, in high
demand locations, such as transport nodes, commercial and main retail locations and
entrances to schools, etc., a wider width is recommended.
AS 1428 adopts a minimum height clearance of 2.0m above the trafficable surface with a
preferred height clearance of at least 2.4m.
In addition to this, AS1428 also lists requirements for the design of sloped footpaths. The
requirements for landings of at least 1.2m long and maximum lengths of sloped footpaths
are dependent on the gradient of the slope. These are included in Table 6 below.
Table 6 Design Requirements for Sloped Walkways
Gradient (constant along whole length)
Maximum length between landing
1 in 20 15m
(1)
Between 1:33 and 1:20 Linear interpolation from above Ramp 1 in 14
(2) 9m
(2) Calculated by linear interpolation
(1) Maximum length can be increased by 30% if one side of a walkway is bound by handrail as specified in AS 1428.1.
(2) Handrails as specified in AS 1428.1 shall be provided on both sides of the ramp
Furthermore, crossfall on footpaths should be as flat as practicable, consistent with
achieving an adequately drained surface. Excessive crossfall causes problems for people
in wheelchairs and prams. AS1428.1 specifies that any crossfall of ramps and walkways
should not exceed 1:40.
5.2.1.4 Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSI)
According to AS 1428.4, TGSI can be used to “alert people who are blind or vision impaired
to pending obstacles or hazards on, or changes in direction and location points of, the
continuous accessible path of travel, where those hazards or changes could not reasonably
be expected or anticipated using existing tactile and environmental cues.
The Standard states that “when the kerb ramp is the only crossing entry point and the
footpath is 3.0m or less, and the grade of the kerb ramp is greater than 1 in 8.5, TGSI are
not required on face of kerb ramp”.
5.2.2 Crossing Facilities
At all road crossings, kerb ramps should be provided for pedestrians to gain access to
roadway with minimum impediment. They are also essential for people in wheelchairs and
other pedestrians with mobility impairments. Kerb ramps should be aligned in the direction
of travel.
For non-standard kerb ramp design and placement, the following should be satisfied:
• The ramp path should be at least 1 metre wide,
• The ramp should land within the pedestrian crossing zone and not into vehicle paths.
This is of particular concerns for kerb ramps at corners.
• There should be no lip or step.
• The link between the path of travel and the offset kerb ramp should be paved.
• There should be at least 1 metre clear width of footpath around the kerb ramp to allow
most wheelchairs to pass without being affected by the grade changes in the kerb ramp.
Determining the appropriate crossing facility to install is mostly dependent on pedestrian
and traffic volumes as well as the nature of the surrounding area. According to
AUSTROADS the provision of formal pedestrian crossing facilities should be considered
when at least one of the following conditions exist:
• Whenever there is the need for increase visibility and designation of the crossing area,
where pedestrians cross at numerous locations along a short section of road and a
formal crossing would serve to channel pedestrian crossing activity to a single point;
• Where there is substantial conflict between motorist and pedestrian movements;
• Where the best location for pedestrians to cross may be unclear due to geometric or
traffic operational conditions; and
• At locations recommended as part of the “Safer Routes to Schools” scheme.
Australian Standard 1742.10 specifies installation guidelines in the form of numerical
warrants for the establishment of a crossing.
In additional to these numerical warrants, AUSTROADS also provides a guide to the most
appropriate crossing type for each road classification. This guide is included in Table 7.
Table 7 Suitability of Crossing Type
Facility Road Classification Primary Arterial (non-
freeway)
Local Street
Pedestrian operated signals A A C Pedestrian device should not be needed
Pelican B A C Pedestrian operated school signals A A B Pedestrian (zebra) crossing C B B Children’s crossing C B A Pedestrian refuges B B A Footpath (kerb) extension C B A Road narrowings, indented parking, kerb extension, line marking
C C A
A Most likely to be appropriate treatment B May be an appropriate treatment C Inappropriate treatment
Source: AUSTROADS Part 13: Pedestrian, pp 28-29
It should be noted that neither numerical warrants, nor the guidelines provided above should
be taken as the sole criteria for determining the requirement for a particular facility.
AUSTROADS recommends that a careful engineering study be conducted, considering
matters such as safety and capacity to fully determine the need for a crossing facility.
5.2.3 Other Facilities
Bus Shelters
AUSTROADS recommends that all bus stops should be provided with adequate signage,
lighting, and related treatments to clearly identify them. All shelters should be adequately lit,
have Australian Standard seating and be as draught proof as possible. All bus stops should
also be accessible.
Street Furniture
According to AS 1428.2 all items of street furniture should be positioned away from the path
of travel and should be of a colour which contrasts with its background. Where possible,
furniture should not be positioned along the building line as it is used as a physical cue for
people with sight impairments.
All seating should meet the standard measurements listed in the design standards reference
(Appendix D). In addition, AS 1428.2 states that in areas of high use by people with
ambulatory disabilities, such as areas frequented by elderly peoples, seats should be
provided no more than 60m apart alongside the path of travel.
Directional Signage
The issue of directional signage placement is addressed in AUSTROADS Part 13. For a
standing person signs should be placed less than 10° above or below eye level; for a seated
person signs within 15° of eye level are acceptable. Signs mounted between 900mm and
1.5m from the group level provide the most appropriate compromise between the
requirements of seated and standing people. All signs should be placed within 30°
horizontally of the direction of travel to allow them to be easily read whilst maintaining a
clear path of travel.
5.3 High Priority Routes
5.3.1 Definition
In general, high priority routes are routes that provide access to the most significant
pedestrian attractors and generators, particularly those connecting to major public transport
nodes. They also form the skeleton of the pedestrian network and provide the pedestrian
trunk routes through the study area. These routes would often experience high pedestrian
demand. Typical examples are routes accessing railway stations and major shopping
areas.
All roads in the study area should have paved footpaths on both sides, with a minimum
width of 2.4 metres where possible. The paths provided should meet the minimum
dimension requirements stated in Section 5.2.1.
All paths of travel along high priority routes should be fitted with Australian Standard kerb
ramps. Tactile indicators (Section 5.2.1.4) should be provided at crossing points, steps,
ramps and other obstacles if it is appropriate. Additional requirements outlined in Section
5.2.1 such as type and positioning of grates should also be adhered to.
The installation of crossing facilities would be dependent on the ability of a location to meet
the numerical warrants, taking into account the local features of the area. At intersections
with major traffic routes where crossing opportunities are limited, pedestrian crossings
should be considered. Provision of additional crossings is a consideration for Council’s
Local Area Traffic Management Scheme program.
5.3.4 Lighting
Lighting meeting the AS 1158 requirements is recommended for all pedestrian generators
and attractors and around any hazard spots. Adequate lighting should also be provided at
crossing points.
Additional facilities recommended along high priority routes include bus shelters at key
stops, seating at all bus stops, directional signage, bins and seating at 60m to 100m
intervals. All additional facilities should meet the requirements outlined in Section 5.2.1.
Facilities should not be placed along the building edge as this is used as guidance by
persons with vision impairment.
The building edge should be kept clear of any obstructions such as outdoor dining areas,
retail activities, and other structures for the same reason. For locations where such
obstruction is necessary, the clear width of the remaining footpath should meet the minimum
standard and the obstruction should be delineated from the footpath with a structure that is
solid along the ground.
5.4 Low Priority Routes
5.4.1 Definition
In general, low priority routes provide access to pedestrian attractors and generators. They
also connect with the core high priority routes and extend the pedestrian network over the
study area. Some examples are routes to local shopping areas, bus routes and local parks.
All roads in the study area should have a paved footpath on both sides, with width of 1.2
metres minimal and 2.4 metres adjacent to key pedestrian generators. The paths provided
should meet the minimum dimension requirements stated in 5.2.1. Australian Standard kerb
ramps should be provided at road crossings along the path of travel.
The installation of crossing facilities would be dependent on the ability of a location to meet
the numerical warrants, taking into account the local features of the area. At intersections
with major traffic routes where crossing opportunities are limited, pedestrian crossings
should be considered even if warrants are not met.
5.4.4 Lighting
Lighting meeting the AS 1158 requirements is recommended for all pedestrian generators
and attractors and around any hazard spots. Lighting should also be adequate at crossing
points.
5.4.5 Other Facilities
It is recommended that bus shelters be provided along low priority routes at major stops
where pedestrians are not already protected by other structures such as building awnings.
As with the general route requirements, Australian Standard seating should also be
provided in areas frequented by the elderly.
6 ROUTE AUDITS AND RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
6.1 Prioritising Facilities
There are many actions that could be undertaken to improve conditions in the study area for
all pedestrians including the elderly and people with disabilities. These actions are
categorised as follows:
• all actions;
• actions for which Marrickville Council is primarily responsible (i.e. not State or Federal
Government, RTA, Education Department, Health Department etc);
• actions that differ by means of implementation (effectively the ‘4Es’ approach to non-
motorised transport used in Bikeplans: Engineering, Enforcement, Encouragement,
Education); and
• engineering actions able to be undertaken by Marrickville Council through the Action
Recommendations.
The PAMP has been developed as shown in the PAMP Methodology flowchart (Figure 4).
Within this, the Step 4 tasks are shown in more detail in the diagram that follows. Table 8
and Table 9 flowcharts provide a summary of the process.
6.1.1 Solution Assessment
For each problem that is considered worthy of further investigation, the potential solutions
available vary with the problem type and the road environment. The different road
environments are:
• Local road;
Typical solutions for the various problem type/road environment combinations have been
considered. For some problem types the optimal solution may be a combination of actions.
For each problem under investigation, each potential solution is assessed against a set of
performance criteria. The five assessment criteria used are:
• benefit to pedestrians;
• impact on other road users (including 'cross' public transport routes);
• cost;
• local impacts (social, environmental etc).
Table 8 Problem Ranking and Solution Assessment Method
High Medium Low
Audit Sheet for Priority (red) Routes
Do you wish
Prioritise
sub-routes
Prioritise
Actions
Solution
Table 9 Solution Assessment Chart
Description of solution to be tested:
Solution Criteria Score
(s) Weight* (w)
Benefit to pedestrians
Cost
Assessment with respect to Government strategies
-2 -1 0 1 2
Local impacts
Total Score
* The weights attributed to each criterion are fixed by the relevant agency or agencies responsible for design, funding and implementation
The performance of each potential solution is scored against each criterion using simple,
easily identifiable measures. The overall performance of each potential solution is then
established by combining its performance against the full set of criteria into a single score.
This could be achieved by weighting the criteria according to their relative importance, as
shown in the sample sheet in Table 8. Determination of the weights to be applied to the
various criteria could be achieved by polling representatives of the various groups with an
interest in maintenance, development and operations of transport infrastructure and
government services. A mechanism for consolidating these views into common weighting of
the criteria has been developed. This is an extension of the method applied in the Social
Audit approach used by Arup in ranking projects in other multi-dimensional evaluation
framework (Singleton & Hulse, 1989).
Application of this method would allow each potential solution to be assigned an overall
performance score. The scores of the range of potential solutions could be compared to
identify the most appropriate solution (or combination of solutions) for the problem under
investigation. In some cases, the scores may also identify that no solution is appropriate.
For the current PAMP study, these assessments and weightings were estimated, rather
than calculated for each problem and set of potential solutions.
6.1.2 Application
The data collection program was felt to represent the level of survey effort likely to be
possible under full implementation of the assessment program.
Actions were assessed subjectively using the assessment procedure described above,
applying arbitrary weights. Although no significance can be assigned to the final score
because of the arbitrary weights applied, the procedure was considered to be able to
provide differentiation in the rating of potential solutions.
This assessment confirms the value of the implementation procedure in a number of
respects. Firstly, the procedure provides a mechanism for identifying operational problems
worthy of attention. Secondly, it invites the designer to consider a range of potential
solutions, rather than only the most obvious solution. Thirdly, it provides a means of
assessing the performance of those potential solutions not only against operational
objectives but also against broader community goals. The procedure therefore is likely to
generate solutions, appropriate to operational and community needs, to the most important
problems confronting the PAMP study.
Prioritisation has been considered on two levels - the location of the works and the nature of
the works. The high priority routes have been selected through the route network selection
process outlined below in section 6.2. Identified works on those routes have been
prioritised as high or low. The prioritisation of works is based on:
• Safety and Access - crossing opportunities, kerb ramps, minimum paths of travel, and
repairing footpath cracks.
6.2 The Audit Process
A physical access audit of the high priority routes (Figure 11) within the study area was
completed in June 2009. Auditing of the low priority routes is outside of the scope of this
study.
6.2.1 Pedestrian Facility Deficiencies Identified
The key focus of the audit was to identify access barriers for pedestrians with a specific
focus on access for less mobile pedestrians such as the elderly and people with disabilities.
The identified barriers found in a number of cases included:
• Uneven footpath surface
• Kerb ramp not align with the direction of travel
• lip, step or no kerb ramps; and
• footpath obstructions (e.g. poorly placed trees, bus shelters, signage, retail activities
impinging on paths of travel.
Other individual barriers were identified and highlighted within audit spreadsheets
(Appendix E).
The locations of items that need to be addressed were also mapped in Figure 12 to Figure
14.
6.2.2 Crossing Opportunities identified
During the audit, along the High Priority Route, the following locations were identified for
opportunities of crossing facilities provision.
Table 10 Crossing Opportunities Identified
Audit ID Location Opportunity
south connections to facilitate permeability
through the area.
west arms
St from New Canterbury Rd creates
uncertainty for pedestrians crossing Herbert
St.
is no a signal or signage to respond to the
pedestrian movement along Parramatta Rd at
Percival Rd. The high traffic movement from
Percival Rd onto Parramatta Rd creates
uncertainty for pedestrians crossing Percival
Rd.
Signalised crossing
It is recommended that the identified locations to be investigated referring to the RTA
numerical warrants and the crossing facilities guidelines to determine the need for a suitable
crossing facility.
Figure 12 Footpath Audit – Footpath Issues
Figure 13 Footpath Audit – Footpath Obstruction, Drainage and Lighting Issues
Figure 14 Footpath Audit – Kerb Ramp Issues
Figure 15 Footpath Audit – Bus Stop Issues and Crossing Opportunities
6.3 Issues Arising from the Audit
Full list of the issues arising from the footpath audit is included in Appendix E. Each issue
has a unique ID number that links to the issues maps and the corresponding information in
the audit spreadsheet. Photos of the audited issues are documented in the Audit Photos
CD provided in Appendix F.
6.3.1 Kerb Ramp Issues
The audit found that most of the kerb ramps are provided along the footpath in the study
area. However, some ke