Recommendation Date
Recipient Name
Transit NZ
Text
In conjunction with the relevant local Councils and New Zealand Rail Limited, examine the feasibility of restoring the pedestrian right of way which previously existed adjacent to State Highway 2, between Horokiwi Road and Petone Bridge.
Reply Text
Although Transit New Zealand (TNZ) does not provide footpaths on state highways, we do make some financial support available to local authorities for construction and maintenance of footpaths where significant safety benefits can be achieved. In relation to your particular proposal, TNZ has consulted with the Hutt and Wellington City Councils about pedestrian/cyclist facilities on State Highway 2 and priorities for them.
Three issues have been identified which will require examination. They are:
• The lack of connection between your proposed footway and pedestrian facilities at the other end;
• The preference of cyclists to use the road shoulder; and
• The low priority given to this work by the cities in comparison to their other cycle/pedestrian projects.
The suggestion that a walkway/ cycleway between the road and rail was eliminated by widening the highway is not correct. The traffic lane has always been part of the on-ramp at the Petone over bridge. The on-ramp merging lane was however extended, with the agreement of the Hutt City Council, to solve a traffic conflict issue. There was concern about the number of vehicle accidents, and it was throughout that very few pedestrians would consider walking on the State Highway 2 verge. Transit New Zealand recently looked at the feasibility of bringing southbound cyclists and perhaps pedestrians from State Highway 2 under the over bridge beside the rail tracks. However, following discussion with New Zealand Rail Ltd, it was decided that there was insufficient room to do so safely. It seems that there are no simple solutions to corrections at Petone.
Three issues have been identified which will require examination. They are:
• The lack of connection between your proposed footway and pedestrian facilities at the other end;
• The preference of cyclists to use the road shoulder; and
• The low priority given to this work by the cities in comparison to their other cycle/pedestrian projects.
The suggestion that a walkway/ cycleway between the road and rail was eliminated by widening the highway is not correct. The traffic lane has always been part of the on-ramp at the Petone over bridge. The on-ramp merging lane was however extended, with the agreement of the Hutt City Council, to solve a traffic conflict issue. There was concern about the number of vehicle accidents, and it was throughout that very few pedestrians would consider walking on the State Highway 2 verge. Transit New Zealand recently looked at the feasibility of bringing southbound cyclists and perhaps pedestrians from State Highway 2 under the over bridge beside the rail tracks. However, following discussion with New Zealand Rail Ltd, it was decided that there was insufficient room to do so safely. It seems that there are no simple solutions to corrections at Petone.
Related Investigation(s)