MOXHAM / HATAITAI / WAITOA INTERSECTION
ROUNDABOUT PROPOSAL
Hataitai Residents Association
7 July 2020
Summary
• The majority of bus passengers travelling from the eastern suburbs to the central city travel
through the intersection. It is used by approximately 7,000 people in buses and 12,000 people in
private vehicles per day
• A number of reported crashes and near misses, one involving a mother and baby, at the Hataitai
intersection at Hataitai Road, Waitoa Road and Moxham Avenue have been received over recent
years.
• Concerns were raised by the community regarding pedestrian safety and driver confusion at this
intersection through the Residents Association.
• Previous engagement with the community on the proposal of traffic lights in September 2018
met objections and a number of other options have since been explored.
• When ranked against criteria the delivery of a small mountable roundabout with a raised zebra
crossing on the Hataitai Road approach was considered to deliver the maximum benefit of
overall performance and pedestrian safety at this intersection.
2
Previous engagement on traffic light proposal
• In September 2018, we consulted with the local community on a proposal to install traffic lights at the
intersection to improve safety, particularly for pedestrians.
• We had great engagement on this proposal, with nearly 800 people, businesses and organisations taking
the time to provide a submission, 82% of these being residents.
• While more than half of respondents answered ‘YES’ to having experienced, witnessing or being aware of
crashes or near misses at the intersection, only 32% supported the installation of traffic lights.
• We concluded that based on a high percentage of concerns received regarding the safety at the
intersection, there was a definite mandate to make safety improvements, but not for traffic lights.
• Since then our Council officers have assessed various other options (15 in total) and a roundabout is now
being proposed.
3
4
5
Options Evaluation Criteria
Design Objectives Weighting
Improve pedestrian safety 30%
Reduce driver confusion 15%
Reduce bus delays 15%
Minimise parking loss 15%
Minimise pedestrian delay 15%
Improve place function 10%
Multi-Criteria Analysis
6
Top Ranked Options
Design Objectives
Improve
pedestrian
safety
Reduce
driver
confusion
Reduce
bus
delays
Minimise
parking
loss
Minimise
pedestrian
delay
Improve
place
function
Total
weighted
score
Cost Rank
Weighting 30% 15% 15% 15% 15% 10%
Mountable roundabout Moderately
achieves
Significantly
achieves
Slightly
achieves
Moderately
reduces
Slightly
reduces
Moderately
achieves
85 125k 1
Raised table at
intersection
Slightly
achieves
Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Moderately
achieves
50 200k 2
Traffic lights with
parallel pedestrian
crossings
Slightly
achieves
Moderately
achieves
Neutral Slightly
reduces
Slightly
achieves
Slightly
reduces
50 250k 2
Minor improvements to
pedestrian crossings
Slightly
achieves
Slightly
achieves
Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral 45 30k 4
Raised roadways Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Significantly
achieves
30 ~1.5
million
5
Change Give Ways
controls to Stop
controls
Slightly
achieves
Moderately
achieves
Neutral Slightly
reduces
Slightly
reduces
Neutral 30 120k 6
How options performed
7
• A cost benefit analysis has been carried out with three options considered: a roundabout, traffic signals
with parallel and Barnes dance crossings, and the current road layout. The roundabout option has shown
significant benefits and a far safer and more efficient design that what is currently in place.
• The roundabout option offers travel time benefits for private vehicle and bus passengers, with only a slight
increase in travel time for pedestrians – between 10 and 14 metres which equates to between 8-12 seconds
per pedestrian journey when using a zebra crossing compared with the current direct route.
• The roundabout option has the only true cost benefit ratio and provides high value for money, in the order
of $3 million compared with an indicated $1.5 million dis-benefit on the traffic signal proposal (based on
NZTA’s 40 year analysis period).
Traffic Modelling and Efficiency
8
Parking & Place Function
• A total of 13 car parks will be removed with the Roundabout proposal, however we are looking at opportunities
to create further parking around the vicinity of the intersection.
• Bus stop on Hataitai Road (Hataitai Stop C) – GWRC have advised us that this bus stop can become part-
time as it is only used in the morning peak hour. It is proposed that this bus stop operates from 6.30am-
9.00am and P60 At All Other Times. This would free up 3 spaces in this location.
• Change unlimited angle parking on William Street to P60 (3 to 6 spaces).
• Bus Stop on Waitoa Road East (Hataitai Stop E) – possible option to re-instate some parking pending on
GWRC’s new timetable changes assessment.
• Place function is currently being investigated at the intersection.
Communication Approach
• WCC initially consulted with the whole community with a proposal for traffic lights, and received strong
engagement with approximately 800 responses.
• We are now taking a slightly more targeted approach with the proposal for the mountable roundabout.
We are now talking mainly with Ward Councillors, the Resident’s Association, Hataitai businesses and
those who made submissions in the previous engagement in 2018.
• The communication is now focused on the preferred option of a mountable roundabout with a raised
pedestrian crossing (on Hataitai Road) and building community support for this - a full communications
plan in is place.
• A Traffic Resolution will be required to legalise the parking changes and a formal consultation targeted at
those residents and business most affected will be required.
9
Timelines
10
Key Milestones :
• Notification sent to key stakeholders and 800 residents/business who responded to previous traffic light
survey – June 2020
• Presentation at Residents Association Meeting – 7 July 2020
• Traffic Resolution consultation – August 2020
• Report to Strategy & Policy Committee Meeting (for approval of road marking, signs and car parking
changes) – September 2020
• Begin Construction – Late 2020
11
Further information and feedback
• For more information please visit our webpage –
https://wellington.govt.nz/your-council/projects/hataitai-intersection
• Please submit any feedback to [email protected]
QUESTIONS?
13
APPENDICES
Options evaluation – Appendix 1
All options evaluated and ranked in order of preference based on multi-criteria analysis
14
Option Evaluation
Design objectives Reduce driver
confusion
Improve
pedestrian
safety
Reduce bus
delays
Minimise
parking loss
Improve place
function
Improve vehicle
efficiency
Minimise
pedestrian
delay
Improve safety
overall
Total weighted
score Rank Cost is affordable
Rough order
cost
Weighting 15% 30% 15% 15% 10% 0% 15% 0%
1. Do nothing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 yes 0
2. Minor improvements to pedestrian
crossings 0.15 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 4 yes 30k
3. Change Give Way controls to Stop
controls 0.3 0.3 0 -0.15 0 0 -0.15 0 30 6 yes 120k
4. Raised table at intersection 0 0.3 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 50 2 yes 200k
5. Four-way Stop controls -0.3 0.6 -0.15 0 0 0 -0.15 0 0 7 yes 120k
6. Mini Roundabout 0.15 0 -0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 yes 20k
7. Small Roundabout 0.15 0.3 -0.15 -0.3 0.1 0 -0.15 0 -5 10 yes 250k
8. Mountable Roundabout 0.45 0.6 0.15 -0.3 0.1 0 -0.15 0 85 1 yes 125k
9. Large Roundabout 0.45 0.3 -0.15 -0.45 -0.3 0 -0.3 0 -45 12 no >1 million
10. Intersection controls with bus
priority provisions 0 -0.3 0.45 -0.3 0 0 -0.15 0 -30 11 yes 350k
11. Traffic lights with parallel pedestrian
crossings 0.3 0.3 0 -0.15 -0.1 0 0.15 0 50 2 yes 250k
12. Traffic lights with exclusive
pedestrian phase 0.3 -0.3 -0.15 -0.15 -0.1 0 -0.45 0 -85 15 yes 250k
13. Traffic lights with bus priority
provisions 0.3 -0.3 0.15 -0.3 -0.1 0 -0.45 0 -70 13 yes 280k
14. Junction realigned to prioritise bus
movements and traffic lights 0.3 -0.6 0.45 -0.3 -0.1 0 -0.45 0 -70 13 yes 600k
15. Raised roadways 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0
30 5 no ~1.5 million
Top ranked options – Appendix 2
1. Mountable Roundabout
2. Raised table at intersection
2. Traffic Lights with Parallel Pedestrian Crossings
4. Minor improvements to pedestrian crossings
5. Raised roadways
6. Change Give Way controls to Stop controls
15 Improve place function Reduce driver confusion Improve pedestrian safety Minimise pedestrian delay Reduce bus delays
Our investigation into a mountable roundabout saw that there would be moderate and significant improvements to each aspect we looked at. Pedestrian safety and vehicle efficiency are projected to see moderate improvements and
driver confusion indicates that it will be significantly reduced. With this option we will see a safer area for pedestrians and cyclists in comparison to the current situation, which falls into WCC’s Transport Strategy, where we are aiming to
create less demand for individual car usage, and enhance the experience of public transport, cycling and walking. $125k
This involves lifting the road level at the intersection to slow traffic and enhance the village centre. There would be moderate improvements to place function and a slight improvement for pedestrian safety. Other factors would see no
significant change. $200K
This involves installing traffic lights to control all movements at the junction. Pedestrians would be given an early start before turning vehicles are allowed to filter through the pedestrian crossing and give way to the people still on the
crossings. The pedestrian signalised crossings would be placed on the desire line of the pedestrians to achieve greater compliance and safety for all intersection users. $250k
This involves leaving the crossings in their current positions, but making them more visible by lengthening the white bars and highlighting them with a coloured background. Pedestrian guide tactiles would also be installed on all
approaches to assist visually impaired users. There would be little to no changes to the cur- rent situation. $30k
This is a bigger version of the raised intersection. It involves reconstructing all the roads in the village centre to create a large shared area similar to lower Cuba Street. A lower speed limit (10km/h) would be appropriate to reinforce the
shared nature of the streetscape. The only change from this option was slight improvement in overall safety. $1.5milliion
This involves changing the Give Ways to Stops, extending the kerbs and relocating the pedestrian zebra crossings further away from the intersection to make it clearer to motorists which approaches have right of way. We would be
expected to see slight changes to the current situation, in both positive and negative ways, however overall it would remain the same. $120k
16
Comparison between mountable roundabout and traffic signals and existing road layout
• A cost benefit analysis has been carried out with three options considered; traffic signals with parallel and
Barnes dance crossings and the roundabout with average delays on each intersection approach and
estimated average delays for each pedestrian crossing leg between 5.00pm -6.00pm.
• The roundabout option substantially decreases delays on all four approaches. All three options increase
pedestrian delay with signals with the Barnes Dance being the worst performing.
Traffic Modelling and Efficiency – Appendix 3
7 8
20
4
23
11
38
3 5
16
30
3
6
19
40
5
-
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Current Option 1:Signals with parallel
crossing
Option 2: Signal with Barnes
Dance
Option 3: Roundabount
Ave
rage
se
con
ds
of
de
lay
by
app
roac
h (
PM
pe
ak)
North: Hataitai Rd
South - Moxham Ave
East: Waitoa Rd East
West: Waitoa Rd West
0
17
30
7
0
17
29
7
0
14
29
6
0
14
29
6
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Current Option 1:Signals with parallel
crossing
Option 2: Signal with Barnes
Dance
Option 3: Roundabount
Ave
rage
se
con
ds
of
de
lay
by
cro
ssin
g le
g (P
M p
eak
) North: Hataitai Rd
South - Moxham Ave
East: Waitoa Rd East
West: Waitoa Rd West
17
Cost Benefit Analysis - Estimated benefits and dis-benefits (discounted)
-$8,000,000
-$6,000,000
-$4,000,000
-$2,000,000
$-
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
Option 1:Signals with Parallel
Crossing
Option 2: Signal with Barnes Dance
Option 3: Roundabout
Dis
cou
nte
d b
en
efi
ts a
nd
dis
be
ne
fits
Crash cost savings
Travel time - pedestrians
Travel time - bus passengers
Travel time - private vehiclepassengers
Traffic Modelling and Efficiency – Appendix 4