Noosa High Priority Cycle Route Corridor Study(PDF, 8MB)

Noosa High Priority Cycle Route Corridor Study and Concept Design
Final Options Analysis Report (Corridor 2)




7           IMPLEMENTATION
This section outlines the methodology for prioritising the delivery of individual projects as part of the implementation of




                                                                                     Y
the HPR (refer to Section 7.1) and the high-level cost estimate to implement Corridor 2 broken down by works location,
priority and budget year (refer to Section 7.2). This section also includes considerations for implementation, with specific
reference to potential funding and delivery mechanisms (refer to Section 7.3).




                                                                                  LIC
7.1         Works prioritisation
This High Priority Cycle Route Corridor Study has led to the identification of both missing and deficient links along both
Corridor 1 and 2. These have been prioritised and presented as an integrated, indicative draft implementation plan to
inform a staging plan for delivery of the HPR.




                                                                     PO
NSC requested a simple and common-sense approach to the prioritisation and requested a program be developed
assuming an annual expenditure of $800,000. The draft implementation plan projects have therefore been broken down
into segments that can be achieved within this budgetary parameter, as far as practicable.
NSC advised that the draft implementation plan will be reviewed as part of the Noosa Walking and Cycling Strategy and
Implementation Plan which is being prepared concurrently with the High Priority Cycle Route Corridor Study.
The draft implementation plan prioritisation involved a two-step process:
                                                           CIL
     1.   Identification of project priority based on existing path width and demand volume (both existing and potential
          considering land use and density)
     2.   Determination of ranking within priority based on a logical sequence of corridor development and influenced by
          related and committed projects. This sequencing of corridor development included, but was not limited to,
          consideration of the proximity to key attractors and the ability of a new or upgraded cycle facility to improve
          access, the ability to address gaps in the existing cycle network, and the ability to link to adjacent cycle projects
          along the corridor to create a safer and more connected cycle network.
                                        N
A works prioritisation matrix, as shown in Table 41, was applied to help identify project priority based on existing path
width and demand volume.
                                     OU

Table 41: Works prioritisation matrix

                                                         VOLUME
 PATH WIDTH
                                   Low                    Medium            High

 No Path                            H                         H              VH
         TC



 1.2m                               M                         H              VH

 2.0m                                L                        M               H

 2.5m                               VL                        L               M

 3.0m                               VL                       VL               L
       NO




7.2         Draft implementation plan
The draft implementation plan for the HPR Corridor, as detailed in Table 42, has been specifically developed in a format
that can be easily integrated with Council’s 10-Year Capital Program. It should be noted that the below plan is subject to
Council’s budgeting process and the concurrent Cycling and Walking Strategy Implementation Plan which takes a Shire-
wide approach to prioritisation and will take precedence over this program. The below plan outlines high-level costs for
both Corridor 1 and Corridor 2 in order to provide an indication of the proposed staging across the entire HPR. The costs
and implementation priorities presented in the plan have been prepared for the implementation of permanent cycle
infrastructure and do not take into account the implementation of LQC projects as an interim measure.

0996 – 24 February 2021 – V2                     The analysis, design and cost estimating referenced in the report was76undertaken
                                                 solely to guide planning and should not be interpreted as a final or endorsed
                                                 position of Noosa Council.