Lambton Quay Assessment Form
Lambton Quay Do Minimum
Lambton Quay Do Minimum
Lambton Quay Option 1
Lambton Quay Option 2
Lambton Quay Option 3
Provide a description of
Provide a description of
Provide a description of
Provide a description of
Provide a description of
Provide a description of
Provide an explanation
how the the scoring may
how the scoring may
Provide an explanation
how the the scoring may
how the scoring may
Provide an explanation
how the the scoring may
how the scoring may
Questions
Score Provide any commentary relevant A B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Score
of the rational behind change if loading bays were change if taxi's and loading
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Score
of the rational behind change if loading bays were change if taxi's and loading A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Score
of the rational behind change if loading bays were change if taxi's and loading
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
to the do minimum.
the score.
to be retained on the
bays were to be retained on
the score.
to be retained on the
bays were to be retained on
the score.
to be retained on the
bays were to be retained on
Golden Mile
the Golden Mile
Golden Mile
the Golden Mile
Golden Mile
the Golden Mile
Taxi's are a bigger concern for
Removal of general traffic
Taxi's are a bigger concern for
Inline bus stops at northern
Loading bays would need to be
buses, due to difficulties
regulates and improves JT and Loading bays would need to be
buses, due to difficulties
end are significant issue.
Loading assumed on ped areas
IO - Bus Travel time and reliability
0
Taxi's would severely impact
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Slight improvement to trave1 indented and may marginally
inregulating behaviour.
0.25
0.15
0.35
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.21
2
reliability. Reliability accounts indented and may marginally
inregulating behaviour.
0.5
0.3
0.7
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.42
1
Inline bus stops in general
outside of hours - no impact to
0.25
0.15
0.35
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.21
time and realiability only.
bus operations.
What are bus travel times along each segment?
decrease reliabilyt or jt.
Increased side friction will
for biggest scoring factor
decrease reliabilyt or jt.
Increased side friction will
degrade reliability (rounded
buses
What the variance of travel time / reliabilty of services along the segment?
reduce JT improvements.
(rounded from 1.5)
reduce JT improvements.
down from 1.25)
What is the bus volume throughput along the segment?
Larger bus bays at north end
Multiple flag boarding will
and johnston st closure offer
improve customer expreience.
significant improvements to
IO - Bus passenger boarding and alighting
Taxi's use bus stops illegally
Taxi's use bus stops illegally
Loading on ped areas may
Taxi's use bus stops illegally
0
Poor score for bus delay offset
Unlikely to impact bus
customer experience. This is
Unlikely to impact bus
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
and may impact bus
0.25
0.15
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.21
3
and may impact bus
0.75
0.45
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.63
2
Smaller bus stops will crowd reduce safety of customers at
and may impact bus
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.42
comfort and convenience
by marignal improvement in
customer convenience
offset by in line stop and bus
customer convenience
passengers.
customers.
customers.
bus stops.
customers.
location and available space.
bunching associated with
How many passengers may be cleared from bus stops?
What is the wait time at buses?
(rounded up from 0.5)
reduced stop frontage
How much bus stop crowding is there?
(rounded up from 2.5)
Subject to locations of loading
Subject to locations of taxi
General traffic removed,
Subject to locations of loading
Subject to locations of taxi
IO - Pedestrian safety
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Reduced general traffic SB,
zones - potential slight
ranks - potential slight
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.21
0
Parking and Loading removed,
zones - potential slight
ranks - potential slight
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0.4
0.4
0.2
1.2
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.42
removal of parking / loading
What is the potential for pedestrian accidents to be reduced?
reduction in score
reduction in score
side roads closed.
reduction in score
reduction in score
Improved footpath widths will Improvements to portions of Improvements to portions of
Improved footpath widths will Improvements to portions of Improvements to portions of
Improved footpath widths will Improvements to portions of Improvements to portions of
How many pedestrian crossing are along the corridor?
improve ped LoC, reduced
Lambton Quay footpath will
Lambton Quay footpath will
improve ped LoC, reduced
Lambton Quay footpath will
Lambton Quay footpath will
improve ped LoC, reduced
Lambton Quay footpath will
Lambton Quay footpath will
IO - Pedestrian capacity
What is the pedestrian delay per crossing?
0
No changes to available footpath width or
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0.2
0.2
0.35
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.18
2
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.36
2
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.36
1982
How many pedestrian crossings are across the corridor?
signal timings and
improve ped LoC and reduced improve ped LoC and reduced
signal timings and
still offer improved ped LoC
still offer improved ped LoC
signal timings and
still offer improved ped LoC
still offer improved ped LoC
signal times
What is the pedestrian delay per crossing?
pedestrainised sideroad will
signal timings reduce
signal timings reduce
pedestrainised sideroad will
and reduced signal timings
and reduced signal timings
pedestrainised sideroad will
and reduced signal timings
and reduced signal timings
What is the level of footpath pedestrian density
reduce pedestrain delays
pedestrain delays
pedestrain delays
reduce pedestrain delays
reduce pedestrain delays
reduce pedestrain delays
reduce pedestrain delays
reduce pedestrain delays
reduce pedestrain delays
What is the level of bus stop overspill?
Level of pedestrian amenity (using VURT)
if lanes allocated and /or
if lanes allocated and /or
side street closures and some vehicles enabled side street
depends on vehicles
vehicles enabled side street
if sides streets and lanes
allocates enough width to
IO - Improve Place quality
0
footpath extensions give some crossing then it would reduce
frequency more than the bays - crossing then it would reduce
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Minimal change overall
No change
No change
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
llocated would reduce score as 0.1
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.19
3
public realm to enable a range
0.3
0.9
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.57
opportunity to make better
scores probably to 1 as its
these could 'read' as part of
scores probably to 1 as its
Composition and relationship of buildings and space
it takes aaway opportbuity
of positive outcomes
dwell space and activation
taking away - maybe possible
public realm if needed to
taking away - maybe possible
How connected does the place feel?
What is the level of activity promoted
though after hours?
though after hours?
Act
How comfortable does the place feel?
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.8
0.108
0.084
0.108
0.072
0.032
0.096
0.032
0.1296
1.6
0.21
0.174
0.216
0.064
0.064
0.192
0.064
0.256
2
0.222
0.258
0.21
0.16
0.08
0.24
0.08
0.3168
Improved PT and some
increase in space, but more
PT & AT as more viable modes
E - Social
0
bus movements may make for
for all, greater ease of
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
minimal change overall for
No change
No change
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0.5001
0.5001
0.5001
0.3
0.3
0.5001
0.75
0.57
target groups
a less sociable pedestrian
movement, more space for
environment and reduced
social opportunititues
What is the range of relevant stakeholder and community feedback
accessibility and safety for Potential decrease in score if ther
P e
o tis
e lnetss
ial sp
deaccre f
a or
se pe
in op
sc l
o e
r eto
if m
thov
er e c
i om
s le fo
ss rt
spabcly
e for people to move comfortably
Potential decrease in score if ther
P e
o tis
e lnetss
ial sp
deaccre f
a or
se pe
in op
sc l
o e
r eto
if m
thov
er e c
i om
s le fo
ss rt
spabcly
e for people to move comfortably
E - Retail Impact Assessment
What is the likely impact/opportunity to retailers and businesses?
0
Increased pedestrian congestion from
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Greater increase of foot
Highly utilised during
Taxi stands near LQ are utilised
0.1667
0.1667
0.1667
0.1
0.1
0.1667
0.25
0.2
1
In addition to Option 1, two
Assuming loading bays on the Taxis on the GM would allow 0.167
0.1667
0.1667
0.1
0.1
0.1667
0.25
0.2
2
Signigicantly increasing
Assuming loading bays on the Taxis on the GM would allow
0.3334
0.3334
0.3334
0.2
0.2
0.3334
0.5
0.4
population growth, but CBD will always
traffic and pedestrian activity
weekdays and relevant
the most on the GM between
bus lanes in each direction
GM can be accessed while all
for easier access to retailers
amenity with 75% more
GM can be accessed while all
for easier access to retailers
attract people and patronage, not deter
from 30% more footpath
stakeholders note as crucial
67-78% on weekdays and 9-
would improve transport
else remains constant,
instead of on side streets.
footpath space and provisions
else remains constant,
instead of on side streets.
especially for LQ which is the main 'high
space. Serves the working
for businesses on the GM. LQ
15% on weekends. For
networks, but no general
retailers would benefit, but
However taxi stands are
for bikes and scooters
retailers would benefit.
However taxi stands are
end' retail precinct along with Willis Street.
population during weekdays has the most loading bays (11)
customers trying to access
traffic would limit access
not of enough magnitude to
currently located toward the
outweigh the same magnitude However, the magnitude of
currently located on the ends
Hence, in the event of 'do minimum', it
increasing their options for
on the GM. Retailers would
retailers, this would be more
resulting in net nil benefit.
increase the score.
ends of LQ so accessiblity
of negative impacts from
benefits received from more of LQ so accessiblity benefits
would be expected to see growing levels of
walking and public transit and
face less risk and receive
convenient however would
Hence, the score is the same
benefits from retaining are
Options 1 and 2. Modal shift footpath space and scoot may
from retaining are
patronage as this is Wellington's premier
the cost of general traffic
goods faster if loading bays
not be seen as a deterrant to
as Option 1.
minor/almost immateraial,
allowances create medium to outweigh loading bay benefits, minor/almost immateraial,
retail precinct.
accessibility. Potential loss of
were retained. However,
accessing retailers if taxi
hence the score would be
long term benefits. Hence the
hence the score would be
hence the score would be
efficiency/higher goods
many large retailers are reliant stands were relocated. Hence,
unchanged.
higher score. But questions
unchanged.
unchanged.
Given the cycle facility is likely
Minor improvements as the
Given the cycle facility is likely to be provided on the eastern
general traffic is being
to be provided on the eastern
side, there will be only one
Minor improvements as some
removed from this section of
Significant improvements for
side, there will be only one
existing loading bay and two
Heavily used by northbound cyclists as
side streets movements by
Negatively impacting on the
GM. Although cyclists will still Negatively impacting on the
Negatively impacting on the
people on bikes as there is
existing loading bay retained
Negatively impacting on the
taxi stands retained on that
E - Cycling Level of Service
0
there is no parallel northbound route on
motorised vehicles are being
level of service but not
mix with motorised vehicles level of service for cyclists but level of service for cyclists but
opportunity for seperated
on that side of Lambton Quay.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
level of service and may
0.1667
0.1667
0.1667
0.1
0.1
0.1667
0.1
0.16
1
0.167
0.1667
0.1667
0.1
0.1
0.1667
0.1
0.16
3
side of Lambton Quay. Will
0.5001
0.5001
0.5001
0.3
0.3
0.5001
0.3
0.48
Featherston St and cycling LoS is poor
restricted. Removal of loading significant enough to change
(i.e. buses), the reduced
not significant enough to
not significant enough to
cycle facility to be provided. Will change the score to a "2"
change the score to "0".
change the score to a "2" as
along the quays.
bays and taxi stands also
the score.
volume of motorised vehicles
change the score of "1".
change the score of "1".
Also see comments in "Fit with as service vehicles may need service vehicles may need to
provide improvement.
will result in a slight
LGWM Programme" below.
to drive on the cycle lanes for drive on the cycle lanes for a
What is the effect to cycling level of service?
improvement of cycling level
a short distance to get to the
What is the effect on perceived safety and comfort of cycling on the
short distance to get to the
of service.
from the loading bay.
segment?
from the loading bay.
Remocal of parking / loading =
Reduction in score due to
General traffic removed,
Reduction in score due to
E - General Safety
0
Reduction in score due to
Reduction in score due to
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
reduced manouevring crash
manouevring of service
0.1667
0.1667
0.1667
0.5
0.1
0.1667
0.1
0.19
1
Parking and Loading removed,
manouevring of service
0.167
0.1667
0.1667
0.5
0.1
0.1667
0.1
0.19
2
0.3334
0.3334
0.3334
1
0.2
0.3334
0.2
0.38
What is the general effect to road safety on the segment?
manouevring of taxis.
manouevring of taxis.
potential
vehicles.
side roads closed.
vehicles.
What is the general effect to road safety on adjacent streets?
Information
Potentially significant
E - Sustainability
0
Continued PMV preference, growth, and
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Minor improvement on key
mimimal change
minimal change
0.1667
0.1667
0.1667
0.1
0.1
0.1667
0.1
0.16
1
Minor improvement on key
mimimal change
minimal change
0.167
0.1667
0.1667
0.1
0.1
0.1667
0.1
0.16
3
improvement on key
mimimal change
minimal change
0.5001
0.5001
0.5001
0.3
0.3
0.5001
0.3
0.48
bus congenstion
sustinability criteria
sustinability criteria
To what extent does the option deliver against sustainabiltiy issues and
sustinability criteria
aspects relevant and important to Wellington and Aotearoa?
Closing side road connections
What is the alignment with linked projects such as MRT or central city cycling
Advantages of Option 2
E - Fit with LGWM Programme
to Lambton Quay creates
network?
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
no conflict with other LGWM
mimimal change
minimal change
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
mimimal change
minimal change
0.5
0.5001
0.5001
0.3
1.5
0.5001
0.3
0.3
3
Ability to accommodate
mimimal change
minimal change
0.5001
0.5001
0.5001
0.3
1.5
0.5001
0.3
0.3
How much flexibility is there to integrate with linked projects?
packages
more opportunity to locate
separated cycling facilities
bus stops closer to Waterfront
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.66667
0.022226667 0.022226667 0.022226667 0.053333333 0.026666667 0.022226667
0.055
0.011833333
1.166666667
0.039 0.038896667 0.038896667 0.073333333 0.126666667 0.038896667
0.085
0.016833333 2.66667
0.088906667 0.088906667 0.088906667
0.16
0.186666667 0.088906667
0.235
0.0435
DM&O - Delivery
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-1
No change in score
No change in score
-0.333
-0.333
-0.333
-0.333
-0.4
-0.333
-0.333
-0.4
-1
No change in score
No change in score
-0.33
-0.333
-0.333
-0.333
-0.4
-0.333
-0.333
-0.4
-2
No change in score
No change in score
-0.666
-0.666
-0.666
-0.666
-0.8
-0.666
-0.666
-0.8
DM&O - Operations and Maintenance
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-1
No change in score
No change in score
-0.333
-0.333
-0.333
-0.333
-0.2
-0.333
-0.333
-0.55
-2
No change in score
No change in score
-0.67
-0.666
-0.666
-0.666
-0.4
-0.666
-0.666
-1.1
-3
No change in score
No change in score
-0.999
-0.999
-0.999
-0.999
-0.6
-0.999
-0.999
-1.65
DM&O - Timeframe for Delivery
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
No change in score
No change in score
0.666
0.666
0.666
0.666
0.8
0.666
0.666
0.1
2
No change in score
No change in score
0.666
0.666
0.666
0.666
0.8
0.666
0.666
0.1
2
No change in score
No change in score
0.666
0.666
0.666
0.666
0.8
0.666
0.666
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.026666667
0
0
-0.02833333
-0.333333333
-0.02
-0.0222
-0.0222
-0.0222
0
-0.0222
-0.0222
-0.04666667
-1
-0.0666
-0.0666
-0.0666
-0.0666
-0.08
-0.0666
-0.0666
-0.07833333
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.46667
0.13023 0.10623 0.13023 0.12533 0.08533 0.11823
0.087
0.1131
2.433333333
0.2 0.1907
0.2327 0.11513 0.19067 0.2087
0.1268 0.22617 3.66667
0.24431 0.28031 0.23231 0.2534 0.18667 0.26231 0.2484 0.28197
Official
2
the
under
Released
