Ask Your Mates Open Forum

Footpath Scoring System

  • 1.  Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 26 August 2013 16:02
    Good Evening All, I'm Nicholas Green, A Graduate Planning Engineer at Baw Baw Shire Council. I've been directed here from Kurt Pitts my wonderful team leader. At the moment I've just taken over our Footpath Request & Scoring System. We are looking to overhaul the way in which we score our footpaths in order to determine priorities for future works etc efficiently. Kurt suggested that this forum would be a great place to start. Obviously there is no need to reinvent the wheel here, so I have made my first post on here to ask what other Engineers in similar positions have done. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks All, [IPWEA CEO Note: Nicholas, check out the IPWEA Practice Note on Condition Assessment of Footpaths & Cycleways at www.ipwea.org/PracticeNotes.] ------------------------------------------- Nicholas Green Bittern VIC -------------------------------------------
    BlogPageSpacerBlank


  • 2.  RE:Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 26 August 2013 16:08
    Sorry for the incorrect link to our Practice Notes. Try: http://www.ipwea.org/PracticeNotes ------------------------------------------- Chris Champion CEO, IPWEA Australasia Sydney NSW -------------------------------------------
    BlogPageSpacerBlank


  • 3.  RE:Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 28 August 2013 16:43
    The Mornington Peninsula Shire has developed a scoring system which we have been using very successfully for 7 years now. We also use the scoring system to determine any resident contribution required through a Special Charge Scheme and to prioritize works in a four year program where only the first two years are set in concrete. Happy to discuss at anytime. You could also talk to Peter Frazer (03 5950 1332) or check our web site..

    -------------------------------------------
    Alan Prentice
    Senior Infrastructure Planning Officer
    Mornington Peninsula Shire Council
    ROSEBUD VIC
    Ph 03 5950 1331
    -------------------------------------------






    BlogPageSpacerBlank


  • 4.  RE:Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 27 August 2013 03:06
    Hi Nicholas,

    I uploaded this visual footpath condition assessment guide to the IPWEA library last week.

    Please feel free to modify it to suit your needs.

    http://www.ipwea.org/Discussions/ViewAttachment/?MessageKey=44925c05-0947-4c23-a60d-03cdd5209176&DocumentKey=8bc6806c-3352-4b9c-942e-c60ac356cb47

    Regards,

    ------------------------------------------
    Wayne Eddy
    Strategic Asset Planning Coordinator
    City of Whittlesea
    BUNDOORA MDC VIC

    -------------------------------------------






    BlogPageSpacerBlank


  • 5.  RE:Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 28 August 2013 10:00
    Good Afternoon Chris & Wayne. Sorry for the misconception but what I was referring to is rather scoring of future footpath projects and the prioritizing behind determining the need for footpaths, as opposed to the condition assessment scoring of current footpaths, i.e. what volumes of foot traffic would we expect to use this footpath? What benefits are foreseeable if a certain footpath was introduced etc. Then referencing this with other options to then determine priorities. Thanks. ------------------------------------------- Nicholas Green Graduate Planning Engineer Bittern VIC -------------------------------------------
    BlogPageSpacerBlank


  • 6.  RE:Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 31 August 2013 07:03
    Nicholas,

    While I don't have a 'scoring system' for this sort of process I would look at continuity and feeds. Making footpath a continuous link thereby filling in the gaps of the network while looking at the feeders or more importantly the destinations or traffic generators. People usually walk to a bus stop but drive to shops. What is council policy regarding allowance for footpath, one side of road, both sides of road, shared networks? This should not be a problem with new subdivisions if the developer is doing the work I guess your problem is linking their work to your network.

    At a TAFE many years ago I observed that no footpaths were built in the first year and an analysis of where students walked evidenced by the path they trod became the footpaths. You could look at where evidence of foot traffic exists and footpaths don't. As for prioritising, you need to look at the traffic, no good building a footpath every one wants but no one uses. Traffic counting people may not be successful! Staged development might be an option where one side of a road is done and if demand is there the other side gets done.

    I don't think there is a simple answer here as politics will no doubt interfere with good science. You need a clear strategic plan or policy as to why you need footpaths and what they will do before you look at the tactical problems of where to build them. Not everything in life can be reduced to metrics.

    good luck.

    -------------------------------------------
    Ashley Bishop
    Asset Management Officer
    Benalla Rural City Council
    BENALLA VIC

    -------------------------------------------






    BlogPageSpacerBlank


  • 7.  RE:Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 01 September 2013 11:56
    Hi, At the City of Stirling in 2009, Council adopted the Integrated Transport Strategy placing pedestrians ahead of other transport modes and introducing the policy of constructing a footpath on at least one side of every street that is not a short cul de sac. Since then we have been addressing the 325 km of streets needing a footpath spending $2 million per year ($10/person/year). We score the need for a path using risk assessment principles. We take the road hierarchy (several levels added) to provide a 'hazard' score and multiply this by the sum of the origin/destination factors 'likelihood' score. Factors include proximity to schools, shops, aged housing, train stations, bus routes, equipped play areas, PAWs, beach accesses etc. Paths are then constructed strictly according to the matrix score which provides an unbiased justification in response to NIMBY objectors. Recently we have been refining the hazard score by (where data is available) allowing the matrix to substitute a hazard score based on actual traffic volume factorised by the variation of 85th percentile speed. This is providing a robust mechanism for prioritising new footpaths which is, because it is focused, is actually changing the dynamics of suburbs with some indications (need for some follow up research if we can find time) that bus patronage increases following a more coherent path provision. We avoided measuring worn verges as this would not show latent demand and was not a true measure of what the wider community needed, particularly those with a disability - include mums with prams and children on bikes in that. ------------------------------------------- Jon Offer Projects & Support Engineer City of Stirling -------------------------------------------
    BlogPageSpacerBlank


  • 8.  RE:Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 01 September 2013 22:25
    Nicholas

    Have a look at our Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan.  Section 6.3 has a weighted scoring criteria for what you are after.  Its available on our website.  Its based on RMS guidelines for the development of such.

    http://www.warringah.nsw.gov.au/your-council/plans-publications-and-policies/all-strategic-plans/warringah-pedestrian-access

    Regards

    Steve
    -------------------------------------------
    Steve Watson
    Road Asset Manager
    Warringah Council
    DEE WHY NSW

    -------------------------------------------






    BlogPageSpacerBlank


  • 9.  RE:Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 31 August 2013 07:11
    For what it's worth, colleagues, ARRB material on Livable Streets in the 80s and 90s concluded that an adequate pathway for pedestrians, separate from traffic, is needed on at least one side of all streets.  There are clear benefits (one might say "essential needs") for people with child buggies, walking aids and little children on foot.  Certainly we should be nervous about expecting all pedestrians to share the roadway with vehicles if the speeds are significantly above walking pace.  When we were asked about very low volume access ways, the best rule of thumb I came up with was that if the roadway has upstand kerbs, then that suggests that it is more than an "access way" or "driveway", and a footpath is probably warranted.  Who pays for it is another matter, but it ought to be a requirement in all your residential codes. 

    Cheers

    Ray

    -------------------------------------------
    Ray Brindle
    Editor, "Road and Transport Research"
    ARRB Group


    -------------------------------------------






    BlogPageSpacerBlank


  • 10.  RE:Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 31 August 2013 07:14
    Nicholas,

    While vehicle speeds, sight distance, shoulder parking, walking distance to schools and shops need to be taken into account in providing path paving, pedestrians seem generally happy to mix it with traffic up to about 800 VPD - above this they will start to head for a footpath.  This is usually apparent by the grass being worn away in locations where sufficient pedestrians feel the need to get away from the vehicular traffic, and thus should be the first to be paved.

    -------------------------------------------
    John Gould
    HUNTERVIEW NSW

    -------------------------------------------






    BlogPageSpacerBlank


  • 11.  RE:Footpath Scoring System

    Posted 20 September 2013 20:41
    The NZTA website has good info on pedestrian network design

    Also Austroads

    http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/pedestrian-planning-guide/index.html

    -------------------------------------------
    Peter Scott
    Auckland Transport

    -------------------------------------------






    BlogPageSpacerBlank