Agenda of City Infrastructure Committee Meeting

Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting

Page 16

20/11/2019

REPORT TITLE: Proposed Implementation of Safety Treatment on Shared Footpath on Davey Street Between Hunter Street and Evans Street

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Acting Manager Traffic Engineering

Director City Planning

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of this report is to advise the Committee of a proposal to implement low cost effective treatments aimed at addressing the conflict between pedestrians and cyclists at Davey Street between Hunter Street and Evans Street, Hobart.

1.2. The community benefit of the proposed treatments are that it would allow a treatment that has the potential to resolve a long standing vulnerable road user safety issue involving conflict between pedestrians and cyclists.

2. Report Summary

2.1. Over many years, concerns have been raised with the City of Hobart about the safety of pedestrians and cyclists on the footpath along the frontage of the ‘Zero Davey’ complex on Davey Street between Evans Street and Hunter Street, Hobart.

2.2. There have been a number of incidents of collisions between cyclists and pedestrians, with serious and minor injuries having occurred to both pedestrians and to cyclists.

2.3. A consultant CDM Research has provided independent advice on the treatments and options that could resolve the conflict issue. These include low cost effective measures such as transverse line marking across the footpath and bicycle activated lights. Other options that were recommended were:

· The widening of the footpath outside Zero Davey Hotel and relocation of bus drop off zone at the head of Hunter Street.

· The removal of the taxi zone on the northern side of Davey Street to allow for a dedicated on-road bicycle lane to be installed.

Both options above would require approval from the Department of State Growth as the works involves modification of the road carriageway on Davey Street. In addition, there is a significant cost associated with the implementation of these options and the design will need to be carefully considered.

2.4. A step by step approach that aims to resolve the pedestrian and cyclist conflict is proposed. The first stage focusses on increasing awareness of both cyclist and pedestrians of the likely presence of other riders and pedestrians by providing visual and vibratory signals to both users through:

· The inclusion of coloured pavement markings at high risk conflict areas.

· The removal of existing centreline of shared path at the conflict areas (where coloured pavement will be installed).

· The installation of tactile ground surface indicators (TGSI’s) at the approach to the main entrance to the Zero Davey hotel, the café and outside the bus stop.

· The installation of low profile rumble strips or “Vibra” rubber strips.

· The installation of new “Shared Path” and “Bicyclist Slow” warning signage at Evans Street and Hunter Street.

2.5. The second stage will be implemented initially as a trial, only if the conflict issues between pedestrian and cyclists on Davey Street between Hunter Street and Evans Street are not resolved. The second stage is an innovative attempt to improve the overall safety and comfort of this section of footpath for pedestrians and cyclists by the installation of a series of barriers spaced 3m apart (creating a chicane type arrangement). This treatment will enable:

· Cyclists to slow down to pass between the barriers;

· Pedestrians with prams, strollers or wheelchairs are able to still move through the treatment;

· Cyclists riding recumbent bicycles, or bicycles with trailers will be able to still manoeuvre through the treatment.

2.6. It is hoped that this treatment, if required to be adopted, will result in cyclists routinely moving through this area at lower speeds than they do currently, and that by reducing the overall speed of cyclists the incidences of conflict between cyclists and pedestrians will be reduced in both number and severity.

2.7. It is proposed that the stage 2 treatment would be installed as a trial for three months, and that the treatment would be observed and the behaviour of footpath users recorded. A decision will be made based on the results if this treatment is effective in reducing speeds of the cyclist.

3. Recommendation

That the two stage approach for resolving conflict between pedestrians and cyclists on the footpath along the frontage of the ‘Zero Davey’ complex on Davey Street between Evans Street and Hunter Street, Hobart as outlined in section 5 of this report be endorsed.

4. Background

4.1. The Hobart Intercity Cycleway is a generally off-street shared pedestrian and cyclist path the runs along the railway corridor between the Hobart Waterfront and Claremont.

4.2. In the vicinity of the Hobart Waterfront, the Intercity Cycleway separates from the railway corridor in the vicinity of the Hobart Cenotaph, and utilises the footpath on the southern side of the Tasman Highway – Davey Street corridor to access the Hobart Waterfront.

4.3. Currently, the formal designation of the footpath as a shared cycling / pedestrian path applies north of Hunter Street.

4.4. Over many years, concerns have been raised with the City of Hobart about the safety of pedestrians and cyclists on the footpath along the frontage of the ‘Zero Davey’ complex on Davey Street between Evans Street and Hunter Street.

4.5. There have been a number of incidents of collisions between cyclists and pedestrians, with injuries having occurred to both pedestrians and to cyclists.

4.6. The primary concern is the interaction between pedestrians entering / exiting either a vehicle (taxi’s, passenger cars and buses) parked in the 5 minute parking zone along the frontage of the Zero Davey Hotel premises itself, and cyclists riding along the shared footpath in front of the subject site. This interaction, while likely to only result in a collision with injuries every 3 to 5 years, is uncomfortable and a continued source of public complaint

4.7. Historically, City of Hobart has made a number of changes to line marking signage, and street furniture in this area in response to past collisions to mitigate the risks associated with this issue. These include alterations to the centre line separating direction of flow and the installation of signage on footpath.

4.8. This conflict issue has been reviewed independently by CDM Research in 2012 and 2017.

4.8.1. In the report dated 2012, CDM Research recommended the following improvements that could potentially improve the situation.

· The addition of extra transverse line marking across the footpath and bicycle activated lights. The intent of these treatments is to make cyclists and pedestrians more aware of the possible presence of each other;

· The removal of the parking lane from immediately in front of the Zero Davey Hotel, and widening of the footpath to allow cyclists to be moved further from the doorways, and an installation of a bus drop-off zone indented into the head of Hunter Street, with a short 2 vehicle parking zone left in front of the Zero Davey Café;

· The removal of the Taxi Zone on the northern side of Davey Street, to allow a dedicated on-road bicycle lane to be installed by moving the existing traffic lanes northwards into the space currently occupied by the Taxi Zone.

4.8.2. In the most recent report prepared by Cameron Munro, it was suggested that transverse yellow markings (using a thicker application) be installed at the point where pedestrians cross the footpath. The yellow lines are expected to present both a visual and physical signal. Another suggestion was to provide cyclist actuated warning signs or pavement lighting. This report also noted that there is no evidence that these treatments would be effective in the reduction of speeds of cyclists or improve the safety for pedestrians.

4.8.3. In this report, the use of chicanes was mentioned as an “aggressive infrastructure treatment” that should be considered only as a last resort. In the later report, CDM advised that the use of chicanes would impede the movement of the majority of bicycle riders and pedestrians.

4.8.4. Chicanes are considered a low cost effective treatment that will directly resolve the underlying issue, which is the speed in which cyclists ride on the footpath. Although speeds may not be excessively high in the area, it is considered that the speeds in which cyclist ride in this location do result in injury crashes.

4.8.5. The chicane treatment would, like the original installation of other traffic calming devices such as road humps and ‘slow’ points, would be a cause of inconvenience to the footpath users that the devices would force to slow to a more appropriate speed.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that a staged approach be adopted where the first step to mitigating the issue will be tested through additional visual cues and vibratory signals. The installation of the second stage treatment will commence only if the safety issues with the interaction of cyclist and pedestrians continue following the implementation of stage 1 treatment.

5.2. Stage 1

5.2.1. The installation of coloured pavement markings located in the path of crossing pedestrians outside Zero Davey Hotel and café on the corner of Davey Street and Evans Street to highlight the conflict areas. An example of the coloured pavement are provided at the access to the Mures car park further south on Davey Street.

5.2.2. The installation of “Shared Path” and “Bicyclist Slow” advisory warning signage at the Hunter Street and Evans Street approach.

5.2.3. Removal of white centre line in the locations where transverse yellow line markings are located to avoid confusion for cyclists and make them aware of crossing area.

5.2.4. Provide low profile rumble strips prior to the entrance to Zero Davey across the full pathway to reinforce to cyclists of the hazard. Alternatively a product that may produce similar outcomes to rumble strips is “Vibra Strip” which is a rubber corrugated strip that gives a vibratory warning signal to the cyclist.

5.2.5. Install tactile markers at hotel and café entrance points where people step onto the shared path.

Text Box: Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSI)

Text Box: Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSI) Text Box: Coloured Pavement Surface at high risk zones

5.3. This treatment predominately aims to increase the awareness of both cyclists and pedestrians of the likely presence of other riders and pedestrians through the high risk zones.

5.4. This treatment (with the use of coloured pavement, rumble strips/vibra strip and TGSI’s) is intended to send a message to cyclists that they are entering the Hobart waterfront, a high pedestrian usage zone and this area differs from the activity on the shared path north of Evans Street.

5.5. Stage 2

Stage 2 is intended to be installed (initially as a trial) if there are still issues (such as reported near misses) with cyclist and pedestrian conflict at the “Zero Davey” complex following the installation of the first stage. This treatment aims to moderate cyclist speeds by installing a series of three barriers spaced evenly apart so that (See attached plan and memo):

· Cyclists will need to slow down to pass between them;

· Pedestrians with prams, strollers or wheelchairs are able to still move through the treatment;

· Cyclists riding recumbent bicycles, or bicycles with trailers will be able to still manoeuvre through the treatment.

5.6. It is hoped that this treatment outlined as stage 2 will result in cyclists routinely moving through this area at lower speeds than they do currently, and that by reducing the overall speed of cyclists the incidences of conflict between cyclists and pedestrians will be reduced in both number and severity.

5.7. This is a similar approach to that often used on roads, where by installing treatments that reliably reduce the speed of motor vehicles (such as road humps, or roundabouts, or chicanes) we can improve the overall safety of a road for all road users including cyclists and pedestrians.

5.8. If the treatment proves successful in reducing vehicle speeds and improving pedestrian safety, this change would likely come at a reduced amenity for cyclists on the route.

5.9. It is proposed that the trial of this treatment would be installed for a period of three months and that the treatment would be observed and the behaviour of footpath users recorded. A decision would then be made about trying alternative treatments, or looking to implement the slow point as a permanent treatment.

5.10. Any issues observed relating to the presence of chicanes during the trial will result in the removal of this treatment.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. Matters of road safety are supported by Strategic Objective 2.1 of the Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025 as follows:

“2.1 A fully accessible and connected city environment.

2.1.3 Identify and Implement infrastructure improvements to enhance road safety.”

7. Financial Implications

7.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1. The cost coloured pavement markings and rumble strips are expected to be minimal.

7.1.2. The purchase of materials for the “chicane” trial will cost in the order of $2,100. The installation will be undertaken by the City of Hobart.

7.1.3. Funds for the stage 1 and stage 2 works are available in the current financial year operating budget.

8. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1. The Transport Commission, pursuant to Section 59 of the Traffic Act 1925 has issued a direction to Tasmanian Highway Authorities (Transport Commission Direction – 2014/2) that requires those authorities to only install traffic signs and linemarking in compliance with the Australian Standard Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, consider the AustRoads national guidelines, and to comply with Department of State Growth specifications and standard drawings.

8.2. The City of Hobart is currently responsible for managing the footpaths on the Davey Street road reserve, with the Department of State Growth being responsible for the road areas between the kerblines.

8.3. The interactions between cyclists and pedestrians on the Davey Street footpath between Evans Street and Hunter Street has been raised by members of the community, and the City of Hobart has received advice that the existing situation needs to be addressed.

9. Community and Stakeholder Engagement

9.1. The stage 1 works has been discussed with a member of Cycling South and are in support of the treatments.

9.2. The trial of the chicanes is supported by the frontage property.

9.3. The proposal of the “chicane” trial was discussed at the Hobart Active Travel Committee meeting in October 2019. The HATC had significant concerns about the proposal of the slow point put forward. The following issues were raised.

· Concern that there will be difficulties for people with visual impairments to negotiate the chicanes;

· Adequacy of lighting in the location proposed for the slow point;

· Suggestion that an alternative treatment of providing planter boxes on either side of the pathway and a coloured concrete surface at the entrance to the hotel to indicate a shared space, be considered;

· Concerns that there are three barriers (creating the slow point) and wondering if this could be reduced to two in a similar way to how the treatment is provided at the Intercity cycleway;

· Suggesting that given there are expected to be only 1 injury crash per 3 to 5 years at this location, whether installing a treatment is necessary, and whether it risks causing more injuries than it could resolve.

The following comments are made in relation to these matters:

· The slow point will be an obstacle for people with visual impairments. They like other users will need to manoeuvre through and around the treatment;

· The point where the treatment would be installed is immediately underneath two pedestrian streetlights, and will be appropriately and well lit.

· Alternative treatments including surface treatments, signage, and line marking are certainly options. They are however less likely to be effective in reducing speed, and can be difficult to install and remove in a clean way that doesn’t mark and discolour the surface. There would certainly be potential to try an alternative treatment of this type;

· The slow point treatment is proposed with three barriers (creating the slow point) rather than the more normal two as provided at the Intercity cycleway because when a mock treatment was installed and inspected on the Zero Davey Street footpath with two barriers, it was apparent that this was ineffective in reducing speeds. By adding a third barrier in the mock treatment at the site, it was determined that speeds were reduced reliably, while still allowing sufficient space for cyclists to manoeuvre;

· Not treating the site is a valid option. If treatments that are effective and can be implemented without causing unreasonable negative impacts on the community are not able to be found, then this is the most likely option. The current proposal is essentially to test a potential treatment that may improve the situation. This may result in the treatment being determined to not be a viable treatment option.

10. Delegation

10.1. The Manager Traffic Engineering and all positions to which that position reports have delegation to approve changes to signage and line marking on those public streets for which the City of Hobart is the Highway Authority (except for speed limits, traffic signals and parking controls on State roads with a speed limit over 70 km/h).

As signatory to this report, I certify that, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, I hold no interest, as referred to in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1993, in matters contained in this report.

Shivani Jordan

Acting Manager Traffic Engineering

Neil Noye

Director City Planning

Date: 15 November 2019

File Reference: F19/144836

Attachment a: Memo - Zero Davey Street - Pedestrian and Cyclist Conflict - June 2019 - 28/10/2019 ⇩

Attachment b: Concept Plan - Potential Treatment - Footpath - Davey Street - 27/12/2018 ⇩

Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting - 20/11/2019

Page 87

ATTACHMENT a

PDF Creator

People	We value people – our community, our customers and colleagues.
Teamwork	We collaborate both within the organisation and with external stakeholders drawing on skills and expertise for the benefit of our community.
Focus and Direction	We have clear goals and plans to achieve sustainable social, environmental and economic outcomes for the Hobart community.
Creativity and Innovation	We embrace new approaches and continuously improve to achieve better outcomes for our community.
Accountability	We work to high ethical and professional standards and are accountable for delivering outcomes for our community.