This is the exact embedded text of the captured official document.
Snapshot e5e17c2485f7 · verified 2026-06-07 ·
original document ·
archived snapshot ·
unofficial consolidation, the official version is held by the municipal clerk.
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Town of Riverview
March 22, 2013
121-21048
GENIVAR Inc.
55 Driscoll Crescent
Moncton, New Brunswick
Canada E1E 4C8
Tel. 506-857-1675
Fax 506-857-1679
www.genivar.com
Contact:
Greg Zwicker
[email protected]
Jesse Howatt
[email protected]
GENIVAR
i
Active Transportation (AT) and active living have become a focus of many municipalities throughout
Canada. In terms of AT, the Town of Riverview is best known for its Riverfront Trail and the connection
to the Dobson Trail. Through the development of this AT Plan, Riverview intends on extending and
highlighting it's AT infrastructure. The intent of the plan is to connect Riverview's residents through a grid
like network of AT routes. The AT routes are intended for any form of human powered transportation
such as walking, cycling, skate boarding, wheelchairs, rollerblading, snowshoeing and cross-country
skiing. The AT routes give residents an alternative to driving.
The Town of Riverview's AT Plan breaks the network into four designations:
1. Primary AT Routes
2. Secondary AT Routes
3. Tertiary Routes
4. Trails
Each category is further broken down into existing, proposed and future routes. Overlaid on a map, the
AT routes help demonstrate the Town's existing routes and missing links. A design standard, developed
for each category of AT route furthermore illustrates the look and intent of each route.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AT Master Plan
GENIVAR
ii
The network was developed through the analysis of the existing AT assets, a series of public and
stakeholder consultation and the use of best practices. Based on the network the location, function and
in some instances the design of signage was identified. The signage along with end of trip facilities,
benches, washrooms and lighting help complete an AT network. By identifying this additional
infrastructure, Riverview is ensuring it's AT network is complete and fully functional.
As mentioned above, design standards for both trails and streets were developed based on the Town of
Riverview's existing road specifications. The standards provide guidelines for the integration of AT into
the City's existing infrastructure. The cost associated with integrating this infrastructure was assessed for
the routes highlighted in red in the table below. These routes were determined through an analysis of
safety, connectivity, aesthetics and accessibility.
Project / Route
Class
Safety
Connectivity
Aesthetics
Accessibility
Average
Findlay Blvd
1
4
2
4
5
3.8
Coverdale Rd (Patricia to West Riverview)
1
4
2
4
4
3.5
Coverdale Rd (Patricia to Trites)
1
4
4
3
4
3.8
Coverdale Rd (Trites to Causeway)
1
4
4
3
4
3.8
Coverdale Rd (Causeway to Gunningsville)
1
4
4
3
4
3.8
Hillsborough Rd (Gunningsville to Hawkes)
1
4
4
3
4
3.8
Hillsborough Rd (Hawkes to Bridgedale)
1
4
4
3
4
3.8
Gunningsville Blvd
1
1
3
1
1
1.5
Cleveland Ave (Devere to Coverdale)
2
3
1
2
3
2.3
Pine Glen Rd (Devere to Gunningsville)
2
2
3
1
1
1.8
Devere Rd (Cleveland to Pine Glen)
2
2
3
2
2
2.3
Whitepine Rd
2
2
2
2
2
2
Buckingham Ave
2
3
1
2
2
2
Trites Rd (Coverdale to Whitepine)
2
2
2
2
3
2.3
Trites Rd (Callaghan to Callowhill)
2
5
4
4
5
4.5
East School
2
2
2
2
2
2
Runneymeade Rd
2
2
2
2
2
2
Callowhill Road
2
5
4
4
5
4.5
Cleveland Ave (Gunningsville to Pinewood)
3
4
2
4
5
3.8
Cleveland Ave (Pinewood to Devere)
3
2
1
2
2
1.8
Pinewood Rd
3
1
2
1
2
1.5
Bradford Rd
3
1
1
3
3
2
Sussex Ave
3
4
4
3
4
3.8
Hawkes St
3
4
4
4
4
4.0
Riverfront Trail (Old Coach to Causeway)
T
1
3
1
4
2.3
Riverfront Trail (East of Old Coach)
T
2
2
1
4
2.3
Depending on the designation of the route, the probable cost may include sidewalk on one or both sides
of the street or a multi-use trail along one side of the street. The designation, the length of the route and
the existing infrastructure along the street influence the probable costs. Probable costs were developed
for 12 proposed routes.
Route Analysis Table
GENIVAR
iii
*The above estimates do not include the price to acquire lands where necessary.
The above projects highlight the significant capital required to implement AT infrastructure throughout
Riverview's AT network. Other than the significant infrastructure investment required to realize the AT
network, the Town is also able to invest in smaller projects to help promote AT within the community.
Such investments may include the following:
-
Adding paint to all tertiary routes indicating they are shared routes;
-
Installing signs to the tertiary routes indicating it is a shared route;
-
Installing signage along primary, secondary and tertiary routes as well as trails;
-
Widen the Riverfront Trail to 3 metres, pave it and realign wherever it is necessary to ensure
the safety for snow plows;
-
Working with Codiac Transit to ensure there is sufficient infrastructure available for transit users
as well as AT users at all bus stops;
-
Install AT end-of-trip facilities such as bike lockers, showers at key destinations along the AT
network; and
-
Install other AT infrastructure such as benches and washrooms along the AT network.
Project
Estimate
Lengths
Applicable
Standard(s)
Estimates of probable
construction costs*
Time frame
Trites Rd (Callaghan to Callowhill)
550 m
Urban Collector Minor
$200,000 - $250,000
1-2 years
Hillsborough Rd (Hawkes to Bridgedale)
1.1 km
Arterial
$300,000 - $350,000
2-3 years
Hawkes St
200 m
Urban Local Primary
$40,000 - $60,000
2-3 years
Cleveland Ave (Gunningsville to Pinewood)
175 m
Urban Local Primary
$35,000 - $50,000
2-4 years
Findlay Blvd
1.4 km
Arterial
$300,000 - $350,000
3-5 years
Sussex Ave
1.0 km
Urban Local Primary
$200,000 - $250,000
4-6 years
Callowhill Rd
1.4 km
Urban Collector Minor
$550,000 - $600,000
5-7 years
Coverdale Rd (Causeway to Gunningsville)
1.8 km
Arterial
$950,000 - $1,100,000
6-9 years
Coverdale Rd (Trites to Causeway)
1.1 km
Arterial
$350,000 - $450,000
8-10 years
Coverdale Rd (Patricia to Trites)
1.4 km
Arterial
$450,000 - $550,000
9-10 years
Hillsborough Rd (Gunningsville to Hawkes)
2.6 km
Arterial
$1,250,000 - $1,450,000
11-13 years
Coverdale Rd (Patricia to West Riverview)
1.2 km
Arterial
$550,000 - $650,000
13-16 years
Total
12.93 km
Various
$5,175,000 - $6,110,000
16 years
Estimate of Probable Construction Costs Table
GENIVAR
iv
1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Active Transportation ......................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Planning Process ............................................................................................................... 1
2 Active Transportation Network ......................................................................... 2
2.1
Existing Routes .................................................................................................................. 2
Codiac Transit
3
2.1.1
2.2
Proposed and Future Routes ............................................................................................ 3
Primary Routes
3
2.2.1
Secondary Routes
5
2.2.2
Tertiary Routes
6
2.2.3
Trails
7
2.2.4
2.3
Destinations ....................................................................................................................... 8
2.4
Potential Land Acquisitions and Easements ..................................................................... 9
2.5
Integration with Surrounding Communities ....................................................................... 10
3 Active Transportation Design Standards ......................................................... 11
3.1
Engineering Design Standards .......................................................................................... 11
Urban Local Primary Proposed AT Design Standard
11
3.1.1
Urban Collector Minor Proposed AT Design Standard
12
3.1.2
Urban Collector Primary Proposed AT Design Standard
13
3.1.3
Trail Design Standard
14
3.1.4
3.2
Design Challenges ............................................................................................................ 15
3.3
Other (i.e. curb cuts, storm grates) .................................................................................... 17
4 Additional Active Transportation Infrastructure ............................................. 18
4.1
Signage.............................................................................................................................. 18
4.2
Traffic Control Signage ...................................................................................................... 18
4.3
Trail Access Signage ......................................................................................................... 19
4.4
Interpretive Signage .......................................................................................................... 20
4.5
Mileage Markers and Wayfinding Signage ........................................................................ 21
4.6
End of Trip Facilities .......................................................................................................... 21
4.7
Benches and Washrooms ................................................................................................. 22
4.8
Lighting .............................................................................................................................. 22
4.9
ATV and Snowmobile Signage .......................................................................................... 22
5 AT Route Management and Winter Maintenance ............................................ 23
5.10
AT Route Management ..................................................................................................... 23
5.11
Winter Maintenance ........................................................................................................... 23
6 Recommended Policies and By-laws ............................................................... 24
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GENIVAR
v
6.1
Municipal Development Plan .............................................................................................. 24
Amended Policies
24
6.1.1
New Policies and Proposals
27
6.1.2
6.2
Subdivision By-law ............................................................................................................. 28
6.3
Zoning By-law ..................................................................................................................... 31
7 Community Education Program ........................................................................ 33
8 Route and Trail Names ...................................................................................... 34
9 Additional Studies, Initiatives and Funding Opportunities ............................. 35
9.1
Additional Studies ............................................................................................................... 35
9.2
Funding Opportunities ........................................................................................................ 35
10 Implementation, Phasing and Costing ............................................................. 36
10.1
Implementation ................................................................................................................... 36
10.2
Phasing / Costing ............................................................................................................... 37
Appendices:
Appendix A:
Background and Recommendations Report
Appendix B:
Existing AT Infrastructure
Appendix C:
Codiac Transit Routes
Appendix D:
Active Transportation Map
Appendix E:
Key Destinations Map
Appendix F:
Land Acquisition Map
Appendix G:
Urban Local Primary Proposed Design Standard
Appendix H:
Urban Collector Minor Proposed Design Standard
Appendix I:
Urban Collector Primary Proposed Design Standard
Appendix J:
Trail Design Standard
Appendix K:
TAC Signage Standards
Appendix L:
Signage Map
Appendix M:
Community Education Program
Appendix N:
Route Naming Map
Appendix O:
Funding Opportunities
Appendix P:
Phasing and Costing
Appendix Q:
Definitions
1
1 Introduction
In recognition of the importance of providing safe and efficient infrastructure for alternative forms of
transportation, the Town of Riverview has prepared this Active Transportation Plan. This plan furthers the
Town's goal of providing a high quality of life, healthy lifestyle alternatives that help retain and attract
residents.
1.1 Active Transportation
Active Transportation (AT) is both a recreational and commuter activity. It encompasses any form of
human powered transporation such as walking, biking, skate boarding, wheelchairs, cross-country skiing
and roller blading. Planning for AT is not a new phenomenon, many cities throughout the world, and many
smaller towns are incorporating active transportation infrastructure into their commnities.
AT requires a two-pronged appraoch to achieve a truly vibrant network: infrastructure and education. A
community can have excellent AT infrastructure, but the residents need to be educated on the proper use
and benefits of this intrastructure. In most rural communities, social norms, such as using the car to go to
the corner store, are entrenched. These can only be changed through education.
AT networks rely on the connectivity and quality of the infrastructure that makes up the network.
Connectivity is gauged by the ease of access to the network. The accessibility of the network is
determined by factors such as safety, aesthetics, and the location of key destinations. In many cases,
accessibility of the network will differ for able-bodied people versus people with physical challenges.
1.2 Planning Process
Preparation of this Plan involved background research and community
consultation. Information gathered in the initial stages helped identify the
specific needs, challenges and opportunities that would need to be addressed
as part of the Plan. A comprehensive summary including a preliminary AT
network and set of recommendations can be found in the Background and
Recommendations Report (Appendix A).
At various stages throughout the course of developing the Plan, the Project
Team met with the Town's Steering Committee which was comprised of
representatives from the Town's Departments of Parks, Recreation &
Community Relations, Engineering & Public Works and Economic
Development. These will be the Departments responsible for implementing
the Plan and therefore provided valuable input into all aspects of the project.
Following the release and presentation of the draft Active Transportation Plan
to the public, residents were asked for comments or suggestions to help
identify changes or elements requiring further consideration before finalization
and implementation. The adjacent diagram outlines the planning process carried out to-date.
2
2 Active Transportation Network
The location of the proposed AT routes is based on the analysis of current AT routes, the existing road
system, access to routes from residential areas and access to key destination. Available mapping and on-
site assessments were used in determining the existing road systems and its condition and in determining
key destinations. Each route was assessed based on connectivity, accessibility, safety and aesthetics.
The Steering Committee, comprised of representative from various Town Departments, provided
additional information regarding route selection.
2.1 Existing Routes
The existing AT network consists of two major trails, several multi-use trails, sidewalks and several small
formal and informal connecting trails within residential neighbourhoods. The major trails consist of the
Riverfront Trail and Dobson Trail. The Riverfront Trail is a crushed stone multi-use trail running from the
Causeway to Hawkes Street. The Dobson Trail begins in Riverview off of Pine Glen Road and travels for
51 km to the Fundy National Park. The existing multi-use trails within Riverview consist of Gunningsville
Boulevard, Findlay Boulevard, Pine Glen Road, Pinder Road and Trites Road. Other existing AT
infrastructure includes a bridge crossing Findlay Boulevard connecting Bradford Road East to Bradford
Road West and several small connections throughout the community, which are highlighted below in
Figure 1 as 'Existing AT Connections'. A larger version of Figure 1 can be found in Appendix B.
An existing cross-country ski trail is located in the Mill Creek Park area. A Park Master Plan for Mill Creek
is in the process of being developed and will include the cross-country ski trails. This plan will simply
acknowledge the trails existence as part of the Mill Creek Park Master Plan.
Figure 1 - Existing AT Infrastructure in Riverview
3
Codiac Transit
2.1.1
Public transportation is an effective bridge to facilitate the increased use of AT. Codiac Transit has
already embraced AT with the installation of bike racks on each bus, known as the Bike and Ride system.
Bus service is currently provided to Riverview through two bus routes. Further details including route
maps can be found in Appendix C. The location of bus stops is also shown on the AT Map in Appendix D.
Through the installation of additional end of trip facilities at key destinations, Riverview will help make the
use of both AT and public transportation more efficient and accessible. Key destinations may include
Riverview Mall and the Chocolate River Station but could also include key bus stops along Hillsborough
Road and Coverdale Road. By installing bike racks, bike shelters and/or bike lockers at these and other
locations, residents will have the ability to travel by bicycle to a designated location, store their bike in a
safe location and use the bus to travel to and from work. This is an excellent measure for those who do
not feel safe biking on either of the two bridges or do not want to bike as lengthy of a distance.
Bike shelters can be incorporated into the design of a bus stop. The example in Figure 2 by SecuraBike
shows a bike shelter that can shelter up to 32 bikes and could be large enough for transit users to also
use as a sheltered bus stop.
2.2 Proposed and Future Routes
The routes on the AT Map are broken up into four designations; Primary Routes, Secondary Routes,
Tertiary Routes and Trails. A copy of the map can be found in Appendix D.
Primary Routes
2.2.1
The primary routes, (Figure 3) are broken up into three designations: existing routes, proposed routes
and future routes. The existing primary routes are already constructed, proposed primary routes are
routes that can easily be added to existing streets and future primary routes are potential routes that can
be incorporated into future developments or routes that require relatively substantial upgrades to existing
infrastructure. The estimate length of existing primary route is 4.7 km, proposed primary route is 2.4 km
and future primary route is 16.5 km.
Primary routes are the spine of the AT network. They are located along roads that experience high
volumes of traffic from all transportation modes and can provide a choice of AT options ranging from
multi-use trails, sidewalks to bike lanes.
Figure 2 - Bus Shelter, product of SecuraBike
4
The existing primary routes, mentioned in Section 2.1, are either paved or gravel trails featuring a
landscaped buffer between it and the motorized vehicles. They include trails along Findlay Boulevard,
Gunningsville Boulevard and Pinder Road.
The proposed primary routes consist of Findlay Boulevard and Hillsborough Road. The section of Findlay
Boulevard between Whitepine Road and Coverdale Road is all that is left to complete the loop consisting
of Gunningsville Boulevard, Findlay Boulevard and Coverdale Road. Until infrastructure is installed
along Findlay Boulevard, it may be possible for AT users to use Buckingham Avenue as the north
south connection between Whitepine Road and Coverdale Road. The eastern section of Hillsborough
Road is having a water main installed in the coming years which provides the opportunity to also install
AT infrastructure. The section of Hillsborough Road that is proposed primary route is from Hawkes Street
to the future intersection of Hillsborough Road and Bridgedale Boulevard. It is recommended that the
AT infrastructure be in the form of 1.5 meter wide bike lanes running on either side of the street
between the sidewalk and the road and a new sidewalk along the north side of Hillsborough road.
The future primary routes include Bridgedale Boulevard, West Riverview Boulevard, Coverdale Road and
Hillsborough Road from Hawkes Street to Gunningsville Boulevard. It is recommended that AT
infrastructure be included in the design for Bridgedale Boulevard and West Riverview Boulevard.
It is also recommended that Riverview complete a detailed design of Coverdale Road and
Hillsborough Road to determine whether or not there is width for AT infrastructure. In the
meantime it is proposed that the Riverfront Trail be paved and widened to 3 meters from Hawks
Street to the Causeway. This will give AT users an alternative route connecting Riverview East and
West.
Figure 3 - AT Map: Primary Routes
5
Secondary Routes
2.2.2
Similar to the primary routes, the secondary routes (Figure 4) are broken up into three designations:
existing, proposed and future. The secondary routes are located along routes that experience a moderate
level of volume of all transportation modes. These routes will provide a choice of AT options from trails,
sidewalks and bike lanes and are meant to connect tertiary routes and residential neighbourhoods to the
Town's primary routes. The estimate length of existing secondary route is 1.8 km, proposed secondary
route is 10.7 km and future secondary route is 3.2 km.
The existing secondary routes, mentioned in Section 2.1, include multi-use trails along a section of Pine
Glen Road and Trites Road. The proposed secondary routes include:
-
Callowhill Road;
-
Trites Road from Coverdale Road to Callowhill Road (excluding the existing trail);
-
Whitepine Road from Trites Road to Pine Glen Road;
-
Pine Glen Road from Berkley Drive to Devere Road;
-
Devere Road from Pine Glen Road to Cleveland Road;
-
Cleveland Road from Devere Road to Coverdale Road;
-
Old Coach Road from Hillsborough Road to Chamber Street;
-
Chamber Street from Old Coach Road to Bridgedale Boulevard; and
-
Runneymeade Road from Hillsborough Road to the Mill Creek Park.
The future secondary routes are located along potential extensions of existing roads to the West
Riverview Boulevard. The routes include Whitepine Road from Trites Road to West Riverview Boulevard
and Trites Road from Callowhill Road to West Riverview Boulevard.
Figure 4 - AT Map: Secondary Routes
6
Tertiary Routes
2.2.3
The tertiary routes (Figure 5) are also broken up into three designations: existing, proposed and future.
The tertiary routes are located along routes that experience a low to moderate level of volume of all
transportation modes. These routes incorporate sidewalks and shared routes and are intended to connect
the residential neighbourhoods with the secondary routes. The estimate length of existing tertiary route is
120 m, proposed tertiary route is 4.6 km and future tertiary route is 820 m.
The only existing tertiary route, mentioned in Section 2.1, is the pedestrian bridge linking Bradford Road
East and Bradford Road West. This is the only connection crossing Findlay Boulevard between
Coverdale Road and Whitepine Road. The proposed tertiary routes include:
-
Sussex Avenue;
-
Bradford Road East and West from Buckingham Avenue to Cleveland Avenue:
-
Pinewood Road from Pine Glen Road to the Country Club Road;
-
Cleveland Road from Devere Road to the Dobson Trail; and
-
Hawkes Street.
The future tertiary routes include the extension of the proposed tertiary route on Pinewood Road to
extend through Clayton Developments proposed subdivision and across Gunningsville Boulevard into Mill
Creek Park. The route will be an extension of the sidewalks and shared route up until Gunningsville
where a paved multi-use trail will extend into Mill Creek Park.
Figure 5 - AT Map: Tertiary Routes
7
Trails
2.2.4
The trails (Figure 6) are similarly broken up into three designations: existing, proposed and future. The
estimate length of existing trail route is 7.8 km, proposed trail route is 1.9 km and future trail route is 5.3
km. The trails are typically used for recreational purposes and not for commuting, but that may not always
be the case. The existing trails consist of the well-known Riverfront Trail and the Dobson Trail. As
mentioned in Section 2.2.1, it is proposed that the Riverfront Trail be paved and widened to
accommodate commuter traffic as an alternate route to Hillsborough Road and Coverdale Road.
The proposed trail consists of an extension of the Riverfront Trail south to Mill Creek Park. This trail uses
land owned by New Brunswick's Department of Transportation and Infrastructure. This land has been
reserved for a future bridge connection from Riverview to Moncton and Dieppe. As the bridge may only
be built in several decades it is proposed that the land be used for a multi-use trail.
The future trails consist of the extension of the Dobson Trail to Trites Road and into the Mill Creek Park
and the westward extension of the Riverfront Trail. The Dobson Trail is widely used by residents of
Riverview and extending it further into the community only seems to make sense. However, as
highlighted in Section 2.5 some land acquisitions may be required before constructing the extensions.
The extension of the Riverfront trail also requires some land acquisition but for the most part will be able
to travel over the sewer easement already in place. The barrier preventing the extension of the Riverfront
Trail is the Causeway. Currently there is no safe way to cross the Causeway and based on conversations
with traffic engineers, an AT bridge crossing the Causeway is recommended to help give AT users a
safe East West passage over the Causeway.
Figure 6 - AT Map: Trails
8
2.3 Destinations
An AT route is only as good as where it takes you. As outlined in the Background and Recommendations
report, key destinations were determined through community consultation, existing land uses, future
growth areas, and existing transportation networks. The key destinations (Figure 7) include schools,
downtown (Riverview and Moncton), commercial areas, parks and other recreation facilities. The
locations of the key destinations play a key role in determining the route of the AT network. A larger
version of Figure 7 can be found in Appendix E.
Figure 7 - Potential Land Acquisition Map
9
2.4 Potential Land Acquisitions and Easements
Based on the proposed and future AT routes, the Town of Riverview will be required to acquire lands or
easements in order to construct some of the AT routes. The properties affected by the proposed and
future AT routes are highlighted in Figure 8. The routes requiring the largest land acquisitions or
easements are the extension of the Dobson trail to Trites Road and the extension of AT infrastructure
from Cleveland Avenue to the Dobson Trail. These particular routes are all designated as future routes.
The extension of the Riverfront Trail west of the Causeway is proposed to run along the Town's
current sewer easement similar to the existing Riverfront Trail east of the Causeway. The
acquisitions or easements required to connect the Dobson Trail to the Mill Creek Park are dependent on
the route. The exact route of the proposed extension of the Dobson Trail is part of the Mill Creek Park
Master Plan.
A larger version of Figure 8 can be found in Appendix F.
Figure 8 - Potential Land Acquisitions and Easements Map
10
2.5 Integration with Surrounding Communities
While Greater Moncton features a number of distinct and separate communities, all are within proximity to
residents that spend time in more than one community on a daily basis. This allows residents of the
region to easily take advantage of the various employment, recreation, entertainment and other
opportunities in any of the communities. Connectivity between the various communities will therefore be
an important component to encouraging AT use.
Currently Riverview has connections to the City of Moncton via Gunningsville Boulevard and the
Causeway, to the communities of Hillsborough and Lower Coverdale via Hillsborough Road and to the
community of Coverdale via the Coverdale Road. There are currently no direct connections to the City of
Dieppe; however there is an indirect connection through Moncton to Dieppe.
Future connections to the City of Moncton may come in the form of a pedestrian and bicycle bridge over
the Petitcodiac River to Bore View Park in downtown Moncton. Future connections to the City of Dieppe
may similarly come in the form of a bridge over the Petitcodiac River to southern Dieppe. Future
connections to Coverdale, Lower Coverdale and Hillsborough may come in the form of multi-use trails or
bike lanes along Coverdale Road and Hillsborough Road. Along the sections of Coverdale Road and
Hillsborough Road where the speed limit is 70 km/hr, it is not recommended that AT users share
the road with motorists for safety reasons.
The Tri-Community, City of Moncton, City of Dieppe and the Town of Riverview are in the process of
completing a Regional Sustainable Transportation Master Plan. The Master Plan will develop a set of
recommendations to improve and enhance transportation connections between the three communities.
These recommendations should be referenced.
11
3 Active Transportation Design Standards
3.1 Engineering Design Standards
The Town of Riverview's current design standards for streets do not include provisions for AT
infrastructure such as shared routes, bike lanes or multi-use trails. By working with the Town's
Department of Engineering and following recommendations from the Traffic Association of Canada
(TAC), revised standards have been developed to include AT infrastructure. The following subsections
outline proposed standards for the Urban Local Primary, Urban Collector Minor and Urban Collector
Primary.
Urban Local Primary Proposed AT Design Standard
3.1.1
The revised standard for the Urban Local Primary (Figure 9) includes the addition of shared routes. The
current standard has a 20 metre right-of-way, 1.5 metre wide sidewalk on one side of the street, and a
road configuration that can accommodate two motorized vehicle travel lanes with parking on both sides.
The revised standard is the same except for the two travel lanes are dedicated and signed shared routes
and the sidewalk is widened to 2.0 metres wide. Landscaping should also be included along the sidewalk
in the form of trees and shrubs. Parking is still allowed on either side of the street.
The inclusion of the Urban Local Primary AT design standard should be incorporated into the AT tertiary
routes along existing and future roads. A larger scale of Figure 9 can be found in Appendix G.
Figure 9 - Urban Local Proposed AT Design Standard
12
Urban Collector Minor Proposed AT Design Standard
3.1.2
The current design standard for the Urban Collector Minor includes a 20 metre right-of-way, 1.5 m wide
sidewalk on one or two sides of the street and a road configuration that can accommodate two vehicle
travel lanes with parking on both sides. The proposed AT design standard includes increasing the right-
of-way to 23 metres and requiring a 2.0 metre wide sidewalk on one side and a 3.0 metre wide multi-use
trail. Where there is space the multi-use trail should be widened to 3.6 metres as recommending in TAC.
Landscaping should also be included along the sidewalk and multi-use trail in the form of trees and
shrubs. Parking is still allowed on either side of the street.
The inclusion of the Urban Collector Minor AT design standard should be incorporated into the AT
secondary routes along existing and future roads. A larger scale of Figure 10 can be found in Appendix H.
Figure 10 - Urban Collector Minor Proposed AT Design Standard
13
Urban Collector Primary Proposed AT Design Standard
3.1.3
The current design standard for the Urban Collector Primary includes a 23 metre wide right-of-way, 1.5
metre wide sidewalks on both sides of the street and a road configuration that can accommodate two
vehicle travel lanes with parking on both sides. The proposed AT design standard includes widening the
one sidewalk to 2.0 metres and the other 3.0 metres to a multi-use trail. Where possible the multi-use trail
should be widened to 3.6 metres. Landscaping should also be included along the sidewalk and multi-use
trail in the form of trees and shrubs. Parking is still allowed on either side of the street.
Similar to the Urban Collector Minor, the Urban Collector Primary AT design standard should be
incorporated into the AT secondary routes along existing and future roads where a wider asphalt surface
is required. A larger scale of Figure 11 can be found in Appendix I.
Figure 11 - Urban Collector Primary Proposed AT Design Standards
14
Trail Design Standard
3.1.4
There is currently no design standard for trails in the Town of Riverview. Based on the best practices
outlined in Appendix A and discussions with town staff, a minimum design standard has been produced.
The design standard includes a 3.0 m paved surface, a 1.0 m cleared area on either side of the trail and a
1.5 m landscaped area on the outer limits on the right-of-way. The 1.0 m wide cleared area running
alongside the trail is based on CPTED principles and provides users with surveillance of surroundings.
Not shown in Figure 12, trails should also have a vertical clearance of 2.4 - 3.0 m to ensure users are
safe from any obstructions.
The inclusion of the Trail design standard should be incorporated into the Riverfront Trail and any other
trail intended to be used by users with wheels. A larger scale of Figure 12 can be found in Appendix J.
Figure 12 - Trail Design Standards
15
3.2 Design Challenges
Based on Best Practices outlined in the Background and Recommendations report, several roads and
intersections in Riverview pose some difficult design challenges when trying to incorporate AT
infrastructure. These areas include:
-
Coverdale Road and Hillsborough Road;
-
Causeway Interchange; and
-
Findlay Boulevard.
Coverdale Road and Hillsborough Road are one of the most heavily travelled routes in Riverview. They
are the only streets that connect Riverview East and West. Sections of the roads are quite narrow and
without a detailed analysis and redesign of the roads there is currently no space for bike lanes. As
mentioned in Section 2.2.1, a prompt solution is to direct AT users to the Riverfront Trail and in
the future any major work required to the street should include AT infrastructure.
The Causeway interchange has proven to be a major barrier for AT users wanting to travel East or West
along Coverdale Road. There is currently a sidewalk running along the south side of Coverdale Road
crossing the Causeway, but based on public consultation and on-site assessment this is not a safe or
inviting experience for AT users. After consultation with traffic engineers the most effective solution
while maintaining the interchange is to build an AT bridge along the north side of Coverdale Road
spanning over the causeway. The AT bridge will provide AT users with a safe and inviting connection
over the Causeway Interchange.
Figure 13 - Hillsborough Road and Coverdale Road Design Challenge
16
Findlay Boulevard is a heavily travelled route in Riverview and connects South West Riverview with
Coverdale Road and Moncton. A multi-use trail runs along Findlay Boulevard from Gunningsville
Boulevard to Whitepine Road but the trail does not continue down Findlay Boulevard towards Coverdale
Road. This section of Findlay Boulevard experiences vehicles travelling at higher speeds and is not an
ideal location for bike lanes or shared routes. We are proposing to continue the multi-use trail along
the western side of Findlay Boulevard. The multi-use trail will connect to the high school in a number of
locations as well as to Bradford Road West and to Coverdale Road.
Figure 14 - Causeway Interchange Design Challenge
Figure 15 - Findlay Boulevard Design Challenge
17
3.3 Other (i.e. curb cuts, storm grates)
When designing roads, sidewalks and trails it is important to consider the design of curb cuts, storm
grates, and robust surfaces. With an aging population, more and more residents are limited to traveling
with wheelchairs and walkers. The design details of an AT route can have a large impact on the users
experience. Curb cuts of at least 1.5 metres helps ensure users will have any easier time traveling the AT
route. Storm grates on the road should be designed and/or oriented so that cyclists' wheels cannot easily
get caught in them. Figure 16 provides an example of storm grates in Riverview oriented the correct and
incorrect way.
When developing an AT network it is important that surface materials cater to the intended users. For
example an ideal surface for walkers, joggers and runners is crushed rock as it is easier on the joints but
for cyclists and individuals in wheelchairs and walkers an asphalt surface is the preferred surface.
Concrete, which is typically used for sidewalks is more durable to wear and tear but is hard on the joints
and less comfortable to travel with wheels. It is proposed that trails intended for walkers, joggers and
runners are surfaced with crush rock and multi-use trails intended for walkers, joggers, runners,
bikers and other forms of AT with wheels are surfaced with asphalt. It is also proposed that the
Town consider asphalt for sidewalks.
Figure 16 - Examples of storm grates in Riverview
INCORRECT
CORRECT
18
4 Additional Active Transportation Infrastructure
4.1 Signage
Signage and wayfinding are important consideration when promoting AT infrastructure. They provide
users with information on points of interest, destinations and connections and encourage and inform
users how to safely use the AT infrastructure. Providing mapping is also important to promote increased
knowledge and use of this infrastructure. Signage should be used to create a cohesive "branding" and
look to the trails and bike route network. Figure 17 provides an example of the signs that are in the
process of being developed by the Town of Riverview. It is recommended that similar signs be used for
the branding of the trails and bike route network.
4.2 Traffic Control Signage
All bikeway traffic control signage should follow the Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada
produced by the TAC. These standards outline appropriate traffic control for the installation of signs and
pavement markings on bikeways in Canada. The guidelines are intended for bikeways within the public
right-of-way, but may be applicable to off-road bikeways as well. An outline of the TAC standards that
apply to the AT Plan can be found in Appendix K.
Figure 17 - Riverview Signage from the Town of Riverview
19
4.3 Trail Access Signage
Trail access signage is broken up into two categories:
primary access point and secondary access points.
Different levels of signage are used for the two access
points. Primary access points are located at the main
access points of trails and include signage in the form
of a kiosk. Every kiosk should have the following
information.
-
Map of the entire AT network including
location and directional information.
-
Names of the individual AT routes.
-
Information on the different types of AT routes
(i.e. paved trails, shared roads).
-
Point of interest along the AT routes.
-
Destination along the AT route.
-
Rules on how to use the AT network.
Kiosks may also include bulletin boards for community events associated with AT. Figure 18 is an
example of a primary access point sign. The recommended locations of the kiosks are shown in Figure
19. A large version of Figure 19 can be found in Appendix L.
Figure 19 - Proposed locations of signage and points of interest
Figure 18 - Example of a Primary Access Point Sign
20
Secondary access points are located along
the AT network and are in the form of signs
such as the signs shown in Figure 20.
These signs can include the name of the
trail and the rules on how to use the specific
route it advertises. The recommended
locations of the secondary access point
signs are shown in Figure 19.
4.4 Interpretive Signage
Interpretative signs are used for educational
purposes along trails and routes. The
interpretative signs can be tied directly to
the
route
mapping
and
can
aid
in
wayfinding. The development of interpretive
signage
provides
an
opportunity
for
partnerships with local trail systems or
environmental groups. Below in Figure 21
are examples of interpretive signs. The
recommended locations of interpretive signs
are shown in Figure 19.
Figure 20 - Example of a Secondary Access Point Sign.
Figure 21 - Examples of Interpretive Signs
21
4.5 Mileage Markers and Wayfinding Signage
The mile marker signs should be located along routes frequently used by runners and walkers, such as
the Riverfront Trail, Gunningsville Boulevard and Pine Glen Road. Figure 22 gives an example of a mile
marker sign. Wayfinding signage should be located along all routes to reassure users that they are still on
a designated AT route. Figure 22 gives an example of a wayfinding sign.
4.6 End of Trip Facilities
Effective bicycle infrastructure also includes end of trip facilities. End of trip facilities can include sheltered
and non-sheltered bike racks, bike lockers, showers and changing rooms. Providing end of trip facilities
removes a barrier for residents to use AT for commuting.
Sheltered and non-sheltered bike racks provide users a space to park and lock their bike while at their
destination. Areas that should include sheltered bike racks are major bus stops and schools. Non-
sheltered bike racks are sufficient at other destinations. Based on the best practices outlined in the
Background and Recommendation Report the most recommended bike rack is the inverted U bike rack.
Figure 23 is an example of an inverted U bike rack.
Figure 23 - Examples of an inverted U bike rack
Figure 22 - Examples of a Mile Marker Sign and a Wayfinding Sign.
22
Other end of trip facilities includes showers and changing rooms. These are typically provided for
commuters and are found at schools and employment centres. It is essential for effective AT networks
that the end of trip facilities be located near the key destinations throughout the Town.
4.7 Benches and Washrooms
Other forms of infrastructure that is important to the success of AT networks are benches and
washrooms. These facilities are becoming increasingly important with an aging population. They provide
the elderly, the young and the mobility-disabled residents with areas to rest along the AT network and an
opportunity to use the washroom. These facilities are currently found along Riverview's Riverfront Trail.
These facilities should be included at major bus stops, along future trails and at major destinations.
4.8 Lighting
Based on the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) standards outlined in the
Background and Recommendation Report lighting visibility along dark and unsafe sections of any AT
route and sidewalk are essential. Lighting should be included along trails intended for commuters and/or
along trails that act as key connections to major destinations during the early morning and early evening.
4.9 ATV and Snowmobile Signage
The Town has recently witnessed damages to its existing trails by individuals using the trails as ATV and
Snowmobile routes. To help prevent future damages to the AT network signs prohibiting the use of ATVs
and snowmobiles should be located at the entrance and along the route of the multi-use trails. The signs,
shown in Figure24 are from the Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada.
Figure 24 - All-Terrain Vehicles Prohibited Sign (RB-87) and Snowmobile Prohibited Sign (RB-65)
23
5 AT Route Management and Winter Maintenance
5.10 AT Route Management
The majority of AT Routes in Riverview are within the street ROWs, which are either owned by the Town
or in some cases by the Province. As a result the responsibilities to maintain and manage the routes fall
under the Town. The one exception is the Dobson Trail. The majority of the trail is out of Town limits and
therefore is managed by the non-profit group Fundy Hiking Trail Association, which is made up of
volunteers.
5.11 Winter Maintenance
Through discussions with councillors, town staff and residents, the following has been determined with
regards to the winter maintenance of the AT network. Currently the Town clears sidewalks with three
Trackless snow blowers, each covering on average roughly 12 km. The Riverfront Trail is currently not
cleared, nor the multi-use trail along Gunningsville Boulevard. The Riverfront Trail has been cleared in the
past, but with the realignment of the trail in 2010 after the causeway doors were opened the trail proved
to be unsafe for Trackless snow blowers. The Riverfront Trail is also surfaced with crushed rock, which
results in more wear and tear than an asphalted trail would on the Trackless snow blowers. It is
proposed that the Town pave and widen the Riverfront Trail to a minimum of three metres from
the Causeway to Hawkes St and realign it where deemed necessary. With these upgrades, it will
most likely be more feasible to maintain the Riverfront Trail during the winter months.
Currently the Town clears the sidewalks along Gunningsville Boulevard but not the multi-use trail;
however they do clear the multi-use trail along Pine Glen Road but only along the sections of the street
that does not have sidewalk. Sidewalks are quicker to clear than multi-use trails as they are narrower. It
is proposed that the Town continues to clear its sidewalks prior to the multi-use trails. It is also
proposed that the Town prioritise the clearing of primary AT routes over secondary routes and
tertiary routes. However, the Town should also continue to prioritise when clearing the AT routes such
as first clearing AT routes leading to schools.
As the AT network develops, the Town will be require to purchase more snow blowers to clear the AT
infrastructure in a timely manner. It is proposed that for every 10 km of AT infrastructure that
requires winter maintenance, the Town have one Trackless snow blower or another form of snow
clearing machine.
The Town currently uses Trackless snow blowers to clear the sidewalks. These machines can cost
upwards to $200,000 each. Below is a list of alternative snow clearing machines to consider in the future,
which may also help with decreasing the upfront and on-going costs associated with snow blowers.
-
Ventrac - Snow Blower with other attachments available;
-
Holder - Snow Blower with other attachments available;
-
Bobcat - Snow Blower with other attachments available.
24
6 Recommended Policies and By-laws
Similar to the engineering design standard revisions in Section 3.1, the AT Plan also recommends
changes to the Town's Municipal Development Plan, Subdivision By-law and Zoning By-law. The intent of
the recommendations is to integrate terminology to promote the development of AT education and
infrastructure into the Town's governing policy documents. Specific areas the amendments address
include:
-
Integrating active transportation terminology into existing policies related to connectivity;
-
Requiring the consideration and inclusion of active transportation infrastructure into new
developments; and
-
Clarifying terminology and standards related to trails and AT infrastructure required or considered
under the Subdivision By-law.
6.1 Municipal Development Plan
As discussed in the Background and Recommendations Report, the Town's existing Municipal
Development Plan already contains a number of policies that are supportive of AT even though it is not
explicitly mentioned. This section outlines proposed amendments to the Municipal Development Plan that
will integrate the Active Transportation Plan into the Town's governing policy document.
Amended Policies
6.1.1
The following table contains existing policies and proposed changes to text based on the Active
Transportation Plan:
Table 10.1: Proposed Amendments to Existing Municipal Development Plan Policies and
Proposals
Policy / Proposal
Text
4.6.13
Existing
Policy
It shall be the intention of Council to consider sidewalks, trails and paths to
be essential components of the Town's transportation network and to
evaluate the need for these important connections during the review of all
subdivision and terms and conditions applications.
Proposed
Policy
Council shall recognize the importance of the existing and future active
transportation network provided in Schedule E. When assessing
subdivision, rezoning and terms and conditions applications, Council shall
have specific regard for:
(a) the integration of primary, secondary and/or tertiary active
transportation infrastructure based on the standards of the Active
Transportation Plan and Subdivision Standards;
(b) the provision for smaller connections within neighbourhoods to
establish or maintain a pedestrian grid; and
25
(c) the use of sidewalks, trails and multi-use paths as essential parts of
the Town's transportation network.
4.6.14
Existing Policy
Council shall provide specific direction in the Subdivision Standards to
ensure that sidewalks are an integral part of all newly developed areas.
Proposed
Policy
Council shall provide specific direction in the Subdivision Standards to
ensure that sidewalks, bike lanes, multi-use trails, cross-country ski
routes and/or other active transportation infrastructure are an integral
part of all newly developed areas.
5.1.4
Existing Policy
In order to create beautiful and safe streets, Council shall ensure that
street trees are required on all streets, and in an effort to promote walkable
communities, provide specific direction in the Subdivision Standards to
ensure that sidewalks are an integral part of all newly developed areas.
Proposed
Policy
In order to create beautiful, safe and walkable streets and
communities, Council shall ensure that all new developments
include:
(a) sidewalks, bike lanes, multi-use trails or other active
transportation; and
(b) where possible, separate pedestrian and active transportation
infrastructure from the vehicular portion of the road through a
landscaped strip featuring street trees to provide an attractive
streetscape and enhanced experience for pedestrians and
cyclists.
5.6.4
Existing Policy
To assist with the implementation of Policy 5.6.3, Council will use the
following objectives to evaluate the secondary plans:
(a) the plan provides an appropriate amount of mix housing types which
should
(b) include a combination of single, two unit, semidetached, and
rowhouse /
(c) townhouse dwellings;
(d) the efficient layout of streets and traffic in general;
(e) the connectivity of the subdivision with adjacent lands;
(f) the location and size of future parks, open spaces and trails;
(g) detailed servicing and infrastructure information; and
(h) any other applicable information.
Proposed
Policy
To assist with the implementation of Policy 5.6.3, Council will use the
following objectives to evaluate the secondary plans:
(a) the plan provides an appropriate amount of mix housing types which
should include a combination of single, two unit, semidetached, and
rowhouse / townhouse dwellings;
26
(b) the efficient layout of streets and traffic in general;
(c) the connectivity of the subdivision with adjacent lands;
(d) the location and size of future parks, open spaces and trails;
(e) integration of active transportation infrastructure;
(f) detailed servicing and infrastructure information; and
(g) any other applicable information.
Principal 4:
Connectivity
Must be
Enabled
Existing
Text
Developers will need to provide road, open space and trail connections to
adjacent developments. Connectivity is about providing:
(a) a variety of transportation options including vehicular, bicycle,
walking, and other active transportation linkages;
(b) open space linkages that create a connected network of parks, green
spaces and public lands that are based on existing natural features.
These networks of linked open space can provide space for trails and
should be easily accessible to residents by bike or foot; and
(c) safe and walkable communities through the use of sidewalks.
Proposed
Text
Developers will need to provide road, open space, active transportation
and trail connections to adjacent developments. Connectivity is about
providing:
(a) a variety of transportation options including vehicular, bicycle,
walking, and other active transportation linkages;
(b) open space linkages that create a connected network of parks, green
spaces and public lands that are based on existing natural features.
These networks of linked open space can provide space for trails and
should be easily accessible to residents by bike or foot; and
(c) safe and walkable communities through the use of sidewalks.
9.0.3
Existing
Policy
It shall be the intention of Council to establish a long-term, town-wide
strategy for creating and developing future parks, open spaces and trails
through a Recreation Master Plan and an Active Transportation Plan.
Proposed
Policy
It shall be the intention of Council to establish a long-term, town-wide
strategy for creating and developing future parks and open spaces through
a Recreation Master Plan.
27
9.0.13
Existing
Proposal
To assist in the implementation of Policy 9.0.3, Council proposes to
complete an Active Transportation Plan, which will be used improve and
expand the existing transportation network for cycling, walking and public
transit. The Plan should include the following:
1. Ensure safe and efficient accessibility for non-motorized
transportation within the community.
2. Identify and create a network of trails and other paths providing
connectivity to neighbourhoods, schools, work and shopping
destinations.
3. Develop an educational and promotional program that encourages
the use of alternative modes of transportation.
Proposed
Proposal
To assist in the implementation of Policy 9.0.3, Council proposes to
periodically evaluate and review the existing Active Transportation Plan,
which will be used to improve and expand the existing transportation
network for cycling, walking and public transit. The review should include
the following:
1. Ensure safe and efficient accessibility for non-motorized
transportation within the community.
2. Identify and expand a network of trails and other paths providing
connectivity to neighbourhoods, schools, work and shopping
destinations.
3. Review the educational and promotional program that encourages
the use of alternative modes of transportation.
New Policies and Proposals
6.1.2
This section contains new policies and policies that should be added to the Municipal Development Plan.
The numbering will be at the discretion of the Town Clerk and Planning Staff.
Chapter 4 (Infrastructure and Municipal Services) Policies:
(1)
Where a cul-de-sac is permitted, subject to Policies 4.6.2 and 4.6.3, provision must be made for
pedestrian and active transportation connectivity from the end of the cul-de-sac to the adjacent
street.
Chapter 4 (Infrastructure and Municipal Services) Proposals
(1)
Council proposes to work with Codiac Transit to establish active transportation infrastructure that
corresponds with bus routes and stops while considering the installation of infrastructure such as
bike racks and/or lockers at key destinations and public transportation nodes.
28
Chapter 9 (Parks, Open Spaces and Recreational Facilities) Policies:
(1)
Council shall recognize the importance of the Active Transportation Plan when considering any
proposed development.
(2)
Council shall discourage the use of all-terrain vehicles, snowmobiles and other motorized vehicles
(with the exception of those designed for mobility disabled) on any trails, cross-country ski routes or
other active transportation infrastructure and may consider installing infrastructure in certain
instances to prevent this.
(3)
When assessing Lands for Public Purposes as part of the subdivision process Council shall
consider any existing, non-formalized trails and/or cross country ski routes and encourage the
integration of these as formal active transportation routes within a proposed development.
(4)
Council shall work with the Province of New Brunswick to incorporate Active Transportation
infrastructure into any existing or future Provincially owned roads or crossings.
Chapter 9 (Parks, Open Spaces and Recreational Facilities) Proposals:
(1)
Council proposes to undertake investments into active transportation based on the phasing outlined
in the Active Transportation Plan.
(2)
Council proposes to undertake a feasibility study that provides preliminary designs and cost
estimates for new or upgraded active transportation crossings as outlined in the Active
Transportation Plan.
6.2 Subdivision By-law
Amendments to the Town's Subdivision By-law are aimed at clarifying the use and development of trails
as permitted Lands for Public Purposes. Other amendments are intended to provide standards with
respect to right-of-way and street widths, connectivity and the introduction of AT infrastructure. One of the
key elements of amendments to the Subdivision By-law will relate to the right-of-way and street widths
along with Active Transportation infrastructure required for streets constructed as part of new
subdivisions. The following outlines proposed amendments to this portion of the Subdivision By-law:
Existing Standard
2(1) In a subdivision, unless otherwise stipulated by the Commission, streets required pursuant to
subsection 3(1)(a) of this by-law shall:
(a) contain the following minimum right of way width:
-
urban arterial/freeway - 30 meters
-
urban collector primary - 23 meters
-
urban collector minor - 20 meters
-
urban local primary - 20 meters
-
urban local minor - 18 meters
(b) be constructed with the following minimum driving surface:
-
urban arterial/freeway - to be determined by the Town's Engineering Department
29
-
urban collector primary - 12.8 meters
-
urban collector minor - 10.6 meters
- urban local primary - 9.25 meters
-
urban local minor - 9.25 meters
Proposed Standard:
2(1) In a subdivision, unless otherwise stipulated by the Commission, streets required pursuant to
subsection 3(1)(a) of this by-law shall:
(a) contain a minimum right-of-way and street width along with active transportation
infrastructure in accordance with the following table:
Minimum Requirements for Right-of-Ways, Streets and Active Transportation Infrastructure
Street
Type
Minimum
Right-of-
Way
Width
Minimum Street
Width
Recommended
Active
Transportation
Infrastructure
Minimum Active
Transportation
Infrastructure
Width and Design
Proposed
Parking
Urban
Arterial /
Freeway
30 m (98.4
ft)
To be determined
by Town's
Engineering
Department
Separated multi-use
Trails
Subject to
Subdivision
Standards
No
Urban
Collector
Primary
23 m (75.5
ft)
12.8 m (42.0 ft)
Sidewalks on either
side of the street
Subject to
Subdivision
Standards
Yes
Urban
Collector
Primary
AT Route
23 m (75.5
ft)
12.8 m (42.0 ft)
2 meter wide sidewalk
and 3 meter wide
multi-use trail
Subject to
Subdivision
Standards
Yes
Urban
Collector
Minor
20 m (65.6
ft)
10.6 m (34.8 ft)
1.5 meter wide
sidewalk on one side
with the option of
another on the other
side
Subject to
Subdivision
Standards
Yes
Urban
Collector
Minor AT
Route
23 m (75.5
ft)
10.6 m (34.8 ft)
2 meter wide sidewalk
and 3 meter wide
multi-use trail
Subject to
Subdivision
Standards
Yes
Urban
Local
Primary
20 m (65.6
ft)
9.25 m (30.3 ft)
1.5 meter wide
sidewalk on one side
of the street
Subject to
Subdivision
Standards
Yes
Urban
Local
Primary
AT Route
20 m (65.6
ft)
9.25 m (30.3 ft)
2.0 meter wide
sidewalk on one side
of the street with share
route on the road.
Subject to
Subdivision
Standards
Yes
30
Urban
Local
Minor
18 m (59.1
ft)
9.25 m (30.3 ft)
No sidewalks required
Subject to
Subdivision
Standards
Yes
Additional amendments are outlined in the following table:
Table 10.2: Proposed Text Amendments to the Subdivision By-law
Section
Standard
1. Definitions
Proposed
Amendment
Add the following to the definition of lands for public purposes:
(m) a trail or integrated network of trails designed to
provide enhanced recreational opportunities and non-
motorized connectivity throughout a neighbourhood.
2. Streets and
Services
Proposed
Amendment
Add the following standard to 2(1):
Where a cul-de-sac is permitted, subject to Section 2(1)(c), a
paved multi-use trail to the specifications of the Subdivision
Standards or a park must be provided from the bulb of the cul-
de-sac to an adjacent street.
5. Subdivision
Agreements
Existing
Standard
5(1) In a subdivision where streets are existing or required, pursuant
to section 3(1)(a) of this by-law, the person proposing to subdivide
land shall provide within that subdivision such facilities as streets,
curbing, sidewalks, walkways, street lights, water and sewer lines,
culverts, drainage ditches and the developer shall:
(a) enter into a subdivision agreement with the municipality that is
binding upon their heirs, successors and assigns to construct and pay
the cost of facilities required within the subdivision, and shall deposit a
sum of money, or an irrevocable letter of credit with the Town,
sufficient to guarantee the faithful performance of said agreement;
and
(b) enter into a drainage agreement with the municipality that is
binding upon their heirs, successors and assigns that will ensure
compliance with the subdivision drainage plan.
Proposed
Standard
5(1) In a subdivision where streets are existing or required, pursuant
to section 3(1)(a) of this by-law, the person proposing to subdivide
31
land shall:
(a) provide within that subdivision such facilities as streets, curbing,
sidewalks, walkways, bike lanes, trails, multi-use trails, street
lights, water and sewer lines, culverts, drainage ditches;
(b) enter into a subdivision agreement with the municipality that is
binding upon their heirs, successors and assigns to construct and pay
the cost of facilities required within the subdivision, and shall deposit a
sum of money, or an irrevocable letter of credit with the Town,
sufficient to guarantee the faithful performance of said agreement;
and
(c) enter into a drainage agreement with the municipality that is
binding upon their heirs, successors and assigns that will ensure
compliance with the subdivision drainage plan.
6.3 Zoning By-law
While no major changes are required to the Town's existing Zoning By-law, it will be important to
introduce standards requiring on-site bicycle parking spaces to improve end of trip facilities across the
community. Similar standards already exist in Moncton and Dieppe and for the purposes of consistency
amongst the three communities; we would recommend using the same standards in Riverview.
One change we would recommend is increasing the minimum amount of bicycle parking from two (2)
bicycle parking spaces to four (4) bicycle parking spaces. The only other change we would recommend
would be not allowing cash-in-lieu of bicycle parking. The following outlines the proposed additions to the
Zoning By-law:
Section 2: Definitions
"bicycle parking space" means a slot in a bicycle rack, or in a bicycle locker, designed to hold one
adult-sized bicycle and provide a fixed loop, bar or other feature to which an adult-sized bicycle may be
secured at the bicycle frame by means of an 8" U-lock;
Section 3: General Provisions
No development shall be permitted for the erection, alteration or use of any building, use or structure,
other than a single detached, semi-detached, duplex or townhouse dwelling, except where secure
bicycle parking spaces are provided and maintained in conformity with the following provisions:
(a) The number of bicycle parking spaces shall be the greater of:
(i)
One bicycle parking space for every twenty (20) vehicular parking spaces required by
the by-law;
32
(ii)
One bicycle parking space for every twenty (20) vehicular parking spaces on the lot; or
(iii)
Four (4) bicycle parking spaces.
(b) Bicycle parking spaces shall be in the form of inverted U, M-style, loop-style, post-mount or
bollard racks of sufficient height that adult-sized bicycles may be locked to the rake with an 8"
U-lock at the crossbar; or else in the form of indoor storage lockers.
(c) Bicycle racks shall be bolted, sunk, embedded or otherwise securely anchored to the
pavement, ground surface or main building.
(d) Outdoor bicycle parking areas:
(i)
shall be no less than three (3) metres deep;
(ii)
shall be clearly marked and delineated on the pavement or ground surface;
(iii)
shall not encroach upon, or be encroached upon by, vehicular circulation lanes, service
lanes or loading bays; and
(iv) shall be cleared of snow in winter.
(e) Notwithstanding (a), where the main building lies within three (3) metres of the front lot line, the
bicycle parking requirement may be met by a payment of cash in lieu, for the purposes of
establishing and maintaining public bicycle parking facilities.
33
7 Community Education Program
The findings from community engagement initiatives have shown that knowledge of AT amongst
Riverview residents is still in its relatively preliminary stages. The Active Transportation Plan should be
supported with a continuous community education campaign designed to inform the public of the benefits
of AT, while encouraging the safe use of infrastructure for both AT users and motorists. The promotion of
the Plan and AT infrastructure should go hand-in-hand with community education. Every act of
community education should be used as an opportunity to promote the Plan, the use of AT infrastructure
and vice versa.
The campaign should begin with the release of the Plan and build on this momentum. The education
campaign should be developed in concert with the mapping and wayfinding strategy as well as
promotional material to create a cohesive "brand" to the trails and bikeways network in the Town. It will be
important to start with the basics by emphasizing the "rules of the road", signage and the benefits
associated with AT.
A staff member should be assigned the task of implementing and promoting the Active Transportation
Plan as well as educating the community. This is not intended or envisioned as a full-time role; it may be
possible to integrate this into a current employee's job description. An outline of the tasks that the
dedicated Active Transportation Coordinator should be responsible for throughout the implementation and
promotion of the AT plan and the education of the community can be found in Appendix M.
34
8 Route and Trail Names
The routes of the Active Transportation Network have been, for the most part, named in the context of the
roadway for which they correlate (e.g. Gunningsville Route). Many existing routes already have been
named by the community using this convention. This naming convention will be familiar to users of the
network and will, for the most part, save on confusion. The exception to this is the East School Route
which runs along Old Coach Road and Chamber Street. This route has been named based on the
destination it services.
The existing unpaved trails in the Active Transportation Network have retained their names, Riverfront
Trail and Dobson Trail. The proposed and future trails that connect to these trails have been named to
express their continuation/extensions. Figure 25 has names associated with the proposed AT routes.
A larger scale of Figure 25 can be found in Appendix N.
Figure 25 - AT Route and Trail Names
35
9 Additional Studies, Initiatives and Funding Opportunities
9.1 Additional Studies
In response to this AT Plan, the Town of Riverview should consider completing a preliminary design study
of Coverdale Road from Gunningsville Bridge to the Trites Road and Hillsborough Road from
Gunningsville Boulevard to Hawkes Street. Currently the road does not consistently have the width to
support AT infrastructure other than the existing sidewalks. As Riverview continues to grow the demand
for multi modal transportation along Coverdale Road and Hillsborough Road will increase. A road can
only be widened so far to accommodate the private car. Eventually Riverview will have to increase AT
and Public Transit infrastructure along Coverdale Road and Hillsborough Road to increase its capacity to
move residents through the Town.
As part of the above recommendation, it is proposed that the Town also look at the possibility of
implementing a road diet or street rightsizing for Coverdale Road from Pine Glen Road to Trites
Road. Road diet is a technique in transportation planning whereby a road is reduced in the number if
travel lanes and/or effective width in order to achieve systemic improvements. Many examples involve
reducing the number of travel lanes and on street parking and involve increasing the space for
landscaping, pedestrians and cyclists. Numerous streets that experience rightsizing see a reduction in
traffic speeds and collisions and see an increase in pedestrian and cycling traffic. Based on our
experience through working with and in the Town of Riverview, it is our understanding that the Town
would like to see Coverdale Road develop into more of a downtown environment. Based on site visits and
analysis vehicles seem to have been given priority in the area and as a result travel a faster than the
posted speeds. Rightsizing Coverdale Road could result in slowing traffic down and improving the
pedestrian experience in downtown Riverview.
9.2 Funding Opportunities
Funding for the implementation of the Active Transportation Plan can be obtained through a variety of
sources including Federal and Provincial programs as well as corporate and charity based organizations.
A detailed analysis of funding opportunities was carried out and can be found in Appendix O. In summary
several federal programs are unclear if they are accepting applications for funding in 2013. The
Federation of Canadian Municipalities Green Municipality Fund (Federal) and the New Brunswick
Environment Trust Fund (Provincial) are the only two government funding opportunities that are currently
accepting applications for 2013. Other funding opportunities such as Bicycle Trade Association of
Canada, Evergreen and other non-government funding opportunities are also available.
36
10 Implementation, Phasing and Costing
10.1 Implementation
Implementation 1 - Recommended AT policy and by-law amendments
The proposed amendments to the Municipal Development Plan, Subdivision By-law and Zoning By-law
outlined in Section 5 should be accepted by council
Implementation 2 - Adopt TAC signage standards
The TAC standards for signage mentioned in Section 4.2 and outlined in Appendix L should be adopted
by the Town as their standards for AT signage in Riverview.
Implementation 3 - Identify staff member as the "Riverview AT Coordinator"
A staff member should be assigned the task of implementing and promoting the Active Transportation
Plan as well as educating the community. This is essential to the success of AT in Riverview.
Implementation 4 - Apply for funding opportunities
Based on funding opportunities outlined in Section 9.2 and Appendix O, the Town's AT Coordinator will
begin applying for funding for the education program, branding program and the installation of AT
infrastructure.
Implementation 5 - Set aside budget for AT infrastructure
The Town should include in their future budgets, funding for the educational program, investment in AT
infrastructure and future feasibility studies relating to AT.
Implementation 6 - Begin education program
AT infrastructure must be supported with an education campaign. The campaign should begin with the
release of the AT plan. The campaign should initially educate residents of the rules of the road for
motorist, cyclists, pedestrians and any other AT users.
There is some truth to the "if you build it they will come" mentality; however, to achieve maximum use of
the Town's AT infrastructure the Town needs to promote active living to change attitudes and perceptions
about alternative forms of transportation.
Implementation 7 - Begin branding the AT network (through signage, route names)
With the help of the education program, the AT Coordinator can begin a branding program which will
include educating the public of the AT route names and signage design. The branding exercise will bring
awareness and understanding of the AT network.
37
Implementation 8 - End of trip facilities and bike racks
Adopt a policy for the purchase and installation of end of trip facilities and bike racks at key destinations in
Riverview. These facilities are required for the adoption of biking as a feasible alternative to automobile
use. Bike racks are an essential component for both commuter and part time bike users.
10.2 Phasing / Costing
As a final Section of the AT Plan, a decision matrix was used to help determine which routes require
attention before others. The routes have already been prioritized by hierarchy classification (class) but the
decision matrix will assess the safety, accessibility, connectivity and aesthetics of each route. Each
criterion was ranked from 1 (for not needing upgrades) to 5 (needing immediate upgrades). Certain
routes, such as on Trites Road are broken into several sections based on the level of AT infrastructure
currently offered. Any route that ranked over an average of 3 was prioritized. Primary routes were given
priority over Secondary and Tertiary routes unless a safety issue was identified.
Project / Route
Class
Safety
Connectivity
Aesthetics
Accessibility
Average
Findlay Blvd
1
4
2
4
5
3.8
Coverdale Rd (Patricia to West Riverview)
1
4
2
4
4
3.5
Coverdale Rd (Patricia to Trites)
1
4
4
3
4
3.8
Coverdale Rd (Trites to Causeway)
1
4
4
3
4
3.8
Coverdale Rd (Causeway to Gunningsville)
1
4
4
3
4
3.8
Hillsborough Rd (Gunningsville to Hawkes)
1
4
4
3
4
3.8
Hillsborough Rd (Hawkes to Bridgedale)
1
4
4
3
4
3.8
Gunningsville Blvd
1
1
3
1
1
1.5
Cleveland Ave (Devere to Coverdale)
2
3
1
2
3
2.3
Pine Glen Rd (Devere to Gunningsville)
2
2
3
1
1
1.8
Devere Rd (Cleveland to Pine Glen)
2
2
3
2
2
2.3
Whitepine Rd
2
2
2
2
2
2
Buckingham Ave
2
3
1
2
2
2
Trites Rd (Coverdale to Whitepine)
2
2
2
2
3
2.3
Trites Rd (Callaghan to Callowhill)
2
5
4
4
5
4.5
East School
2
2
2
2
2
2
Runneymeade Rd
2
2
2
2
2
2
Callowhill Road
2
5
4
4
5
4.5
Cleveland Ave (Gunningsville to Pinewood)
3
4
2
4
5
3.8
Cleveland Ave (Pinewood to Devere)
3
2
1
2
2
1.8
Pinewood Rd
3
1
2
1
2
1.5
Bradford Rd
3
1
1
3
3
2
Sussex Ave
3
4
4
3
4
3.8
Hawkes St
3
4
4
4
4
4.0
Riverfront Trail (Old Coach to Causeway)
T
1
3
1
4
2.3
Riverfront Trail (East of Old Coach)
T
2
2
1
4
2.3
38
The projects / routes prioritized in the decision matrix were then placed in the below table in which more
details were given to each project / route. The estimates of probable construction costs are based on best
available information. These estimates of probable construction costs are provided as a general guide for
the prioritization of funding. A breakdown of each project is provided in Appendix P.
*The above estimates do not include the price to acquire lands where necessary.
The above projects highlight the significant capital required to implement AT infrastructure throughout
Riverview's AT network. Other than the significant infrastructure investment required to realize the AT
network, the Town is also able to invest in smaller projects to help promote AT within the community.
Such investments may include the following:
-
Adding paint to all tertiary routes indicating they are shared routes;
-
Installing signs to the tertiary routes indicating it is a shared route;
-
Installing signage along primary, secondary and tertiary routes as well as trails;
-
Widen the Riverfront Trail to 3 metres, pave it and realign wherever it is necessary to ensure the
safety for snow plows;
-
Working with Codiac Transit to ensure there is sufficient infrastructure available for transit users
as well as AT users at all bus stops;
-
Install AT end-of-trip facilities such as bike lockers, showers at key destinations along the AT
network; and
-
Install other AT infrastructure such as benches and washrooms along the AT network.
Project
Estimate
Lengths
Applicable
Standard(s)
Estimates of probable
construction costs*
Time frame
Trites Rd (Callaghan to Callowhill)
550 m
Urban Collector Minor
$200,000 - $250,000
1-2 years
Hillsborough Rd (Hawkes to Bridgedale)
1.1 km
Arterial
$300,000 - $350,000
2-3 years
Hawkes St
200 m
Urban Local Primary
$40,000 - $60,000
2-3 years
Cleveland Ave (Gunningsville to Pinewood)
175 m
Urban Local Primary
$35,000 - $50,000
2-4 years
Findlay Blvd
1.4 km
Arterial
$300,000 - $350,000
3-5 years
Sussex Ave
1.0 km
Urban Local Primary
$200,000 - $250,000
4-6 years
Callowhill Rd
1.4 km
Urban Collector Minor
$550,000 - $600,000
5-7 years
Coverdale Rd (Causeway to Gunningsville)
1.8 km
Arterial
$950,000 - $1,100,000
6-9 years
Coverdale Rd (Trites to Causeway)
1.1 km
Arterial
$350,000 - $450,000
8-10 years
Coverdale Rd (Patricia to Trites)
1.4 km
Arterial
$450,000 - $550,000
9-10 years
Hillsborough Rd (Gunningsville to Hawkes)
2.6 km
Arterial
$1,250,000 - $1,450,000
11-13 years
Coverdale Rd (Patricia to West Riverview)
1.2 km
Arterial
$550,000 - $650,000
13-16 years
Total
12.93 km
Various
$5,175,000 - $6,110,000
16 years
APPENDIX A - Background and Recommendations Report
6.25"x3.
55"
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN - RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT
Town of Riverview
December 7, 2012
121-21048
i
1
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1
2
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ................................................................................ 2
2.1
Population Growth ..................................................................................................... 2
2.2
Age Breakdown ......................................................................................................... 4
2.3
Population Disbursement .......................................................................................... 5
2.4
Place of Work and Mode of Transportation .............................................................. 10
3
BEST PRACTICES .......................................................................................... 12
3.1
Introduction ................................................................................................................ 12
3.2
Connectivity ............................................................................................................... 13
3.3
Park Dedication ......................................................................................................... 14
3.4
Routes ....................................................................................................................... 15
3.5
Vegetation and Landscaping ..................................................................................... 16
3.6
Trails and Sidewalks ................................................................................................. 17
3.7
Bike Lanes ................................................................................................................. 21
3.8
End of Trip Facilities .................................................................................................. 21
3.9
Intersections and Crossings ...................................................................................... 23
3.10
Signage and Mapping ............................................................................................. 24
3.11
Winter Maintenance ................................................................................................ 27
3.12
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design .................................................. 28
4
CONSULTATION SUMMARY .......................................................................... 30
4.1
Focus Group Workshops .......................................................................................... 30
4.2
Public Open House ................................................................................................... 34
4.3
Questionnaire ..................................................................................................................... 36
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ii
4.4
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 41
5
EXISTING ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE ................................ 42
5.1
Riverfront Trail ................................................................................................................... 42
5.2
Trites Road ........................................................................................................................ 42
5.3
Gunningsville Boulevard .................................................................................................... 43
5.4
Gunningsville Bridge .......................................................................................................... 43
5.5
Pinder Road ....................................................................................................................... 44
5.6
Findlay Boulevard .............................................................................................................. 45
5.7
Findlay Boulevard Pedestrian Bridge ................................................................................ 45
5.8
Pine Glen Road ................................................................................................................. 45
5.9
Dobson Trail ...................................................................................................................... 46
5.10
Cross Country Ski Routes ................................................................................................. 47
6
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND LAND USE PATTERNS .............................. 48
6.1
Watercourses and Wetlands ............................................................................................. 48
6.2
Topography ....................................................................................................................... 49
6.3
Land Use and Future Growth Areas .................................................................................. 49
7
EXISTING POLICIES AND DESIGN STANDARDS .................................................. 52
7.1
Municipal Development Plan ............................................................................................. 52
7.2
Subdivision By-law ............................................................................................................ 54
7.3
Secondary Plans ............................................................................................................... 55
7.4
Zoning By-law .................................................................................................................... 55
7.5
Engineering Standards ...................................................................................................... 56
7.6
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 58
8
RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................. 59
8.1
Key Routes and Destinations ............................................................................................... 59
iii
8.2
Significant Barriers and Challenges ..................................................................................... 61
8.3
Policy and Design Standards ............................................................................................... 63
8.4
Community Education and Engagement ............................................................................. 64
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Best Practices Summary
Appendix B - Consultation Maps
Appendix C - Questionnaire Results
Appendix D - Wetland Mapping
Appendix E - Topographic Mapping
Appendix F - Key Routes and Destinations
Appendix G - Connectivity Base Plan
1
1 INTRODUCTION
The following report outlines baseline data and information that will serve as the foundation of the
Active Transportation for the Town of Riverview. Prior to putting the proverbial 'pen to paper' and
laying out the network, it is critical to gain an in-depth understanding of the community and
surrounding areas.
With a population of 19,130 (2011 Census), Riverview is the fifth largest municipality in New
Brunswick. Regionally, Greater Moncton (Moncton, Riverview, Dieppe, Salisbury, other smaller
communities and the surrounding unincorporated area) has a population of over 138,000 making it the
largest census metropolitan area in the Province. The Town has historically been a predominantly
residential community but through recent initiatives by Council and Town Staff has begun attracting
more commercial development.
The Town has been a desirable location for families and seniors for a number which is due to a
number of factors including:
-
The small town character and feel of the community;
-
Friendly nature of residents and community spirit;
-
Stable residential neighbourhoods;
-
Proximity to well-paying employment opportunities both within the Town and greater regional
centre;
-
Excellent access to retail, restaurants and other sources of entertainment;
-
Well regarded schools; and
-
Access to a variety of recreational opportunities.
Council and Staff want to build on these strengths through further investments in parks and recreation
as evidenced by the preparation of an Active Transportation Plan and the ongoing Mill Creek Park
Master Plan. These projects coupled with ongoing economic and business development initiatives will
help the Town continue to be desirable location for residents and businesses well into the future.
This report will detail and assess various characteristics of the community from a population
standpoint, physical characteristics, transportation and recreation policies, feedback and input from
residents and stakeholders, existing active transportation (AT) infrastructure and land use patterns.
The final portions of this report will highlight best practices for AT and establish a series of
recommendations to be carried through in the Active Transportation Plan.
2
2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
An understanding of Riverview's demographics helps guide all components of the Active
Transportation Plan. Statistics such as the population growth, age-sex breakdown, place of work and
transportation to work will help determine particular needs relative to AT infrastructure. As part of this
analysis we have also included population projections as estimated by demographic analysis software
PCensus. It is important to note that these projections are solely based on historic data and do not
account for major events that may cause significant in or out migration.
2.1 Population Growth
Riverview
2.1.1
Riverview has witnessed relatively steady growth over the past thirty years. Between 1981 and 2011,
the Town increased its population by 4,223 or 28.3%. Based on these figures the Town has averaged
an annual population increase of 140 residents. The percentage growth from each census period
(every 5 years) was somewhat consistent ranging between 2% and 7.3%. The highest percentage
growth (7.3%) occurred between 2006 and 2011. Based on historic trends, the Town's population is
expected to continue growing over the next 11 years in the area of 14.3% or 2,873 residents. Table 2.1
provides historic and projected population figures while Figure 2.1 shows a graphic representation.
Table 2.1: Historic Population Growth and Estimates
Year
Population
Increase
% Increase
1981
14,907
-
-
1986
15,300
393
2.6%
1991
16,270
970
6.3%
1996
16,684
414
2.5%
2001
17,010
326
2.0%
2006
17,832
822
4.8%
2011
19,130
1,298
7.3%
2015
20,094
964
5.0%
2017
20,598
504
2.5%
2022
22,003
1,405
6.8%
Source: Statistics Canada, PCensus Demographic Analysis Software (Tetrad Computer Applications Inc.)
3
Source: Statistics Canada, PCensus Demographic Analysis Software (Tetrad Computer Applications Inc.)
Regional and Provincial Trends
2.1.2
Over the past twenty years the Moncton Census Metropolitan Area (Greater Moncton) which is
comprised of Moncton, Dieppe, Riverview, smaller towns and the surrounding unincorporated areas
featured even more growth than Riverview with an increase of 31,208 residents or 29%. Within that
same period, the Province also grew but at a more modest 3.8%. It is interesting to note that within the
last twenty years the Province's population has increased by 27,271 which is less growth than has
been experience in Greater Moncton alone. This is indicative of the region's economic strength and
ability to attract residents.
Based on historic data both Greater Moncton and New Brunswick are expected to grow over the next
11 years. Table 2.2 and Figure 2.2 provide the data and graphical representation of the historic and
projected growth of Greater Moncton and the Province relative to Riverview.
Table 2.2: Comparative Population Growth (as a %)
Year
Riverview
Greater Moncton
New Brunswick
1996
2.5%
5.6%
2.0%
2001
2.0%
3.7%
-1.2%
2006
4.8%
7.4%
0.1%
2011
7.3%
9.7%
2.9%
2015
5.0%
8.6%
2.4%
2017
2.5%
3.8%
1.2%
2022
6.8%
10.2%
3.4%
Source: Statistics Canada, PCensus Demographic Analysis Software (Tetrad Computer Applications Inc.)
4
Source: Statistics Canada, PCensus Demographic Analysis Software (Tetrad Computer
Applications Inc.)
2.2
Age Breakdown
Assessing the size of various age-groups can provide important information related to a municipality.
Not only does it help identify the age groups the Town is successfully attracting or not attracting but
also provides indicators related to the future composition of the Town. Nationally, the population is
aging. This is due to a number of factors including improved health care (both in terms of technology
and access) and a decrease in birth rates. Essentially, people are living longer but having fewer
children. This will have significant implications for communities in a number of areas.
As it relates to Riverview and AT, assessing the breakdown of various age groups will help in
determining the type of infrastructure that may function better for its residents. Table 2.3 provides data
related to the Town's age groups and Figure 2.3 provides a graphic representation in what is referred
to as a Cohort Model.
5
Source: Statistics Canada - 2011 Census
The Town of Riverview has a relatively typical disbursement of age-groups. Many municipalities are
witnessing a significant decline in the 0 - 19 age range; however this remains strong in Riverview. This
is an important age group as it represents youth within a community which directly correlates to the
Town's attractiveness to families. There is a slight decline in the 20 - 29 age-group which is somewhat
expected as this is the age many are attending secondary education institutions or living elsewhere as
they begin their career. It does appear that the Town has struggled to retain those aged 60 and above
as there is a rather significant decline. This can relate to any number of factors but highlights the
importance of establishing infrastructure and housing to support an aging population. As it relates to
AT, it is evident that the network must be designed and feature infrastructure for all age-groups.
2.3 Population Disbursement
The disbursement of the Town's population is important in establishing where AT infrastructure will
have the most immediate benefit. Riverview is bisected by a number of key collector and arterial
roads. These roads typically receive the vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle traffic from the surrounding
residential neighborhoods. They are designed and intended to move traffic in an efficient manner to
key destinations either inside or outside of Town. In assessing Riverview's transportation network it
becomes evident that the major arterial roads are Gunningsville Boulevard, Findlay Boulevard, and
Coverdale Road. Based on the location of these collector roads we will compare the populations of
four somewhat separate (in terms of traffic) areas. The following provides a graphical representation of
the four areas.
Table 2.3: Age/Sex Breakdown
Age
Male
Female
0-9
1095
990
10-19
1180
1190
20-29
975
1070
30-39
1185
1315
40-49
1325
1470
50-59
1175
1365
60-69
815
900
70-79
435
565
80+
255
530
6
Figure 2.4: Population Disbursement
Source:
Statistics Canada, PCensus Demographic Analysis Software (Tetrad Computer Applications Inc.)
Figure 2.5: Population Breakdown of Four Areas
7
Area 1
2.3.1
As of the 2011 census Area 1 had a total population of 3,505. This has likely increased since that time
and will continue to increase given this is the area of Town witnessing the majority of growth and new
housing. This area has higher proportions of residents aged 0 to 9 and 30 to 39 which indicates this
has been an attractive area for younger families but less attractive for those aged 50 and above. This
could relate to the type of housing being constructed in this area which (in recent years) has been a
mixture of townhouses and semi-detached units, often attractive to first time home buyers.
This portion of Riverview features a number of residential neighborhoods that more or less feed onto
Hillsborough Road. Runneymeade Road will eventually develop into a more prominent collector road
as development occurs and eventually traffic will be able to utilize the east-west corridor. This section
of the corridor (Bridgedale Boulevard) will eventually connect Hillsborough Road to Gunningsville
Boulevard and help disperse traffic is these neighborhoods. At the present time almost all traffic
funnels onto Hillsborough Road.
8
Area 2
2.3.2
With a population of 4,806, Area 2 is the second densest area of the Town which makes sense given it
is one of the older, well established areas of Riverview. The age disbursement of this area's population
is relatively consistent which should not be surprising as the area features a number of stable
neighborhoods that are attractive to home-buyers of all ages.
The area is bounded to the east by Gunningsville Boulevard and the west by Findlay Boulevard.
Whitepine serves as a collector providing access to Findlay Boulevard. Pine Glen Road is also an
important corridor that acts as a collector for residents travelling to Coverdale Road and the town core
or to Gunningsville Boulevard. While this area is more or less built-out, there is a proposed
development south of the golf course which could add additional traffic and pedestrian activity to the
area. Traffic from this area will likely use Pine Glen Road to access Coverdale Road, Gunningsville
Boulevard and/or Findlay Boulevard.
9
Area 3
2.3.3
Area 3 features the highest population of any of the four areas with 8,280 residents. This area features
a number of older neighborhoods but there has been additional development planned west of Trites
Road. It is unclear when or if this development will take place but should any additional growth occur in
the area; the majority of it will likely come once provision is made for extension of the east-west
corridor into this area. The area features two major transportation corridors in Trites Road and Findlay
Boulevard from north to south. Vehicular traffic moving east to west would predominantly travel along
either Whitepine Road or Coverdale Road.
10
Area 4
2.3.4
The least populated area in Riverview, Area 4 has a population of 2,394. With the exception of a mini-
home park, the area predominantly features ribbon form development with homes fronting directly onto
Coverdale Road. It is also important to note that area features fewer young people and more within
older age brackets. This likely relates to a limited range of housing alternatives in the immediate area.
Almost all traffic in this area would travel via Coverdale Road to access any number of other routes or
destinations. Future population growth of this area will likely be limited until the east-west corridor is
extended into western Riverview. Based on existing plans, this is the last phase of the construction of
this so it will likely be a number of years before this area sees any major growth.
2.4 Place of Work and Mode of Transportation
Place of Work
2.4.1
Historically, Riverview has been a predominantly residential community, meaning many residents
travel outside of the Town for work. Census data still shows that the majority of residents 71.3%
(based on 2006 Census data) worked in areas outside of the Town limits. The majority of these
residents (62.2%) worked in a different Census Subdivision which would most likely mean Moncton,
Dieppe and some of the outlying areas. While the Town has and continues to work on encouraging
11
additional employment opportunities within the community, establishing connections to major
employment nodes as part of the AT network will be vital to overall success of the Plan.
Mode of Transportation
2.4.2
Residents within Riverview, like most North American communities, rely on the automobile to get to
and from work. As of 2006, the majority of Riverview residents (91.2%) travelled to work by
automobile. It should be noted that since 1996, the level of active transportation usage has increased
by about 1.4%.
Figure 2.6: Mode of Transportation to Work
Vehicle as
Driver
Vehicle as
Passenger
Public Transit Walk / Bike
Other
1996
2001
2006
12
3 BEST PRACTICES
3.1 Introduction
Active transportation (AT) is both a recreational and commuter activity. Planning for active
communities is not a new phenomenon. Many Cities and Towns across the world have incorporated
active transportation infrastructure into their communities. The following sections review bike and trail
network elements based on best practices currently being used across North America with an
emphasis on particular standards that will apply to the Town of Riverview. A tabular summary of the
recommended best practices for Riverview can be found in Appendix A.
The success of active transportation relies on the connectivity and quality of the particular routes within
the network. Connectivity is gauged by the ease of access to the network and critical destinations in
and around the community. The accessibility of the network is determined by factors such as safety,
aesthetics, and destinations. In many cases, accessibility of a route will differ for able bodied versus
non-able bodied people. This is an important consideration when assessing routes and developing trail
infrastructure.
Whether for recreation or active commuting purposes, there are key barriers that keep people from
utilizing bike and trail networks. Based on our experience in other communities and through the public
consultation these include:
SCALE
BARRIERS
Community
- Perception that it takes too long to get to destinations.
- Inadequate skills or a lack of self-confidence to use active transportation such
as cycling.
- Lack of knowledge of "rules of the road" by both motorists and cyclists.
- Poorly designed or maintained transportation infrastructure.
- Lack of connectivity to key destinations or nodes.
- Lack of infrastructure such as bike racks at destinations.
- Neighbourhood design that favours cars over other modes of transportation.
- Inadequate or non-existent inter-modal connections, e.g., bicycle racks on
buses.
Workplace
- A lack of amenities such as showers, change rooms, secure bicycle storage
areas or bicycle racks, or a lack of knowledge that these facilities exist.
- Inadequate knowledge of safe and convenient routes to and from work.
- Unsafe routes to and from work including poorly lit paths, entrances, parking
13
and storage areas.
- Hostile attitudes towards active commuters (e.g., scorn by other employees,
inflexible work hours, etc.).
- Hidden subsidies that favour automobile traffic, such as free parking or
mileage expenses.
Seasonal and/or
weather-related
- Inadequate maintenance of sidewalks, bicycle lanes and trails
- Lack of cycling skills and knowledge (e.g., dressing for different types of
weather, best equipment to use, etc.)
- Fear of injury in winter or in other inclement weather conditions1
Typically, bike and trail networks consist of sidewalks, trails and on street bikeways. For the purpose of
this plan we have used biking, walking and wheel chairs as the key components of AT. We have
focused on these modes of transportation as the "baseline design tools" required to determine the
infrastructure requirements. The following sections review connectivity and routes and summarize the
best practices review findings.
3.2 Connectivity
A community striving for an effective bike and trail network requires good connectivity. Connectivity is
defined as the directness of links and connections in a community's travel network2. Good connectivity
is achieved by providing as many links (streets and paths) and intersections as possible, while
reducing dead-ends. As connectivity increases, travel times and distances decrease. Ideal block
length is 100 meters but a street network can still provide good connectivity if the length is between
125 and 150 meters long. It is important to note that these connections do not always need to come in
the form of streets and the use of trails and/or parks can be used as effective connectivity tools.
Literature suggests that the most effective street (and trail) pattern for connectivity is a grid. The
standard grid pattern of streets is a relic from early town planning with many communities planned in
this fashion during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. We are now designing many of our new
communities based on this "old" form of design. One strategy used to maintain a pedestrian grid is the
"fused grid". A fused grid is a grid of travel ways with areas "fused" keeping cars out, calming traffic,
while maintaining the pedestrian grid3. This form of development is a predominant model used in New
Urbanist communities.
1 Transport Canada, 2007. Amenities and Programs that Encourage Active Transportation in all
Seasons.http://www.tc.gc.ca/programs/environment/utsp/docs/casestudiespdf/cs53e_allseason.pdf
2 Roadway Connectivity: Creating More Connected Roadway and Pathway Networks http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm116.htm
3 IBID
14
In Riverview, the older neighborhoods have been developed in the traditional grid pattern, however
many of the newer neighborhoods have or are being developed with more meandering streets
featuring crescents and the occasional cul-de-sac. While not ideal for connectivity, it is possible to
establish a pedestrian grid through the use of parks and trails. It is important to note that this is
consistent with existing Town policy that limits the construction of cul-de-sac and strives for the design
of new neighborhoods in the grid pattern.
Best Practices for Riverview:
1. Wherever possible, encourage new developments to be designed in either a grid or fused
grid manner.
2. Avoid the construction of new cul-de-sacs.
3. Where cul-de-sacs are necessary ensure that trail connections from the bulb of the cul-de-
sac are provided to adjacent streets to maintain the pedestrian grid.
4. In existing neighbourhoods, try to identify opportunities to establish new trails that will help re-
establish the grid in areas with low connectivity.
5. Establish multiple connections to primary and secondary routes that will allow for efficient and
fast movement across the Town.
3.3 Park Dedication
One of the most effective ways to plan and develop a trails and bikeways network is to allow for the
dedication of parklands through trail systems. To achieve this, many municipalities across Canada
have redefined a trail system as a linear park to permit property owners to connect trail networks
across properties during subdivision. The municipalities then use their Parks Master Plan and Active
Transportation Plan to promote the location where linear parks are more appropriate versus
neighborhood or regional play parks. When there is a need for an additional park or recreational facility
15
within a specific neighborhood, ensure that easy access is provided for multiple forms of transportation
through the inclusion of trails, bike lanes and bike racks.
Many municipalities have developed specific policy direction through their Municipal Plan that Council
pursues the development of a linear parkway or connectivity system to enable AT. These also include
provisions that system connectivity be a future focus of lands for public purposes acquisition through
the subdivision process.
Best Practices for Riverview:
1. Include mapping of the AT network as part of the Municipal Development Plan.
2. Establish clear policies and standards in the Municipal Development Plan, Subdivision By-law
promoting the use of trails as Lands for Public Purpose.
3.4 Routes
The quality and effectiveness of a route is based on connectivity, aesthetics, safety, and access to
destinations. Also, criteria such as seasonal uses are essential for an attractive, well-used walkway
and bike routes. Communities with active and vibrant bike and trail networks have a hierarchy of
routes that reflect specific trail use such as residential uses; paths that are recreational in nature but
also provide commuter options, and main commuter routes that provide direct linkage throughout the
community4.
A typical residential route
A recreational / commuter corridor
4 Smart Growth Network, 2002. Getting to Smart Growth: 100 Policies for Implementation. www.smartgrowth.org
16
A well-designed commuter route with sidewalk and bike lane
Source: www.pedbikeimages.org
The routes in a community should provide a variety of commuting options. To this end, an AT network
should provide a variety of trails, sidewalks, and bikeways.
Best Practices for Riverview:
1. The bike and trail network should have a hierarchy of routes to provide for a variety of
activities and paths to a destination.
3.5 Vegetation and Landscaping
Landscaping and vegetation are credited with increasing the use of trails and bikeways systems5.
These design elements increase the aesthetics and comfort of a space, which promotes increased use
of an area. Any landscaping and vegetation along trail systems should meet Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles (see Section 7.12). Landscaping along sidewalks
and urban trail systems should be used to create rest areas and strengthen the delineation of
5 Rosenblatt Naderi, J., B. Kweon, C.D. Ellis, and E. Serna (2001) Transportation + Street Trees: Effect of the Urban Design Industry's Roadside
Landscape Improvement Standards on Driver and Pedestrian Performance. Presented at the ARCC Spring Research Conference at Virginia Tech,
April, 2001
17
pedestrian space. This can be achieved by utilizing planting beds and vegetation placement beside
buildings and between the sidewalk and roadway.
Examples of landscaping treatments for sidewalks and urban trails.
Best Practices for Riverview:
1.
Sidewalks should be separated wherever possible by a landscaped buffer featuring trees
to improve the aesthetics for users as well as the overall streetscape.
2.
Additional landscaping and design should be considered for primary routes within the
community.
3.
The type, design and maintenance of landscaping should comply with CPTED principles.
3.6 Trails and Sidewalks
Sidewalks
3.6.1
Sidewalks on existing streets are essential to an effective bike and trail network. The use of a
sidewalk is directly related to the cleanliness, separation from traffic and the aesthetics of the route6,7.
Each of these elements can be addressed with good design and policy. Design criteria include:
-
the condition of surface material;
-
surface width;
-
level surface;
-
clearance from obstructions such as poles and signs;
6 Humpel et. al, 2002
7 TFCPS, 2002
18
-
provision of stairs or ramps on hills;
-
areas of refuge and rest;
-
separation between the sidewalk and vehicles through the use of a landscape buffer
featuring high leafing trees;
-
railings;
-
effective and wide curb cuts for strollers and wheelchairs;
-
seasonal use considerations (grit boxes on areas that are known to be slippery in winter);
-
appropriate lighting; and
-
sight distances and eyes on the space (surveillance).
Sidewalks are generally used for localized short trips, usually within a 500 m radius of a starting point
to a destination8. Best practices suggest a minimum width of 1.5 - 1.8 m for sidewalks9. For sidewalks
that are less than 1.5 m, passing lanes for strollers and wheel chairs are necessary. Design width
should range from 1.5 m in residential areas to 3 m in the central commercial areas with storefronts
and high volumes of pedestrian traffic.
Sidewalks should be designed to address the entire design width, including any encroachments onto
the sidewalk such as street trees, signage and areas of refuge. A well-designed sidewalk will provide a
comfortable environment for people that cannot walk great distances at a time. In addition, sidewalks
will become the primary infrastructure in any AT network. They should be treated as public space and
8 American Planning Association. 2006. Planning and Urban Design Standards. John Wiley and Sons. Hoboken New Jersey
9 IBID
19
linear parkways systems that draw people to and from various destinations while providing for
attractive recreational opportunities.
Table 7.1: Sidewalk Design Considerations
Use
Width
Surface
material
Cross-Grade
Effective width
Suburban
Commercial
Min 1.5
concrete
Max 2%
~ 1.2 m
Suburban
Residential
Min 1.5
concrete
Max 2%
~ 1.2 m
Urban Commercial
Min 2.25 m
concrete
Max 2%
~ 1.5 m
Urban residential
Min 1.8 m
concrete
Max 2%
~ 1.5 m
Sources: American Planning Association. 2006. Planning and Urban Design Standards. John Wiley and Sons.
Hoboken New Jersey
Bump out on a sidewalk less than 1.5 m
Best Practices for Riverview:
1.
A hierarchy of sidewalk design widths is required based on area and level of use.
2.
The minimum sidewalk design width should be 1.5 m.
3.
For sidewalks less than 1.5 m there should be passing bump outs for wheel chair,
strollers and walkers.
4.
Well-used sidewalks provide rest areas along the sidewalk with benches and amenities.
These areas of refuge are essential for older pedestrians especially in hilly areas.
5.
Cleanliness and aesthetics directly impact the use of a sidewalk or route.
6.
Lighting and perceived safety are important for route use.
Trails
3.6.2
Trails are an effective way to create bike and pedestrian only corridors in a community. They provide
for both recreational and commuter uses and are a key tool for reconnecting and creating the
20
pedestrian grid required for an effective AT network. Trail design varies based on intended use and the
level of use. Trail design considerations are the same as for sidewalk design; however, crime and
safety considerations are an essential component of trail design. Many trails do not have the natural
surveillance of adjacent housing to provide the perception of safety, therefore the use of CPTED
principals during design is necessary to promote safe and attractive spaces.
Rest intervals should be provided on trails to promote accessibility. The location of the rest areas is
dependent on the slope of the trail and length of the sloping section. Any slope of 5% or greater
should have a rest area immediately before and immediately after a section which has a slope of 5%
or greater and a length in excess of 15 m. A multi-use trail should not exceed a grade of 10% for a
distance in excess of 20 m. Table 7.2 summarizes general design characteristics for different trail
uses.
Table 7.2: Trail Design Considerations
Use
Width
Surface material
Grade
Clearing
width
Multi-use
2 - 5 m
Gravel/asphalt
0 - 5 % not exceeding 10
% for more than 20 m
4 - 10 m
Walking/hiking
1.25 m
Crusher dust/ gravel
Less than 20 %
2.25 m
Bike trail
2.5 - 3.5 m
Asphalt/gravel
0 - 5 % not exceeding 10
% for more than 20 m
4.5 - 7.5 m
Sources: City of Surrey, San Diego Riverway Trails Plan, Allegheny County Parks, City of Kwartha Lakes Plan, City of Guelph
Best Practices for Riverview:
1.
Trails provide an effective tool for connecting the pedestrian grid.
2.
Trails will require a variety of design widths based on proposed use.
3.
Trails must be carefully designed to provide users with surveillance of surroundings. This
requires clearing tall vegetation from the sides of trails.
4.
Not all trails will be 24-hour use due to safety.
5.
Trails should be encouraged for use by snowshoers and cross-country skiers in winter
months.
6.
Multi-use paths need to be wide enough to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists
travelling in both directions.
7.
Where possible, avoid the use of granular paths as it presents barriers to those with
strollers and in wheelchairs.
21
3.7 Bike Lanes
Cycling is an efficient mode of transportation. Bike lanes can be incorporated into most existing road
right-of-ways; however, bike lanes need to be highly visible and clearly defined. A review of the
literature states that visibility is achieved through signage, lighting, and colour and/or painted bike
lanes. The use of these techniques will vary based on the volume and speed of traffic on a route.
Areas with high volumes of fast moving traffic will incorporate wider, highly visible well-defined bike
lanes. These infrastructure strategies need to be supported with driver education. Table 7.3 provides a
summary of bike and vehicle lane widths.
Table 7.3: Bike Lane Standards
Use
Width
Location
Traffic
Volume
Traffic
Speed
Shared-lane
Bike and car lane
combined, Min 4 m with
4.25 m ideal.
Residential
areas
Low (less than
3000
vehicles/day)
low
Paved
shoulder
1.2 min paved shoulder
with 1.5 ideal. A 3.5 m car
travel lane
Rural routes
moderate
Moderate -
high
Bike lane with
on street
parking
Min. 1.6 m bike lane. Car
lane 3 - 3.5 m
Town core
and core
commercial
areas
high
low
Dedicated
Bike lane
1.5 m min. 2.0 m with
high traffic volumes or
high speed traffic. Car
lane 3 - 3.5 m
Arterial routes
high
Moderate -
high
Sources: City of Surrey, San Diego Riverway Trails Plan, Allegheny County Parks, City of Kwartha Lakes Plan, City of
Guelph
Best Practices for Riverview:
1.
Visibility is essential for safety of the biker and driver.
2.
Signage and cues such as painted bike lanes are needed to educate drivers on shared
right of ways with bikers is required.
3.
Route selection should be based on ROW and traffic speeds.
4.
Bike racks are essential to promote the use of bikes within a community.
5.
Bike lanes should be separated from vehicular traffic on primary and secondary routes
through the use of signage, bike lane symbols and pavement markings.
3.8 End of Trip Facilities
Effective bicycle infrastructure also includes end of use facilities. Providing end of use facilities
removes a barrier from the use of alternative modes of transportation for commuting.
22
Bike Parking
3.8.1
Bike racks are required at key destinations. Bike racks usually include covered and non-covered
storage for commuters and recreational biking respectively. A bike rack must:
-
Support the bicycle upright by its frame in two places
-
Prevent the wheel of the bicycle from tipping over
-
Enable the frame and one or both wheels to be secured
-
Support bicycles without a diamond-shaped frame with a horizontal top tube (e.g. a mixed
frame)
-
Allow front-in parking: a U-lock should be able to lock the front wheel and the down tube of an
upright bicycle
-
Allow back-in parking: a U-lock should be able to lock the rear wheel and seat tube of the
bicycle10.
The most frequently recommended bike rack currently on the market is the inverted U or A bike rack,
as it meets the above listed criteria. These racks can provide parking for bike in multiples of two and
can be expanded to provide for large bike parking facilities. They are also easy to install and maintain.
Bike racks need to be spaced to allow for movement in and out of the space and to permit easy
access to secure the bike. Suggested spacing for bike parking spaces are:
(1) Long-term bicycle parking
-
Also known as bicycle parking space-occupant, Type 1 or Class A bicycle parking.
-
Includes bicycle racks in an enclosed, secured area with controlled access; or
-
Individual, secure enclosures like bicycle lockers.
(2) Short-term bicycle parking
-
Also known as "bicycle parking space-visitor, Type 2 or Class B bicycle parking".
-
These bike parking facilities include bicycle racks in an easily accessible location;
-
Available for public use;
-
Sheltered or unsheltered;
-
Does not protect bicycles from vandalism or theft attempts.11
10 Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals, 2002. Bicycle Parking Guidelines. http://www.apbp.org/
11 City of Toronto, 2008. Guidelines for the Management of Bike Parking Facilities.
http://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/bicycle_parking_guidelines_final_may08.pdf
23
Changing and Shower Facilities
3.8.2
End of trip facilities also include access to showers and changing facilities. Most communities will
integrate these facilities with local gyms, pools or recreational facilities. It is essential for effective
transportation networks that the end of trip facilities be located near the key destinations throughout
the City. As part of the Municipal Plan, Council should encourage Developers to include shower and
changing facilities in any place of employment.
Best Practices for Riverview:
1.
Bicycle parking standards should be incorporated into the Zoning By-law. These would
include the number and type of spaces to be provided for bicycle parking and guidance
on the design of bicycle racks to be installed.
2.
Additional end-of-trip facilities such as showers and change rooms should be
encouraged through the development approvals process.
3.9 Intersections and Crossings
Intersections and crossings between non-motorized and vehicle traffic create conflict points. The
nodes must be addressed to ensure a comfortable and safe environment for both vehicles and other
modes of transportation. The key element for safe crossings is visibility12. Also, it is very important to
delineate between pedestrian and vehicle space. Visibility and space delineation is achieved with
colour or texture changes, lighting, raised crossings, and a clear line of sight between the pedestrian
and vehicle. For the visually impaired, urban Braille tiles at intersections should be installed13. Urban
Braille aids in the definition of pedestrian space and provides a physical cue to pedestrians.
An example of a coloured and textured crossing.
Example of Urban Braille
12 Florida Trail Intersection Handbook: http://www.dot.state.fl.us/Safety/ped_bike/handbooks_and_research
13 S. Tomic, 2003. Hamilton Urban Braille System: Urban Design for an Aging Society. Plan Canada 43 (1):41-3
24
Another essential element to effective and safe intersections is the type and effectiveness of curb cuts.
A universally accessible network must ensure accessible and safe curb cuts that allow mobility
impaired and people with strollers to navigate the crossing safely. An additional measure that should
be taken at highly congested intersections is the use of "bike boxes" which provide the necessary
space at intersections to allow cyclists to make often difficult left hand turns.
Example of a Bike Box in Portland, Oregon
Best Practices for Riverview:
1.
Providing good visibility between driver and pedestrian creates intersection safety. This
can be achieved with lighting, providing good signage and using visual cures for traffic to
slow down.
2.
Safety for the visually impaired can be promoted using changes in texture (urban Braille),
colour and height variation at key intersections.
3.
Consider the use of bike boxes at highly travelled and congested intersections.
4.
Curb cut design needs to address safety for wheelchairs and strollers.
3.10 Signage and Mapping
Mapping
3.10.1
A network map is used to provide a reference that illustrates the entire network and provides clear
information on the route location and use information. A good map will be available in both hardcopy
and on-line format. The map should be directly linked to signage used on the system so that the map
and signage graphic design matches. A route map should identify all routes by the "level" of rider from
novice to advanced rider routes. Novice rider routes will typically be trails and low traffic residential
25
roads, or roads with designated bike lanes. An advanced riders route will be a route with a shared lane
with high speed, high volume traffic.
Best Practices for Riverview:
1.
Providing good mapping for the existing trail and bikeway network is important in
promoting usage of this infrastructure. Mapping should be provided both on the web and
in hard copy format through such locations as recreation facilities, along the Riverfront
Trail and in the Findlay Business Park.
Signage and Wayfinding
3.10.2
Signage and wayfinding is essential for the effective management and use of a trail and bike system.
Signs are required for user safety, to state regulatory and advisory warnings, to identify destinations,
and provide education and information regarding a trail system. The following are typical trail and
bikeway signage.
a)
Warning (Pedestrian Crossing)
Warning signs are used predominantly on roadways to warn automobiles of trail crossing or
the presence of a bike route. These are typically yellow background with black lettering.
b)
Regulatory (usage control) signs
Regulatory signs are typically used in the automobile right of way to delineate traffic speeds.
Regulatory signs can also be used on multi-use trails and bike routes to delineate permitted
users and speeds.
c)
Access sign
Access signs are used to demark an entrance to a trail or bike route. These are used at
secondary access points.
26
d)
Trailhead Information sign/Kiosk /you are here signs
Trailhead signage/kiosk are used at the main access points to a trail and bike network.
Trailhead signs/or kiosks are stationary maps that provide both information about a system as
well as location and directional information about a trail. These kiosks can be used as bulletin
boards for community events associated with a bikeway and trail system.
e)
Reassurance markers/ Identification signs (trail logos)
Markers are used along a route to provide wayfinding for trail/route users. These will clearly
identify which route they are on and are typically associated with mileage postings. The
example below illustrates some good reassurance marker examples from Winnipeg. These
trail identification markers clearly identify the route/trail combined with mileage markers and
trail logo for wayfinding.
27
f)
Interpretive signs
Interpretative signs are used for educational purposes along trails and routes. These signs
should be tied directly to the route mapping and can aid in way finding.
Best Practices for Riverview:
1)
Signage is also an important consideration in promoting trail usage and providing user
information regarding points of interest and amenities.
2)
Signage should incorporate any long-term branding initiatives the Town currently has
underway.
3.11 Winter Maintenance
Winter maintenance for a bike and trail network needs to be based on the proposed winter use of the
system. In our climate, it is not feasible for the entire network to be cleared of snow for people to walk
and commute. The network should be classified based on use for winter maintenance. An effective
approach for winter trail access is to identify key trails for winter use and all-season use. This
approach allows for cross country ski areas, some suburban walking paths, urban walking paths, and
bike routes to be chosen for maintenance promote winter recreational activity. The routes chosen for
winter maintenance will typically be based on the route hierarchy. Primary routes would be chosen as
prime winter maintenance candidates. Typical maintenance costs for winter trail maintenance is
$350/km of trail which is comparable to winter sidewalk maintenance. Many municipalities partner with
trail user groups for winter maintenance (i.e. cross-country skiing and snowmobiling groups).
Best Practices for Riverview:
1.
Not all trails require maintenance during the winter months. The level of winter
maintenance should be based on the level of usage over the winter and the role of the
connection.
28
3.12 Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) focuses on the physical design of space to
deter criminal behavior. This is predominantly achieved through providing natural surveillance or
"eyes on the street". Much of this is achieved through the strategic placement of lighting, benches,
vegetation and open areas in a space. However there are other tactics that can be used to promote
safe spaces. These include effective and well-defined access to spaces, ensuring easy identification
of boundaries to a space, and providing clean and attractive well maintained spaces. All of these
techniques promote safe and health public areas.
The four key design components of CPTED are territoriality, surveillance, access control, and
maintenance.
Territoriality
3.12.1
Space within the trail width and along the edges should be well defined and delineated to create a
sense of ownership, such that intruders and strangers stand out. This may be accomplished through
the use of pavement materials, landscaping, art, signage, screening, fencing, and similar techniques.
Surveillance
3.12.2
Create an environment where it is possible for people engaged in their normal behavior to observe the
spaces around them. Maximize a space's visibility through thoughtful design of building orientation,
window placement, entrances and exits, landscaping of trees and shrubs, and other physical
obstructions. Utilize night time illumination of parking lots, walkways, entrance, stairwells, and related
areas that promote an environment in which natural surveillance is possible.
Lighting is a key element of surveillance and CPTED. Areas that feel unsafe should be lit for safety
reasons to promote visibility, however, for overall trail and bikeway lighting there are currently no
standards or guidelines, but if a trail is intended to serve commuters, or the trails acts a key urban
connection, providing lighting, at least in the early morning and early evening, should be given serious
consideration.
Access Control
3.12.3
Plan and implement access control to restrict criminal intrusion, especially in areas where criminal
activity cannot be easily observed. Access control may include, but is not limited to, use of fences,
walls, landscaping, and lighting to prevent or discourage access to or from dark or unmonitored areas.
29
In addition, sidewalks, pavement, lighting, and landscaping areas should be used to guide the people
to and from primary development entrances and exits.
Maintenance
3.12.4
Lack of maintenance creates a perceived element of crime, which will reduce the use of an area. An
area with scattered garbage and graffiti will be less used than the same area that is clean of debris
with no graffiti. Maintenance supports territorial reinforcement, natural surveillance, and access
control. The more an area is used the safer it becomes which provides a comfortable, safe
atmosphere.
Best Practices for Riverview:
1.
Create defined public and non-public spaces using landscaping.
2.
Provide lighting for key routes in the community.
3.
Where necessary strengthen the territoriality of a space by controlling access with
fencing, landscaping and walls.
4.
Long-term continued maintenance is essential to promote safe and vibrant public spaces.
30
4 CONSULTATION SUMMARY
As part of the initial stages of this project, GENIVAR held three separate focus group workshops with
various stakeholders and one public open house. The intent of these sessions was to engage
participants in mapping key active transportation routes, destinations and barriers in the community. A
community questionnaire was also made available both on the Town's website at Town Hall.
The three focus groups included bicycle and recreational interest groups, seniors, and Town staff. The
public open house attracted a variety of residents, as well as several councilors. All public consultation
followed a similar structure and started with GENIVAR providing a brief presentation to help familiarize
residents with AT, its benefits and the current project being undertaken by GENIVAR and the Town of
Riverview. Following the presentation, participants were broken into small groups to discuss and map
the AT challenges, destinations, barriers and opportunities within Riverview and the surrounding
areas. The following sections provide a summary of input gathered as part of the initial consultation
process.
4.1 Focus Group Workshops
Focus Group Workshop #1: Bicycle and Recreation Groups
4.1.1
The first focus group workshop took place on October 25th at 10:30 am. Various stakeholder groups
and were represented at this meeting including: a board member of La Bikery Bicycle Co-op, a CAN-
BIKE instructor, a Dobson Trail board member and members of the Riverview Cross Country Ski Club.
In addition, a handful of residents who actively walk and bike throughout Greater Moncton also
attended. The following are notes taken during the workshop and a copy of the map (full size version
found in Appendix B) developed during the session:
-
Access to the Dobson Trail via active transportation such as a sidewalk along Pine Glen Road
from Gunningsville Boulevard to the Dobson Trail entrance.
-
Trails should, where possible, avoid crossing roads.
-
Educate both AT users and vehicle drivers of the rules of the road.
-
Prevent 4 wheelers from using AT trails.
-
Require end of trip facilities such as bike lockers in developments.
-
Bike lanes work in Moncton and they would like to see them in Riverview as a starting point.
-
Need to ensure that the rules of the road are the same in all three municipalities.
-
A pamphlet explaining the rules of the road for all users should be created for local police to
distribute.
-
Winter maintenance along some key routes is not sufficient.
31
-
Create maps and pamphlets illustrating safe and alternate routes and place them throughout
the community.
-
Largest barrier in Riverview is the interchange at the Causeway.
-
As AT development moves forward, look for possible connections to neighbouring rural
communities such as Salisbury, Hillsborough.
*
The above map illustrates key destinations (green), problems/barriers (red) and existing routes (blue) within
the Town of Riverview and its neighboring communities.
Focus Group Workshop #2 - Town Staff
4.1.2
The second focus group took place on October 25th at 2:00 pm. The intent of this focus workshop was
to gather feedback and input from Town Staff who ultimately will be responsible for implementing the
Active Transportation Plan. This included Staff from the following departments: Engineering and Public
Works, Recreation and Community Relations, the Greater Moncton Planning District Commission and
Economic Development. The following are notes from the meeting and maps developed at the session
(larger version found in Appendix B):
-
Green space between sidewalks and the road make it difficult to clear snow on the sidewalks.
-
Maintenance cost is a big issue.
32
-
Philip Street has visibility issues.
-
Like the look of the new sidewalk along Pine Glen Road.
-
Possible connection from the existing tobogganing to the Dobson Trail.
-
Education is key for the success of AT in Riverview.
-
By-laws currently do not allow skate boards on sidewalks or consider it an AT use.
-
Tie in the recreational services into the AT network.
-
There is a big push to add more lanes along Hillsborough Road for car traffic. This would
affect AT users.
-
Barriers include cost to maintain AT routes during the winter.
*
The above map illustrates key destinations (green), problems/barriers (red) and existing routes (blue) within
the Town of Riverview and its neighboring communities.
33
*
The above map illustrates key destinations (green), problems/barriers (red) and existing routes (blue) within
the Town of Riverview and its neighboring communities.
Focus Group Workshop #3 - Seniors
4.1.3
The third focus group took place on October 26th at 10:30 am. The focus group had five senior
residents with various levels of mobility. Below are key notes from the meeting and a map (larger
version found in Appendix B) developed at the session:
-
Secondary trails to connect residential neighbourhoods to the perimeter trails (riverfront trail)
are needed.
-
Better winter maintenance on trails. They are currently icy and not cleared.
-
Better align the intersection of Blythwood, Coverdale Road and the Super Store entrance
-
Add guard rails at the end of Pine Glen to help protect pedestrians on the waterfront trail from
cars coming down the hill at Pine Glen in the winter.
-
People need to learn how to share the trails. Seniors do not always hear the bell of cyclists
coming up behind them.
-
Public transit needs to connect to AT routes.
34
*
The above map illustrates key destinations (green), problems/barriers (red) and existing routes (blue) within
the Town of Riverview and its neighboring communities.
4.2 Public Open House
A public open house was held on October 25th at 6:30 p.m. and attracted 25 residents of various ages
including a few councilors. Following a brief presentation outlining the project and the basics of AT,
attendees were broken into three small groups to discuss and map potential issues and opportunities.
The following are key notes from the open house and mapping (larger versions found in Appendix B)
illustrating key destinations, problems/barriers and existing routes
-
Connection to Dobson Trail is essential
-
Barrier - no sidewalks leading to schools. Congestion area around schools because parents
are dropping kids off.
-
Gunningsville Boulevard is a great trail but has no destination for the residents of Riverview
-
As a pedestrian, Riverview is divided in three - East of Gunningsville, between Gunningsville
and Findlay and West of Findlay.
-
Safety issues for pedestrians walking along Coverdale from Trites to Cleveland.
-
Interconnectivity between Mill Creek Park and the surrounding residential neighbourhoods.
35
-
A pedestrian trail connecting Riverview to downtown Moncton via the future third connection.
An AT bridge would give commuters a safer route to downtown Moncton by avoiding
Hillsborough Road.
-
Make more AT loops throughout the community.
-
With signs indicate that pedestrians should not walk along Findlay Boulevard as it is not safe.
-
Better winter maintenance of the trails.
-
Look into ways to prevent motorist from using trails.
-
Signage throughout Riverview showing trails and paths.
-
Use materials that are welcoming to the disabled.
-
Asphalt works best for all users.
-
Have more mixed zoning throughout residential neighbourhoods to create more destinations.
-
Turning left onto Coverdale Road is really dangerous.
-
Educate students and their parents of the different trails in Riverview, Moncton and Riverview.
*
The above map illustrates key destinations (blue), problems/barriers (red), existing routes (green) and future
connections (black) within the Town of Riverview and its neighboring communities.
36
* The above map illustrates key destinations (cyan), problems/barriers (red), existing and future routes (dark blue)
and future connections (black) within the Town of Riverview and its neighboring communities.
4.3 Questionnaire
GENIVAR received 30 questionnaire responses from Riverview residents. The results of the
questionnaires have been compiled into several tables which can be found in Appendix C. Questions
focused on gathering basic household information, existing transportation and AT usage, comfort with
different types AT infrastructure and establishing key routes and destinations. The following
subsections provide a summary of information gathered.
Household Information
4.3.1
As shown in Table 3.1, the majority of respondents were between the ages of 26 - 54 years old
(75.8%) and travelled between 3 - 20 km to get from work or school every day. The majority of
households have two drivers and one or two vehicles.
Table 3.1: Compilation of Questions 10, 11, and 12
0
1
2
3
4
5
How many residents in the
household
0.0 %
13.3 %
30.0 %
13.3 %
23.3 %
20.0 %
How many drivers in the household
0.0 %
16.7 %
66.7 %
6.7 %
3.3 %
6.7 %
37
How many vehicles in the
household
6.7 %
30.0 %
56.7 %
0.0 %
6.7 %
0.0 %
1 - 3 km
3 - 10 km
10 - 20 km
> 20 km
Daily commute distance
11.1 %
51.9 %
25.9 %
11.1 %
Age
- 18
19 - 25
26 - 40
41 - 54
55 - 65
+ 65
Age of individual
responding
3.4 %
6.9 %
51.7 %
24.1 %
10.3 %
3.4 %
Existing Transportation and Active Transportation Usage
4.3.2
Table 2 shows that the majority of residents use a vehicle as their primary mode of transportation. It is
also evident that majority of residents never or rarely use active transportation for commuting purposes
though 77% of the residents use AT for recreational purposes. The survey results indicate that the
main reasons for the lack of AT use is that the commute time is too long and that there are not enough
trails or bike lanes. Close to 5% of the participants were concerned with the safety of AT while another
5% indicated a lack of infrastructure such as bike racks at destination the reason for not using this
transportation mode.
Table 3.2: Compilation of questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the questionnaire
Forms of
Transportation
Car/Truck
Bicycle
Walking/Running
Public Transit
Wheelchair
Other
Most frequently
used
96.7 %
3.3 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
0.0%
Active Transportation Use
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Never
For commuting purposes
18.0 %
18.0 %
11.0 %
54.0 %
For recreational purposes
13.0 %
37.0 %
27.0 %
23.0 %
Reasons for not using Active Transportation
Not enough trails, bike lanes, cross-country ski routes, etc.
22.7 %
Infrastructure does not allow me to go to my desired destination
0.0 %
I do not feel safe
4.5 %
Takes too much time to get anywhere
40.9 %
Weather
4.5 %
There is a lack of infrastructure at destinations (bike racks, lockers,
showers)
4.5 %
All of the above
22.7 %
38
Comfort with AT Infrastructure
4.3.3
As shown in Table 3.3, the majority of respondents are most comfortable using gravel and paved trails
for biking and walking. They also felt more comfortable on sidewalks that have a landscape buffer
between them and the road. Residents felt most unsafe on the shoulder of rural roads and on trails
and sidewalks without any street lighting.
To support active transportation users, respondents highlighted the need for further infrastructure such
as bike racks, lockers, showers and signage and also to improve road maintenance, increase the
number of off street trails, bike lanes and connections to key destinations.
Table 3.3: Compilation of questions 5, 6, and 7
Level of comfort
Very
Comfortable
Comfortable
Uncomfortable
Very
Uncomfortable
Walking on a gravel multi-use trail
75.0 %
25.0 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
Walking on a paved multi-use trail
75.0 %
25.0 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
Walking on the shoulder of a rural
road
10.3 %
27.6 %
41.4 %
20.7 %
Walking on the sidewalk without a
landscaped buffer
22.2 %
63.0 %
14.8 %
0.0 %
Walking on the sidewalk with a
landscaped buffer
71.4 %
28.6 %
0.0 %
0.0%
Walking where there is not street
lighting
3.6 %
10.7 %
42.9 %
42.9 %
Cycling on a gravel multi-use trail
51.7 %
31.0 %
13.8 %
3.4 %
Cycling on a paved multi-use trail
67.9 %
32.1 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
Cycling on the shoulder of a rural
road
10.3 %
10.3 %
55.2 %
24.1 %
Cycling where there is no street
lighting
11.1 %
11.1 %
40.7 %
37.0 %
Level of agreement with
statements
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Secure bicycle parking at
work/school/shopping center
34.5 %
44.8 %
17.2
%
0.0 %
3.4 %
Improved road maintenance
35.7 %
25.0 %
35.7
0.0 %
3.6 %
39
%
Improve sidewalk and trail
maintenance
25.0 %
28.6 %
42.9
%
0.0 %
3.6 %
Improved signage for bike and
pedestrian routes
37.9 %
24.1 %
31.0
%
6.9 %
0.0 %
The existing trails and sidewalks
are meeting my needs
3.6 %
3.6 %
60.7
%
21.4 %
10.7 %
Nothing will encourage me to walk
or bike more often
3.4 %
3.4 %
34.5
%
44.8 %
13.8 %
More multi-use trails (off-street)
27.6 %
41.4 %
20.7
%
3.4 %
0.0 %
Bike lanes or paved shoulders for
cycling (on-street)
37.9 %
27.6 %
27.6
%
3.4 %
3.4 %
More connections to key
destinations
31.0 %
34.5 %
27.6
%
6.9 %
0.0 %
Reduce traffic speed
3.4 %
20.7 %
34.5
%
17.2 %
24.1 %
Key Routes and Destinations
4.3.4
When asked about key routes and destinations, respondents indicated the areas that need better
connected trails, bikeways or sidewalks are the Causeway/Traffic Circle, Trites Road, Gunningsville
Boulevard area and Coverdale Road. They also indicated areas that should be included as part of the
Active Transportation network are Downtown Riverview, Findlay Boulevard retail center, schools,
connections to Downtown Moncton, Biggs Drive recreational fields and facilities, library, Riverview mall
and Mill Creek area. The table below presents respondents recommendations on key routes and
destinations.
Table 4: Compilation of questions 8, and 9
Areas that require better connected trails,
bikeways or sidewalks
Areas that should be included as part of
the Active Transportation network
1. Causeway / Traffic Circle
2. Trites Road
3. Gunningsville Boulevard Area
4. Lower Coverdale Road
1. Downtown Riverview (between the bridge
and causeway)
2. Findlay Boulevard Retail Centre
3. Schools
40
5. Buckingham Avenue
6. Upper Coverdale Road
7. Coverdale Road
8. Schools
9. Old Coach Road to Gunningsville
Boulevard
10. Trites Road Extension
11. South End - Findlay Park
12. Findlay Boulevard
13. Linier parks in new development
4. Downtown Moncton
5. Riverview High School
6. Biggs Drive Recreational Fields /
Facilities
7. Library Town Hall
8. Riverview Mall
9. Mill Creek Area
10. Moncton Industrial Park
Additional Comments
4.3.5
Part of the questionnaire asked respondents to provide any additional comments that they may have in
regards to an active transportation plan for Riverview. The following are some of the comments as
written by the respondents:
-
Need some kind of services for people that would like to get out without the cost of taxis from
East Riverview to West Riverview Only.
-
The rules of the road should be posted online and in schools to tell people where they are
allowed to ride bikes and where they shouldn't (sidewalks, wrong side of the road, etc.). I've
had arguments with friends over the rules and that shouldn't happen, the rules are the law and
everyone should know them.
-
Do whatever you can to ensure bicyclists obey the rules of the road - otherwise, keep them
away.
-
Cross Creek on Pine Glen Road would be a good spot for more AT infrastructure. There is no
bus service or trails for biking/walking to the main areas of Riverview.
-
I like the idea of surveys like this to get ideas from the public.
-
I feel that more Bike Lanes should be added to the streets of Riverview making it easier for
cyclist to navigate the streets of Riverview... as well as the proper signage to notify motorist of
cyclist on the street and to share to road. I also believe more trails should be created
throughout the town which eventually would lead to each trail being connected in some way or
other making it easier to access different areas of the town either by foot or by bicycle.
-
I used to live in Downtown Riverview and would walk to restaurants and stores and bike to
work in Downtown Moncton on the riverfront trail, but now I live in Upper Coverdale and I don't
feel safe biking along the gravel shoulder of the road with cars going 80k beside me, so the
bike sits in the garage gathering dust while my vehicle racks up the miles. I also now work on
41
Mapleton Rd. too far too bike but I wouldn't even dare attempt to go around the traffic circle on
a bike anytime of the day let alone morning rush hour traffic.
4.4 Summary
The consultation process saw participations from a variety of residents, the majority of which
expressed an interest in AT and potential enhancements to the Town's existing network. Some key
points that repeatedly came up throughout the consultation process were:
-
The interchange of the Causeway, Findlay Boulevard and Coverdale Road is a large barrier
for active transportation users traveling from West Riverview to downtown Riverview.
-
The lack of bike lanes along Hillsborough Road and Coverdale Road is a barrier for cyclists
traveling from east Riverview to downtown Riverview and downtown Moncton.
-
Residents of Riverview would like to see more multi-use trails similar to what is in place at
Gunningsville Boulevard.
-
Enhance and encourage through design the use of active transportation as a more desirable
form of transportation for kids traveling to school. Need more sidewalks and bike lanes leading
to schools.
-
Educate the motorists, cyclists, students and parents the rules of the road for all forms of
transportation. Also educate the residents of safe and alternative routes for active
transportation users through signage placed throughout the community.
-
Connect the Dobson Trail and Mill Creek Park into the community through trail connections,
bike lanes and signage.
-
Encourage end of trip facilities such as bike racks, bike lockers and shower facilities.
42
5 EXISTING ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE
5.1 Riverfront Trail
The Riverfront Trail runs along the Petitcodiac River between the causeway (Findlay Boulevard) east
to Hawks Road. The trail is widely used by residents for walking, jogging, running, biking, dog walking.
The trail surface is crushed gravel which is not ideal for roller blading, biking, skateboarding and other
forms of active transportation that uses wheels. Through consultations, residents expressed the need
for signage and perhaps additional trail width to reduce conflicts between cyclists and pedestrians.
Additionally, a number of residents indicated a desire to see the trail cleared during the winter months.
5.2 Trites Road
Trites Road recently saw a portion of an informal trail formalized. The portion of the trail running from
Whitepine Road to Callaghan Road was recently paved with a landscaped buffer running between the
multi-use trail and Trites Road. The trail is ideal for cyclists and other wheeled AT users as it is paved
while providing pedestrians a safer environment to walk, jog and run in than the typical sidewalk as
there is a landscape buffer between them and the street.
43
5.3 Gunningsville Boulevard
The Gunningsville Boulevard multi-use trail runs alongside Gunningsville Boulevard from Coverdale
Road to Findlay Boulevard and Pinder Road. The multi-use trail has a wide landscaped buffer between
it and Gunningsville Boulevard. The trail is paved and is used by walkers, cyclists, runners, joggers
and dog walkers.
Residents have expressed a desire for increased winter maintenance of the trail to allow for year
round use. The multi-use trail has no formal connections between Coverdale Road and Pine Glen
Road, which limits the connectivity to the surrounding neighborhoods and services. However the trail
does connect to the Riverfront Trail and the multi-use trail on the Gunningsville Bridge. A residential
development has been proposed south of the Moncton Golf & Country Club. The Town should work
with the developer to create multiple connections to Gunningsville Boulevard.
5.4 Gunningsville Bridge
The Gunningsville Bridge was built in 2005 and with it came a multi-use trail connecting Riverview to
Moncton. The multi-use trail is paved and separated from the street by a decorative concrete barrier.
The multi-use trail connects Riverview and Moncton's Riverfront Trails. The trail is widely used by
pedestrians and cyclists; however users indicated there is limited space on the multi-use trail for both
cyclists and pedestrians. A further barrier is the fact that cyclists are not legally able to use the
roadway despite ample street width.
44
5.5 Pinder Road
Pinder Road has a multi-use trail running alongside it between Gunningsville Boulevard and Lawson
Road. The multi-use trail is surfaced with crushed gravel and has a landscape buffer between it and
the street. On the ground the trail looks like a simple continuation of the Gunningsville Boulevard multi-
use trail. The multi-use trail helps provide a connection to residents of south western Riverview to
Findlay Business Park and the Gunningsville Boulevard multi-use trail.
45
5.6 Findlay Boulevard
Similar to Pinder Road, the multi-use trail running alongside Findlay Boulevard from Gunningsville
Boulevard to Whitepine Road is surfaced with crushed gravel and is separated from the street with a
landscaped buffer.
5.7 Findlay Boulevard Pedestrian Bridge
The pedestrian bridge spanning over Findlay Boulevard connects Bradford Road East and West. This
is the only connection crossing Findlay Boulevard between Coverdale Road and Whitepine Road. The
bridge is paved and surrounded by a chain linked fence for safety purposes. The bridge does help
connect the neighborhoods on either side of Findlay Boulevard.
5.8 Pine Glen Road
One of the more recent additions to the AT network in Riverview is a multi-use trail running alongside
Pine Glen Road from Gunningsville Boulevard to Berkley Drive. It is our understanding that this multi-
use trail will be extended to Hebron Street in 2013. The multi-use trail is paved and abuts the street
however; there is no landscaped buffer between it and the street. The trail provides connections to the
surrounding residential neighborhoods, Findlay Business Park, Riverview Middle School and the All
46
World Super Play Park. The street is a heavily travelled and if additional AT connectivity can be
provided to Pine Glen Road then it can become a key route in the overall network.
5.9 Dobson Trail
The Dobson Trail is a footpath that stretches nearly 58 km from Riverview to the northern boundary of
Fundy National Park. The start of the trail is in southern Riverview on Pine Glen Road across the
street from Angus Road. At the entrance of the trail is a small parking lot for users to park their cars.
The trail is a footpath through the woods. The trail is used year round by walkers, joggers, runners,
dog walkers and snowshoers and cross-country skiers. As part of the Active Transportation Plan,
enhanced connections to trail will be assessed to improve access for pedestrians and other AT users.
47
5.10 Cross Country Ski Routes
There is currently a well-established system of cross-country ski routes in eastern Riverview. A group
of volunteers maintain the approximately 8 km network that starts at the Bridgedale Community Centre
and extends as far south as the Dobson Trail. The majority of the trails pass through private,
undeveloped land which puts the network at risk as development continues to occur here.
48
6 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND LAND USE PATTERNS
6.1 Watercourses and Wetlands
In 2010 the Province of New Brunswick began providing mapping of wetlands through its online tool
GeoNB (www.geonb.ca). While edits have been made to the mapping since that time, it provides the
approximate location of wetlands across the province. Development within 30 metres of any regulated
wetland or watercourse features is strongly discouraged by the Provincial Department of Environment
and requires approvals in the form of Watercourse and Wetland Alteration Permits of in the case of
larger watercourses and wetlands, an Environmental Impact Assessment.
In the case of Riverview, the dominant feature is the Petitcodiac River. This is considered a
Provincially significant watercourse / wetland by the Province of New Brunswick and any development
within 30 metres of this is prohibited. This presents some potential limitations to the location of any
new or enhanced trails along the waterfront. While Staff from the Provincial Department of
Environment may permit some trail development within this area, there could be requirements for the
Town to go through the sometimes lengthy approval process in order to facilitate this. In preparing the
routes and destinations associated with the Active Transportation Plan, it will be crucial to avoid these
environmentally significant areas.
The following map provides wetland mapping within Riverview (larger version found in Appendix D):
Figure 5.1: Riverview Wetland Mapping
49
6.2 Topography
The Town of Riverview slopes rather significantly from south to the north. The majority of the Town
has been built within the context of these slopes and grades so while they may not present barriers to
constructing cost-effective AT infrastructure, specific consideration will need to be given to providing
rest areas such as benches to those travelling up steeper slopes. Topographic mapping (Appendix E)
will be assessed when determining the location of new AT routes as part of the Active Transportation
Plan.
6.3 Land Use and Future Growth Areas
Existing Neighbourhoods and Commercial Areas
6.3.1
As outlined in Section 2, the Town of Riverview has grown rather steadily over the past thirty years. In
that time, the community has remained predominantly residential in nature. In recent years the Town
has witnessed more commercial development in the Findlay Boulevard and Coverdale Road areas.
The Town would like to see continued large scale commercial growth in the Findlay Business Park
area while centralizing smaller, more pedestrian oriented commercial uses along Coverdale Road.
Residential development within Riverview has historically been in the form of single-family homes
though there has been a shift towards semi-detached units, townhouse / rowhouse units and smaller
apartment buildings in new or expanding areas of the community.
East-West Corridor
6.3.2
While many factors ultimately determine the rate in which a community grows, ultimately the major
element dictating the location of growth in Riverview will relate to the East-West Corridor. This is a
large scale transportation initiative designed as a controlled access roadway intended to enhance
connectivity between the eastern and western areas of Riverview while providing for efficient
connections to Moncton. While predominantly constructed in response to vehicular congestion in the
Town, this route has and will continue to provide an excellent piece of the overall AT network.
The initial phase of this project (Gunningsville Boulevard) is now complete. The next phase of this
project will be the construction of Bridgedale Boulevard which will connect Hillsborough Road and the
east portion of Riverview to Gunningsville Boulevard. Given current limitations in government funding,
it is unclear when or if the Provincial and Federal Governments will provide additional funds to help
complete the remaining portions of the project. In response to this, the Town will work with developers
to fund and construct the next section. Ultimately the speed with which this portion is constructed will
50
depend on the growth and development of this area, unless additional funding comes available in the
near future.
The future phases of the project will connect western Riverview to Findlay Boulevard. The timing for
this phase has yet to be determined but will more than likely follow the completion of the work in
eastern Riverview (Bridgedale Boulevard). Active transportation infrastructure in the form of a paved
multi-use trail was included as part of the existing infrastructure. Residents have expressed a desire
for similar infrastructure so it will be important to consider this in the detailed design of the remaining
portions of the East-West Corridor.
Figure 5.2: Existing and Future Portions of East-West Corridor
Future Growth Areas
6.3.3
The Town and Planning Commission have established zoning and land use designations to direct
future development in Riverview. These are predominantly based on areas of the Town that can be
efficiently and cost-effectively serviced. The East-West Corridor will also play a crucial role in
determining the areas of growth given servicing and transportation constraints of the municipalities
existing infrastructure. The area of Town which has witnessed the majority of growth is Eastern
Riverview.
51
This area will likely continue to be the focal point of residential growth due to the construction of a new
school and anticipated investments by the Town into Mill Creek. As development continues to occur in
this area, it is anticipated the Town and Developers will begin funding and constructing portions of
Bridgedale Boulevard.
Barring some substantial change to either local economics or government funding, we would anticipate
that the above mentioned areas to receive the majority of the Town's growth in the next 10 to 20 years.
The following map outlines the commercial and residential growth areas for Riverview:
Figure 5.3: Future Growth Areas
52
7 EXISTING POLICIES AND DESIGN STANDARDS
7.1 Municipal Development Plan
In May 2012 the Town of Riverview enacted a number of amendments to their Municipal Development
Plan. The amendments were predominantly focused on residential development, though a number of
new policies addressed and considered active transportation and connectivity within the community.
The Municipal Plan recognizes the important role active transportation plays in sustainability and
creating complete streets.
A Municipal Development Plan is the dominant policy document for municipalities. It contains relatively
broad policies and proposals that guide the decisions and initiatives or Council. Policies often focus on
land use, servicing, transportation and recreation as well as any other matters deemed important by
Staff and Council. The following table outlines policies from the Municipal Plan that are relevant to
Active Transportation:
Table 7.1: Relevant Municipal Plan Policies
Policy or
Proposal #
Policy or Proposal
4.6.2
Council shall discourage new cul-de-sacs in new subdivisions.
4.6.3
Cul-de-sacs shall be permitted to a limited extent in any subdivision or when the
topography and dimension of the land provide for no other option of design.
4.6.10
Council shall continue to work with the City of Dieppe, the City of Moncton and the
Province on a tri-community Sustainable Transportation Plan and any other initiatives
that will improve the transportation system at the regional level.
4.6.13
It shall be the intention of Council to consider sidewalks, trails and paths to be
essential components of the Town's transportation network and to evaluate the need
for these important connections during the review of all subdivision and terms and
conditions applications.
4.6.14
Council shall provide specific direction in the Subdivision Standards to ensure that
sidewalks are an integral part of all newly developed areas.
5.6.3
To ensure that large undeveloped Residential Mix (RM) zoned lands are developed in
a coordinated manner that is consistent with this Plan, developers, in cooperation with
the Town of Riverview and the Planning Commission, will need to provide secondary
plans to guide the overall development of these lands.
53
5.6.4
To assist with the implementation of Policy 5.6.3, Council will use the following
objectives to evaluate the secondary plans:
(a) the plan provides an appropriate amount of mix housing types which should
include a combination of single, two unit, semidetached, and rowhouse /
townhouse dwellings;
(b) the efficient layout of streets and traffic in general;
(c) the connectivity of the subdivision with adjacent lands;
(d) the location and size of future parks, open spaces and trails;
(e) detailed servicing and infrastructure information; and
(f) any other applicable information.
5.1.2
It shall be the intention of Council to encourage developments to incorporate smart
growth principles such as:
(a) mix land uses;
(b) complete, walkable, vibrant neighborhoods;
(c) transportation choices;
(d) housing choices;
(e) encourage new developments within the existing urban growth boundary;
(f) preserve green spaces, natural beauty, and environmentally sensitive areas;
(g) utilize smarter and cost effective infrastructure and green buildings;
(h) foster a unique sense of identity; and
(i)
community involvement.
5.1.4
In order to create beautiful and safe streets, Council shall ensure that street trees are
required on all streets, and in an effort to promote walkable communities, provide
specific direction in the Subdivision Standards to ensure that sidewalks are an integral
part of all newly developed areas.
5.1.5
In order to maintain attractive neighborhoods, it shall be the intention of Council to
develop a conservation policy and regulation around tree preservation in order to
prevent the clear cutting of lands on parcels 1 hectare or larger.
Principle 4:
Connectivity
must be
enabled
Developers will need to provide road, open space and trail connections to adjacent
developments. Connectivity is about providing:
(a) a variety of transportation options including vehicular, bicycle, walking, and
other active transportation linkages;
(b) open space linkages that create a connected network of parks, green spaces
and public lands that are based on existing natural features. These networks
of linked open space can provide space for trails and should be easily
accessible to residents by bike or foot; and
(c) safe and walkable communities through the use of sidewalks.
Principle 5:
Landscaping
To provide a pleasant streetscape, all residential development areas will require street
tree planting. Minimum landscaping requirements will be established for all new
subdivisions and multi-unit dwelling buildings.
9.0.3
It shall be the intention of Council to establish a long-term, town-wide strategy for
creating and developing future parks, open spaces and trails through a Recreation
Master Plan and an Active Transportation Plan.
9.0.13
To assist in the implementation of Policy 9.0.3, Council proposes to complete an
Active Transportation Plan, which will be used improve and expand the existing
transportation network for cycling, walking and public transit. The Plan should include
54
the following:
1.
Ensure safe and efficient accessibility for non-motorized transportation within
the community.
2.
Identify and create a network of trails and other paths providing connectivity to
neighborhoods, schools, work and shopping destinations.
3.
Develop an educational and promotional program that encourages the use of
alternative modes of transportation.
7.2 Subdivision By-law
The purpose of a Subdivision By-law is to establish the framework with which lands are subdivided. Of
particular interest to Active Transportation, this addresses roads, parks and trails. As part of the
subdivision process a developer or landowner is required to contribute parkland in what is referred to
as Lands for Public Purposes (LFPP) or alternatively, pay cash-in-lieu. A developer providing land
must contribute a total of ten (10%) percent of the land area of the subdivision (excluding the area of
public streets). Under Provincial legislation (Community Planning Act), this percentage cannot exceed
10%.
Alternatively, Council may require the developer to contribute cash-in-lieu of LFPP at a rate of eight
(8%) percent of the market value of the land being subdivided. Money provided is typically added to a
fund which helps in the construction and/or maintenance of new or existing recreation infrastructure
within the community. LFPP can be used for a variety of purposes as shown in the definition from
Riverview's Subdivision By-law:
"land for public purposes" means land other than streets for the recreational or other use for the
enjoyment of the general public such as:
(a) an access to a lake, river, stream, sea, or other body of water;
(b) a beach or scenic area along the shore of a lake, river, stream, sea, or other body of water;
(c) a conservation area;
(d) land adjoining a school for joint recreational purposes;
(e) land for a community hall, public library, recreational use or other similar community facility;
(f) open space to provide air and light to afford a view to or from a development, or to a lake,
river, stream, sea, or other body of water, or for other purposes;
(g) a park, greenbelt, or buffer area dividing developments, parts of highway, or development
and a highway;
(h) a pedestrian way to a school, shopping centre, recreational area, or other facility;
(i)
a protection area for a water course, stream, marsh, water supply, lake, or other body of
water;
55
(j)
a public park, playground, or other recreational use;
(k) a visual feature, or;
(l)
a wooded area, slope area, or a sight giving view to a scenic area to provide diversity.
The Subdivision By-law also provides a breakdown of the various right-of-way and road widths that
should be used for all new streets. While more detailed standards are provided in the Subdivision
Design Standards (Section 6.5). The following table provides a breakdown of the requirements under
the Subdivision By-law:
Table 7.2: Street Types and Widths Under Subdivision By-law
Type
Minimum ROW
Width
Minimum Driving Surface
Urban Arterial Freeway
30 m
At discretion of Engineering Department
Urban Collector Minor
20 m
9.8 m
Urban Collector Primary
23 m
12.8 m
Urban Local
18 m
9.8 m
As part of the Active Transportation Plan implementation measures in the form of amendments to the
Subdivision By-law will need to be considered that allow sufficient width for bike lanes and encourage
developers to establish trail networks as part of new developments.
7.3 Secondary Plans
Policy 5.6.3 and Proposal 5.6.4 of the Municipal Development Plan outline the requirement for
developers to prepare secondary plans for large-scale developments within Riverview's growth areas.
This will be an effective tool that can be used to assess the overall connectivity of a proposed
development. As part of the Active Transportation Plan it may be necessary to make some minor
amendments to this proposal requiring developers to delineate trails, bike lanes and other active
transportation infrastructure that will be integrated into the neighborhood.
7.4 Zoning By-law
The nature and intent of a Zoning By-law is to establish the location of specific land uses within the
Town while providing specific standards that the design and operation of the use must adhere to. The
contents of the Zoning By-law are entirely based on the governing policy framework established in the
Municipal Development Plan. In general, a Zoning By-law will not have a significant role in the location,
design and construction of most AT infrastructure. One area that will need to be addressed through an
56
amendment is with regards to end of trip facilities. The current Zoning By-law does not establish any
requirements for developers to include bicycle parking as part of commercial or multiple unit residential
developments.
7.5 Engineering Standards
As part of any new subdivision, developers must design all streets and services in accordance with the
Subdivision Development Design Standards established by the Town's Engineering Department. In
terms of AT, it will be important to work with the Engineering Department to revise these standards so
that they include the provision for bike lanes, multi-use trails and other active transportation
infrastructure in the design of all new streets within the Town. Ultimately the particular type of
infrastructure, design and landscaping will depend upon the street's role, usage and the context of how
it will fit within the overall network for Riverview.
The following subsections look at the cross-sections of each street design provided in the Subdivision
Development Design Standards. One important item to note is that the names and street widths for
various road types do not appear to be consistent between the Subdivision By-law and the Subdivision
Development Design Standards.
Local Streets
7.5.1
Under the engineering guidelines, there are two design criteria established for local streets. A local
street provides direct access to residential lots and is used predominantly by people living in the
immediate or surrounding area. These streets should not receive high volumes of traffic and function
as roads to move residents to surrounding collector and arterial roads. The Town of Riverview has two
separate design standards for these streets, the "Urban Local Minor", shown below and the "Urban
Local Primary". As shown in Figure 6.1, the Urban Local Minor Street does not have any sidewalk and
an 18 metre right-of-way. Based on Policy 5.1.4 of the Municipal Plan, it would appear that this street
design is no longer encouraged.
Figure 6.1: Urban Local Minor Cross Section
57
The Urban Local Primary (Figure 6.2) serves the same purpose as an Urban Local Minor street in that
it is intended to be used predominantly by residents who live on the street or in the immediate vicinity.
The major difference this and the previous design standard is that the urban local primary has a 20
metre right-of-way and features a sidewalk on one side of the road.
Figure 6.2: Urban Local Primary Cross Section
Collector Roads
7.5.2
Collector roads are streets that generally receive traffic from local streets and direct them to major
arterials within the Town. These streets still feature low vehicular speed and typically feature sidewalks
on one or both sides of the street depending the estimated usage and pedestrian traffic. The Town's
engineering standards, the "Urban Collector Minor" (Figure 6.3) and the "Urban Collector Primary"
(Figure 6.4). The major difference between the two is that the Urban Collector Primary includes
sidewalks on both sides of the streets with 22 m wide right-of-way versus the 20 m right-of-way of the
Urban Local Minor. Examples of collector roads in Riverview include: Trites Road, Canusa Drive;
Callowhill Road; Pinewood Road, Sussex Avenue, Buckingham Drive, Whitepine Road, Cleveland
Avenue, Runnymeade Road, Pine Glen Road and Old Coach Road.
Figure 6.3: Urban Collector Minor Cross Section
58
Figure 6.4: Urban Collector Primary Cross Section
Arterial Roads
7.5.3
Arterial roadways are streets with limited access designed to move large volumes of traffic (between
7,000 and 30,000 vehicles daily), often at faster speeds. These streets often require a much greater
right-of-way and street width to accommodate turning lanes and other features. Given their importance
and strategic locations, arterial routes often function as critical routes within AT networks. Within
Riverview, the key arterial roadways include Coverdale / Hillsborough Road, Gunningsville Boulevard
and Findlay Boulevard. At the present time there are no specific design guidelines within the Town's
Subdivision Development Design Standards. This is due to the fact that these roadways often require
a great deal of design consideration and are dependent on specific situations.
7.6 Summary
Recent amendments to Riverview's Municipal Development Plan have introduced a number of new
policies that will encourage the development of AT infrastructure across the Town. While no large
scale policy changes are anticipated within this document, it will be important to include mapping of the
AT network along with as part of the document to provide developers with a clear indication of where
new infrastructure will be expected. Amendments will be required to both the Subdivision By-law,
Subdivision Development Design Standards and Zoning By-law as they do not address many areas
associated with AT.
With regards to the design of arterial roadways, while no formal design requirements should be
included, due to the unique circumstances of each road and situation, it will be important to include
policies and standards within the Municipal Development Plan, Subdivision By-law and Subdivision
Design Standards that require the inclusion of active transportation infrastructure in their design and
construction.
59
8 RECOMMENDATIONS
The following section outlines a number of recommendations to be incorporated into Active
Transportation Plan. These recommendations are based upon our background research, extensive
site visits, community consultations and best practices.
8.1 Key Routes and Destinations
Based on our assessment of existing land uses, future growth areas, the existing transportation
network and through community consultation we have identified a number of key routes and
destinations that will form the core of the Town's AT network. Appendix F features the preliminary
routes and destinations mapping.
Key Routes
8.1.1
Routes identified on the Preliminary Routes and Destinations Map will function as the primary or
secondary routes for AT throughout the community. Many of these routes already currently function as
major vehicular collector and arterial routes in and around the community. As such, they also provide
the ability to move the greatest volume of AT users in as efficient as a manner as possible. These
routes are also some of the most readily cleaned and maintained routes both in winter and summer
months providing the greatest opportunity for year round AT use. As part of the Active Transportation
60
Plan, specific methods and design elements will be outlined to introduce active transportation
infrastructure into these key routes.
Destinations
8.1.2
An Active Transportation Plan is only as good as where it takes you. Residents and stakeholders have
indicated that the downtown, commercial areas, parks and other recreation facilities, schools and
downtown Moncton are key destinations. Many of these destinations are located along key routes
previously discussed and the Active Transportation Plan will need to focus on providing safe, efficient,
aesthetically pleasing and accessible infrastructure to encourage significantly more residents to use
active transportation to travel to and from these destinations. It is also important to note the work
presently being done on the Mill Creek Master Plan. In the future this will be a key destination so as
part of the Active Transportation Plan it will be critical to identify infrastructure that will provide easy
access to the park by multiple modes of transportation.
Connectivity Within Existing Neighbourhoods
8.1.3
We have prepared a schematic to help assess connectivity across Riverview (Appendix G). While
some areas requiring additional infrastructure are easily identifiable, others within existing built-up
areas are not as obvious and present challenges. Enhancing connectivity within these areas often
requires the purchase of properties or establishing easements for the creation of trails or other AT
infrastructure. As part of the Active Transportation Plan it will be important to try to identify feasible and
cost-effective solutions to enhance connectivity within these existing neighborhoods.
61
8.2 Significant Barriers and Challenges
AT infrastructure can be incorporated into many of the Town's existing streets rather easily and at
relatively minimal cost. However there are a few locations within the Town that will require specific
design consideration and potentially substantial investments in infrastructure. The following
subsections outline specific areas that will need to be looked at in detail as part of the Active
Transportation Plan.
Findlay Road - Coverdale Road Overpass
8.2.1
Both Coverdale Road and Findlay Boulevard will serve as primary active transportation routes in
Riverview. The waterfront trail already provides infrastructure for many modes of AT but it essentially
ends at Findlay Boulevard. At the present time there is not a safe route for cyclists, pedestrians or
those in wheelchairs to cross Findlay Boulevard with the exception of the sidewalk along the overpass.
The narrow width of this overpass will also limit the ability to establish bike lanes or other
infrastructure.
Findlay Boulevard
8.2.2
Findlay Boulevard serves as a major north south connector within the Town and is a major access
point to the City of Moncton. This is a heavily travelled road that should also serve as a primary route
within the Active transportation network. The major barrier with this roadway will be the lack of access
62
to the route from the adjacent residential neighborhoods. Opportunities to enhance access to this route
will need to be carefully considered under the Active Transportation Plan.
Gunningsville Boulevard
8.2.3
Similar to Findlay Boulevard, Gunningsville Boulevard will serve as a critical route within the AT
network. While the roadway already features a multi-use trail, there is limited access to it from
surrounding neighborhoods. Our understanding is that a proposed development just south of the golf
course will provide additional trail connections to Gunningsville. In preparing the AT Plan, this should
be reviewed and until the development is built out, temporary infrastructure should be put in place
improving access to the infrastructure in the short term.
63
Coverdale Road
8.2.4
Coverdale Road is the main arterial road providing access to many of the Town's retail stores,
restaurants and other services. The major barrier with this street will be a limited right-of-way width in
certain areas. Due to the important role this street plays from a vehicular standpoint, it will be difficult
to fit bike lanes or other AT infrastructure within the existing street.
8.3 Policy and Design Standards
The Town's existing Municipal Development Plan contains a number of policies and proposals directly
related to the enhancement of connectivity across the Town. However, the existing Subdivision By-
law, Zoning By-law and Subdivision Development Design Standards all lack the policies and standards
to effectively promote and implement active transportation infrastructure within the Town of Riverview.
As part of the Active Transportation we recommended the preparation of policy and standards to be
incorporated as amendments to the Town's existing documents. The following provides a brief
summary of amendments that will be prepared:
-
Include the AT network map into the Town's Municipal Development Plan so Developers have
a clear indication of where specific infrastructure must be incorporated into their design.
-
Establish requirements within the Zoning By-law requiring bicycle parking for all commercial,
industrial, recreational and multiple unit residential developments.
-
Amend the Subdivision By-law to encourage the use of trails as Lands for Public Purposes.
64
-
Revise the current Subdivision Development Design Standards with policies and cross-
sections that outline the location of bike lanes, sidewalks, multi-use trails and street trees
consistent with best practices.
Figure 8.1: Example of a Design Standard with AT Infrastructure
8.4 Community Education and Engagement
Even with an AT network in place, education of residents will be necessary in order to provide the
comfort and knowledge needed to increase the use of the network while creating a safe environment
for users and motorists. The following are a number of key elements that should be included as part of
the implementation of the Active Transportation Plan.
Staff Contact and Educator
8.4.1
Designate one staff member from the Recreation and Community Relations Department to be
responsible for AT within Riverview. This should not require full-time dedication but this person should
serve as:
-
Contact for any resident who has questions, concerns or comments with regards to Active
Transportation.
-
They should receive training from qualified CAN-BIKE trainers and be prepared to provide
regular presentations to schools.
-
Work with CAN-BIKE trainers to establish workshops a few times a year for residents of all
ages. Perhaps include La Bikery in this initiative to lend bikes to those who currently do
not have one but may be interested. Town should consider funding part of this to help
keep the cost to residents minimal.
______________________________
Appendix A:
Best Practices Summary
_______________________________
Summary of Active Transportation Best Practices for Riverview
Connectivity
1. Wherever possible, encourage new developments to be designed in
either a grid or fused grid manner.
2. Continue prohibition of cul-de-sacs (where possible).
3. Where cul-de-sacs are necessary (due to topography, wetlands or
other landscape related barriers) ensure that trail connections from the
bulb of the cul-de-sac are provided to adjacent streets to maintain the
pedestrian grid.
4. In existing neighbourhoods, try to identify opportunities to establish
new trails that will help re-establish the grid in areas with low
connectivity.
5. Establish multiple connections to primary and secondary routes that
will allow for efficient and fast movement across the Town.
Park Dedication
1. Include mapping of the Active Transportation network as part of the
Municipal Development Plan.
2. Establish clear policies and standards in the Municipal Development
Plan, Subdivision By-law promoting the use of trails as Lands for
Public Purpose.
Routes
1. The bike and trail network should have a hierarchy of routes to provide
for a variety of activities and paths to a destination.
Vegetation and
Landscaping
1. Sidewalks should be separated wherever possible by a landscaped
buffer featuring trees to improve the aesthetics for users as well as the
overall streetscape.
2. Additional landscaping and design should be considered for primary
routes within the community.
3. The type, design and maintenance of landscaping should comply with
CPTED principles.
Sidewalks
1. A hierarchy of sidewalk design widths is required based on area and
level of use.
2. The minimum sidewalk design width should be 1.5 m.
3. For sidewalks less than 1.5 m there should be passing bump outs for
wheel chair, strollers and walkers.
4. Well-used sidewalks provide rest areas along the sidewalk with
benches and amenities. These areas of refuge are essential for older
pedestrians especially in hilly areas.
5. Cleanliness and aesthetics directly impact the use of a sidewalk or
route.
6. Lighting and perceived safety are important for route use.
Trails
1. Trails provide an effective tool for connecting the pedestrian grid.
2. Trails will require a variety of design widths based on proposed use.
3. Trails must be carefully designed to provide users with surveillance of
surroundings. This requires clearing tall vegetation from the sides of
trails.
4. Not all trails will be 24-hour use due to safety.
5. Trails should be encourage for use by snoeshoers and cross-country
skiiers in winter months.
6. Multi-use paths need to be wide enough to accommodate pedestrians
and cyclists travelling in both directions.
7. Where possible, avoid the use of granular paths as it presents barriers
to those with strollers and in wheelchairs.
Bike Lanes
1. Visibility is essential for safety of the biker and driver.
2. Signage and cues such as painted bike lanes are needed to educate
drivers on shared right of ways with bikers is required.
3. Route selection should be based on ROW and traffic speeds. Bike
routes for strictly commuter purposes can be located along routes with
higher traffic.
4. Bike racks are essential to promote the use of bikes within a
community.
5. Bike lanes should be seperated from vehicular traffic on primary and
secondary routes through the use of signage, bike lane symbols and
pavement markings.
End of Trip Facilities
1. Bicycle parking standards should be incorporated into the Zoning By-
law. These would include the number and type of spaces to be
provided for bicycle parking and guidance on the design of bicycle
racks to be installed.
2. Additional end-of-trip facilities such as showers and change rooms
should be encouraged through the development approvals process.
Intersections and
Crossings
1. Providing good visibility between driver and pedestrian creates
intersection safety. This can be achieved with lighting, providing good
signage and using visual cures for traffic to slow down.
2. Pedestrians safety can be promoted using changes in texture (urban
Braille) , colour and height variation at key intersections.
3. Consider the use of bike boxes at highly travelled and congested
intersections.
4. Curb cut design needs to address safety for wheelchairs and strollers.
Signage and Mapping
1. Providing good mapping for the existing trail and bikeway network is
important in promoting usage of this infrastructure. Mapping should be
provided both on the web and in hard copy format through such
locations as recreation facilities, along the Riverfront Trail and in the
Findlay Business Park.
2. Signage is also an important consideration in promoting trail usage and
providing user information regarding points of interest and amenities.
3. Signage should incorporate any long-term branding initiatives the
Town currently has underway.
Winter Maintenance
1. Not all trails require maintenance during the winter months. The level
of winter maintenance should be based on the level of usage over the
winter and the role of the connection.
Crime Prevention
Through Environmental
Design
1. Create defined public and non-public spaces using landscaping.
2. Provide lighting for key routes in the community.
3. Where necessary strengthen the territoriality of a space by controlling
access with fencing, landscaping and walls.
4. Long-term continued maintenance is essential to promote safe and
vibrant public spaces.
______________________________
Appendix B:
Consultation Maps
_______________________________
______________________________
Appendix C:
Questionnaire Results
_______________________________
Riverview Active Transportation Plan - Questionnaire
Responses
In total, thirty (30) questionnaire responses were received either digitally or in hard copy format.
The following tables present the responses from residents to each question.
1. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION USAGE
1. How do you most frequently get around the Town of Riverview?
Mode of Transportation
#
%
a) Car / Truck
29
97%
b) Bicycle
1
3%
c) Walking / Running
0
0%
d) Public Transit
0
0%
e) Wheelchair, motorized scooter, push scooter, etc.
0
0%
f) ATV (All Terrain Vehicle)
0
0%
g) Inline Skating / Skateboard
0
0%
h) Boat
0
0%
TOTAL
30
100%
2. How often do you use a form of active transportation for commuting purposes (work, school,
groceries, other shopping, etc.)?
#
%
a) Daily
5
18%
b) Weekly
5
18%
c) Monthly
3
11%
d) Never
15
54%
TOTAL
28
100%
3. How often do you use a form of active transportation for recreational / health purposes?
#
%
a) Daily
4
13%
b) Weekly
11
37%
c) Monthly
8
27%
d) Never
7
23%
TOTAL
30
100%
4. If you currently do not use active transportation for commuting or recreational purposes, what
is the major reason why? (circle one)
#
%
a) Not enough trails, bike lanes, cross-country ski
routes.
5
18%
b) Infrastructure does not allow me to go to the
destinations I would like to go to.
0
0%
c) I do not feel safe.
1
4%
d) Takes too much time to get anywhere.
9
32%
e) Weather.
1
4%
f) There is a lack of infrastructure at destinations
(bike racks, bike lockers, showers, rest rooms, etc).
1
4%
g) All of the above.
5
18%
h) Other (please specify).
4
14%
No Answer
2
7%
TOTAL
28
100%
2. COMFORT WITH ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE
5. Please indicate your comfort level with regards to walking for each of the following
statements.
(1 = Very Comfortable, 2 = Comfortable, 3 = Uncomfortable, 4 = Very Uncomfortable or 5 = Unsure)
VC
C
U
VU
Unsure
a) Walking on a gravel multi-use trail
72.4%
24.1%
0.0%
0.0%
3.4%
b) Walking on a paved multi-use trail
75.0%
25.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
c) Walking on the shoulder of a rural
road
10.3%
27.6%
41.4%
20.7%
0.0%
d) Walking on the sidewalk without a
landscaped buffer
22.2%
63.0%
14.8%
0.0%
0.0%
e) Walking on the sidewalk with a
landscaped buffer
71.4%
28.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
f) Walking where there is no street
lighting
3.4%
10.3%
41.4%
41.4%
3.4%
6. Please indicate your comfort level with regards to cycling for each of the following.
(1 = Very Comfortable, 2 = Comfortable, 3 = Uncomfortable, 4 = Very Uncomfortable or 5 = Unsure)
VC
C
U
VU
Unsure
a) Cycling on a gravel multi-use trail
51.7%
31.0%
13.8%
3.5%
0%
b) Cycling on a paved multi-use trail
67.9%
32.1%
0%
0%
0%
c) Cycling on the shoulder of a rural road
10.3%
10.3%
55.2%
24.2%
0%
d) Cycling where there is no street lighting
10.3%
10.3%
38.0%
34.5%
6.9%
3. DESTINATIONS
7. Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements, regarding initiatives that
might encourage you to walk or bike more often.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
a) Secure bicycle parking at work /
school / shopping
centres.
34.5%
44.8%
17.3%
0%
3.4%
b) Improved road maintenance.
35.7%
25.0%
35.7%
0%
3.6%
c) Improved signage for bike and
pedestrian routes.
37.9%
24.2%
31.0%
6.9%
0%
d) No improvements are necessary,
the existing trails and sidewalks are
meeting my needs.
3.6%
3.6%
60.7%
21.4%
10.7%
e) Nothing will encourage me to walk
or bike more often
3.4%
3.4%
34.6%
44.8%
13.8%
f) More multi-use trails (off-street).
27.6%
48.3%
20.7%
3.4%
0%
g) Bike lanes or paved shoulders for
cycling (on-street).
38.0%
27.6%
27.6%
3.4%
3.4%
h) More connections to key
destinations (i.e. shopping,
school, Downtown, etc.).
31.0%
34.5%
27.6%
6.9%
0%
i) Reduced traffic speeds.
3.4%
20.7%
34.5%
17.3%
24.1%
j) Improved sidewalk and pathway
maintenance.
25.0%
28.6%
42.8%
0%
3.6%
8. What do you think are the top three locations in the Town that require new or better connected
trails, bikeways, or sidewalks?
Location
Votes
Location
Votes
Causeway / Traffic Circle / Coverdale
overpass
7
Buckingham
2
Gunningsville Boulevard / Area
3
Old Coach Road to Gunningsville
Blvd
1
Upper Coverdale
3
Trites Extension
1
Coverdale Road
3
Mongomery
1
Trites
3
South End - Findlay Park
1
Schools
2
Whitepine
1
Bike Trail to West Riverview
2
Green space like the Mill Creek
Area
1
Lower Coverdale
2
Liner park in new development
1
Findlay Boulevard
2
Waterfront
1
9. Please rank in order the destinations you feel will be most important to be included as part of
the Active Transportation network (1 through 11) - Table with ranking based on scoring formula
below.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
TOTAL
Downtown Riverview
(between the bridge and
causeway)
13
6
3
0
2
1
0
1
0
0
0
26
Riverview Mall
0
1
0
1
5
2
6
3
2
2
2
24
Findlay Boulevard Retail
Centre
6
7
1
1
3
0
5
1
2
0
0
26
Biggs Drive Recreational
Fields / Facilities
1
1
5
5
3
5
1
3
0
1
0
25
Riverview High School
0
5
5
3
3
3
2
1
1
1
0
24
Downtown Moncton
1
3
7
4
2
2
2
2
3
0
0
26
Moncton Industrial Park
0
0
0
1
0
1
4
2
5
7
3
23
Schools
4
2
1
7
1
7
0
3
0
0
0
25
Library / Town Hall
0
1
2
3
5
2
5
2
4
2
0
26
Mill Creek
0
0
2
0
1
2
0
5
5
8
2
25
Other
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
2
2
7
Cross Creek on Pine Glen
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
In order to calculate and assess the ranking of the various destinations we applied a value that
corresponds to how people ranked the destinations. For instance, every first rank vote a particular
destination received gets value of 11; second ranked destination votes received a value of 10 and so on.
As an example, the following is the breakdown of Downtown Riverview:
Breakdown of Destination Scoring (Downtown Riverview Example)
Rank
Value
Number of Votes
Calculation
Total
1
11
13
11 x 13
143
2
10
6
10 x 6
60
3
9
3
9 x 3
27
4
8
0
8 x 0
0
5
7
2
7 x 2
14
6
6
1
6 x 1
6
7
5
0
5 x 0
0
8
4
1
4 x 1
4
9
3
0
3 x 0
0
10
2
0
2 x 0
0
11
1
0
1 x 0
0
Total
254
Question 9: Desintation Ranking based on Formula
(Rank of 1 = 11, 2 = 10, 3 = 9, 4 = 8, 5 = 7, etc)
Rank Location
Value
1
Downtown Riverview (between the bridge and causeway)
228
2
Findlay Boulevard Retail Centre
183
3
Schools
165
4
Downtown Moncton
163
5
Riverview High School
153
6
Biggs Drive Recreational Fields / Facilities
151
7
Library / Town Hall
122
8
Riverview Mall
95
9
Mill Creek
65
10
Moncton Industrial Park
51
11
Other
21
4. GENERAL HOUSEHOLD INFORMATION OF RESPONDANTS
10. The following questions are intended to give us an idea of your transportation needs.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
How Many Residents
0%
13.3%
30.0%
13.3%
23.4%
20.0%
0%
0%
0%
Home many drivers?
0%
16.7%
66.7%
6.6%
3.4%
6.6%
0%
0%
0%
How many cars in the
household?
6.6%
30.0%
56.8%
0%
6.6%
0%
0%
0%
0%
11. What is the approximate distance of your daily commute to work or school?
< 1 km
1 to 3 km
3 to 10 km
10 - 20 km
> 20 km
No Answer
0%
10.7%
50.0%
25.0%
10.7%
3.6%
12. What is your age group?
18 or younger
1
3.4%
19 - 25
2
6.9%
26 - 40
15
51.7%
41 - 54
7
24.1%
55 - 65
3
10.3%
65+
1
3.4%
TOTAL
29
100.0%
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
-
Need some kind of services for people that would like to get out without the cost of taxis from East
Riverview to West Riverview Only.
-
The rules of the road should be posted online and in schools to tell people where they are allowed
to ride bikes and where they shouldn't (sidewalks, wrong side of the road, etc.). I've had arguments
with friends over the rules and that shouldn't happen, the rules are the law and everyone should
know them.
-
Do whatever you can to ensure bicyclists obey the rules of the road - otherwise, keep them away.
-
Cross Creek on Pine Glen Road would be a good spot for more AT infrastructure. There is no bus
service or trails for biking/walking to the main areas of Riverview.
-
I like the idea of surveys like this to get ideas from the public.
-
I feel that more Bike Lanes should be added to the streets of Riverview making it easier for cyclist to
navigate the streets of Riverview... as well as the proper signage to notify motorist of cyclist on the
street and to share to road. I also believe more trails should be created throughout the town which
eventually would lead to each trail being connected in some way or other making it easier to access
different areas of the town either by foot or by bicycle.
-
I used to live in Downtown Riverview and would walk to restaurants and stores and bike to work in
Downtown Moncton on the riverfront trail, but now I live in Upper Coverdale and I don't feel safe
biking along the gravel shoulder of the road with cars going 80k beside me, so the bike sits in the
garage gathering dust while my vehicle racks up the miles. I also now work on Mapleton Rd. too far
too bike but I wouldn't even dare attempt to go around the traffic circle on a bike anytime of the
day let alone morning rush hour traffic
-
The main deterrent for my household is in terms of active transportation to go to work is that there
are no shower facilities at either of our destinations. For grocery shopping it would not be
convenient to try and lug groceries home on a bike or shop daily. For other activities we could use it
more often but have not yet. We run almost daily in the house and occasionally outside for
health/recreation purposes and use the trails for this.
______________________________
Appendix D:
Wetland Mapping
_______________________________
______________________________
Appendix E:
Topographic Mapping
_______________________________
Riverview Active Transportation Plan
Topographic Map 1m Interval
Riverview, New Brunswick
November 28, 2012 ~ RIVERVIEW_TOPO_1M
0
55 DRISCOLL CRESCENT
MONCTON, NEW BRUNSWICK
CANADA B3B 1X7
PHONE: 506 857-1675 ~ FAX: 506 857-1679
WWW.GENIVAR.COM
Riverview Active Transportation Plan
Topographic Map 5m Interval
Riverview, New Brunswick
November 28 , 2012 ~ RIVERVIEW_TOPO_5M
0
55 DRISCOLL CRESCENT
MONCTON, NEW BRUNSWICK
CANADA B3B 1X7
PHONE: 506 857-1675 ~ FAX: 506 857-1679
WWW.GENIVAR.COM
______________________________
Appendix F:
Key Routes and Destinations
_______________________________
______________________________
Appendix G:
Connectivity Base Plan
_______________________________
APPENDIX B - Existing AT Infrastructure Map
Town of Riverview - Active Transportaion Plan
Existing Active Transportation Infrastructure
Riverview, New Brunswick
January 30, 2013
Legend
Existing Tertiary
Proposed Tertiary
Future Tertiary
Existing Trails
Proposed Trails
Future Trails
Existing Primary
Proposed Primary
Future Primary
Existing Secondary
Proposed Secondary
Future Secondary
Town Boundary
Roads
Bus Stops
Destinations
Water
Existing AT Connections
APPENDIX C - Codiac Transit Routes
1 Codiac Transit Routes
1.1 Route 80: Eastern Riverview (Gunningsville Route)
The eastern portion of Riverview is provided regular bus service predominantly along Hillsborough road to
Highfield Square where passengers can transfer to a number of different buses travelling around Moncton
and Dieppe. The route is predominantly scheduled to provide service for morning and evening commutes
to and from work with limited service in the evening. As this area of Town continues to grow, we
anticipate this route will expand.
Figure 1.1 - Codiac Transit Route 80 Map
1.2 Route 81: Western Riverview (Riverview Route)
Western Riverview is serviced by Route 81 which also terminates at Highfield Square, a node where
passengers are able to transfer to other buses travelling around greater Moncton. This route provides
hourly service from 6:30 am to 9:30 pm though there have been recent discussions about expanding this
service. One of the key stops along this route is the Riverview Mall which is home to a call centre that
employs a number of people at various times during the day and evening.
Figure 1.2 - Codiac Transit Route 81 Map
APPENDIX D - AT Map
Town of Riverview - Active Transportaion Plan
Active Transportation Map
Riverview, New Brunswick
January 30, 2013
Legend
Existing Tertiary
Proposed Tertiary
Future Tertiary
Existing Trails
Proposed Trails
Future Trails
Existing Primary
Proposed Primary
Future Primary
Existing Secondary
Proposed Secondary
Future Secondary
Town Boundary
Roads
Bus Stops
Destinations
Water
Existing AT Connections
APPENDIX E - Key Destinations Map
Town of Riverview - Active Transportaion Plan
Key Destinations Map
Riverview, New Brunswick
January 30, 2013
Legend
Existing Tertiary
Proposed Tertiary
Future Tertiary
Existing Trails
Proposed Trails
Future Trails
Existing Primary
Proposed Primary
Future Primary
Existing Secondary
Proposed Secondary
Future Secondary
Town Boundary
Roads
Bus Stops
Destinations
Water
Existing AT Connections
APPENDIX F - Land Acquisition Map
APPENDIX G - Urban Local Primary Proposed AT Design Standard
APPENDIX H - Urban Collector Minor Proposed AT Design Standard
APPENDIX I - Urban Collector Primary Proposed AT Design Standard
APPENDIX J - Trail Design Standard
APPENDIX K - TAC Signage Standards
1 TAC Signage Standards
All bikeway traffic control signage should follow the Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada
produced by the Transportation Association of Canada (TAC). These standards outline appropriate traffic
control for the installation of signs and pavement markings on bikeways in Canada.
1.1 Shared Routes
It is important to provide appropriate signage on shared routes to encourage safe use of infrastructure for
both cyclists and motorists.
The intent of the Share the Road sign is to advise motorists and cyclists to use extra caution on the
upcoming section of the road as well as provide adequate space for those on the road. The Shared Use
Lane Single File Sign warns motorists that the lane is too narrow for side-by-side operation and cyclist are
allowed full use of the lane.
1.2 Bike Lanes
Bike lanes are a major component of the proposed active transportation network; as such it is important
that signage and lane markings are incorporated into the long-term active transportation network
development. Effective signage and lane marking can be achieved through standard road sign and
pavement marking. TAC provides standards and examples of signage and lane markings for bike routes1.
This sign is used to warn motorists that they are approaching a reserved bicycle lane.
1
Transportation Association of Canada (1998) Bikeway and Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada. Available from: www.tac-atc.ca
Figure 1.1 - Examples of Share the Road (WC-19) and Shared Use Lane Single File (WC-20) signs.
The purpose of these signs is to indicate that a lane is reserved for exclusive use by bicycles. TAC has
specific standards on placement of Reserve Bicycle Lane Signs that should be followed.
1.3 Multi-use Trails
Signage on multiuse trails will encourage safe use of trails for pedestrians, bicyclists and other AT users.
TAC provides standards for Shared Pathway and Pathway Organization signs. Shared Pathway signs
indicate that both cyclists and pedestrians are permitted while Pathway Organization signs indicate how
to share the path when there is an area designated for each.
Figure 1.2 - Examples of Reserved Bicycle Lane Ahead Sign (WB-10).
Figure 1.2 - Examples of Reserved Bicycle Lane Signs (RB-90, RB-91, RB-92).
Trail signage is essential to link local trail systems to the greater AT Network.
This sign is used when a trail crosses a road and indicates to drivers that pedestrians or cyclists could be
crossing.
Figure 1.3.1 - Examples of Shared Pathway (RB-93) and Pathway Organization signs (RB-94R) (TAC).
Figure 1.3.2 - Example of Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Ahead Sign (WB-10).
APPENDIX L - Signage Map
Town of Riverview - Active Transportaion Plan
Signage Map
Riverview, New Brunswick
January 30, 2013
Legend
Primary Access Points
Secondary Access Points
Points of Interest
APPENDIX M - Community Education Program
1 Community Education Program
A Staff member should be assigned the task of implementing and promoting the Active Transportation
Plan as well as educating the community. This is not intended or envisioned as a full-time role; it may be
possible to integrate this into a current employee's job description. The following provides an outline of
the tasks that the dedicated Active Transportation Coordinator should be responsible for throughout the
implementation and promotion of the AT plan and the education of the community.
1.1 Campaign Initiation
Key Action Item
Description
Timeframe
1. Review of goals The goals provided in the Active Transportation Plan should be
reviewed at the start of the project and annually. New goals can be
added as necessary.
Responsibility: Review goals and add new goals as necessary.
1 day then
on-going
annually
2. Steering
Committee
Setup a Steering Committee comprising of predominantly Staff
members to implement the AT Plan and education campaign. This
Steering Committee should include representatives from the
Recreation and Community Relations, Engineering and Public
Works, local Police, a resident familiar with AT and a member of
Council. The Steering Committee should meet on a quarterly or
semi-annual basis to discuss any issues or challenges that have
been encountered (whether it relates to maintenance, safety or
education) and upcoming initiatives/events.
Responsibility: Organize and chair steering committee meetings
quarterly or semi-annually.
1 month then
on-going
quarterly or
semi-annually
3. Checklist of
Stakeholders
Identify individuals who can assist in facilitating educational events
and be AT champions in your community. These will be groups
that have an interest in making AT safer, more accessible and
more prominent in the community. Stakeholders who attended the
focus groups include:
o
Post Carbon Greater Moncton
o
La Bikery (Bike Co-op)
o
Bridgedale Community Centre
o
Cross Country Ski Club
o
Riverview Striders Club
o
Riverview cyclist, CAN-BIKE Instructor
o
Boys and Girls Club
o
Moncton Outdoor Enthusiasts
o
Dobson Trail
3 weeks then
on-going
o
Recreation
o
Parks, Recreation and Community - Coverdale Centre
o
Communications Coordinator
o
Economic Development
o
Riverview CAO
o
Riverview Planning Department
o
Fire Department
o
Engineering and Public Works
Bringing these AT allies together can facilitate education amongst
the groups as well as leverage their shared interests and
knowledge to assist in educating the wider community.
Responsibility: Work with Communications Staff to maintain and
add to existing stakeholders list.
4. Review of
educational
brochure and
presentation
The final Active Transportation Plan will include a brochure
outlining the basics of AT including safety rules for AT users as
well as motorists and information relating to AT infrastructure in
Riverview. This brochure will be provided in PDF and InDesign
format allowing for future updates/edits as desired. The final Active
Transportation Plan will also include the framework for a
PowerPoint presentation that can be used by Staff and/or Steering
Committee as a template for educational sessions. These are
intended as tools to assist with the community educational
campaign and the intention is that these will be modified as
necessary to suit the audience and method of education delivery.
Responsibility:
Updates
to
PowerPoint
Presentation
and
Brochure.
1 day then
on-going
5. Town's Website
Responsibility: Establish and maintain section of Town's website
dedicated to Active Transportation (i.e. www.riverview.ca/AT)
1 week then
on-going
1.2 ATP Implementation, Building Community Awareness and On-going
Education
Implementing the education campaign will occur through a combination of efforts. The dedicated Staff
working closely with the individuals identified as AT Champions will be integral to the success of the
campaign. The methods chosen should be effective, fun and help to promote the Plan and use of AT
infrastructure. Outlined below are some community education programs and action items that would
assist in meeting the goals of the Plan:
Key Action Item
Description
Timeframe
6. Funding
Opportunities
Responsibility: Apply for available funding opportunities and
continually look for additional funding (See Section 6.3).
Monthly and
as necessary
7. Securing
Permits
Responsibility: Secure any necessary permits required for the
construction of AT infrastructure.
On-going
8. Kickoff Event
A special event should be held to announce and celebrate the
Town's first AT project. This event can be similar to SWITCH
Halifax
(https://www.facebook.com/Switchhfx).
Work
with
Communications Staff and local media.
Responsibility: Organize kickoff event.
1 day
9. Small
infrastructure
wins
Responsibility: Celebrate and promote small infrastructure
development (e.g., new trail development, bike rack installation).
Work with Communications Staff and local media.
As
appropriate
10. Celebrating AT
Events
Responsibility: Research and celebrate international, national
and provincial AT events such as Bike-to-Work Day.
As
appropriate
11. Booths at Local
Events
Responsibility: Setting up booths at local events and key
community locations to promote the AT plan and educated the
public.
As
appropriate
12. Educational
Videos
Responsibility: Develop or find applicable educational videos to
be placed on website and Town's Facebook page.
Year 1
13. School
Programs
Responsibility: Establish "Safe School Routes" mapping for
website and organize walk to school programs in the community.
Twice
annually
(spring and
fall)
14. Skill Building
Workshops
Responsibility: Working with the local CAN-BIKE instructor,
explore potential to subsidize a portion of the bike training he
provides. This education should include specific target "how to
ride" programs to teach proper cycling etiquette and safety for on
street riding for all age groups. These should be promoted on
Facebook, the Town's website and local newspaper.
2 - 3 times
per year
15. Trail Hikes
Responsibility: Work with stakeholders to co-host seasonal
community trail hikes to introduce the participants to different trails
within greater Moncton and Riverview.
Quarterly
16. Bike Rides
Work with stakeholders (i.e. La Bikery) while organizing short
monthly community bike rides at a regular time. Introduce the
participants to different trails/routes in the community.
Monthly as
infrastructure
is put in place
17. Smart Phone
Application
Responsibility: Explore potential to develop smart phone
application with Moncton and Dieppe that provides detailed AT
mapping of routes and destinations to allow users to plan routes.
3 months
18. Meetings with
Moncton and
Dieppe
Responsibility: Organize semi-annual meetings with staff from
Moncton and Dieppe responsible for Active Transportation to
discuss on-going initiatives, any issues or challenges identified
and potential cost-sharing measure that can be realized between
the communities.
Semi-
annually
19. Updates to
Mapping
Responsibility: Coordinate any updates to mapping based on
construction / installation of any new AT infrastructure.
As needed
1.3 Evaluating Progress
It is important to evaluate the success of the Community Education Campaign and assess whether the
goals have been met.
Key Action Item
Description
Timeframe
20. Annual
Evaluation
An annual evaluation of the success of the Active Transportation
Plan should take place. There is a variety of information that can
be used as measures of success:
-
Historical police reports relating to motor vehicle and
pedestrian/cycling incidents prior to Plan development
compared to that following the community education
campaign. Measure annually to evaluate any areas
needing additional assessment.
-
Follow up community surveys regarding knowledge and
use of AT by residents.
-
Membership numbers of local user groups (i.e. Riverview
Striders Club, Cross Country Ski Club, etc.)
-
km's of AT infrastructure added
-
any additional AT related groups that have been
established or growth of existing groups.
-
Monitor hits on AT website and Facebook posts
-
Event attendance
Responsibility: Prepare brief annual report of above findings, any
issues or opportunities based on discussions with residents and
potential action items or adjustments to education program.
Annually
APPENDIX N - Route Naming Map
APPENDIX O - Funding Opportunities
1 Funding Opportunities
Funding for the implementation of the Active Transportation Plan can be obtained through a variety of
sources including Federal and Provincial programs as well as corporate and charity based organizations.
1.1 Federal Programs
ecoMOBILITY
Transportation Canada's ecoMOBILITY program is part of the ecoTRANSPORTATION strategy, which is
a Federal Government initiative aimed at addressing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution from
transportation sources.
Since 2008 program has funded 13 projects in 12 communities, one of which is in the City of Saint John.
In partnership with Saint John Transit Commission and Saint John Parking Commission, the City is
delivering a project to increase ride sharing and the use of public transit.
Proposals are no longer being accepted for the ecoMOBILITY contribution program. It is uncertain if
opportunities for funding through this program will be available in the future.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs/environment-ecomobility-menu-eng-144.htm
Moving on Sustainable Transportation Program (MOST)
Moving on Sustainable Transportation Program (MOST) is a Transport Canada contribution program that
provides financial support to help organizations implement demonstrations, research, education and pilot
projects that create and support new sustainable transportation options. Since 1999 the program has
funded 97 projects, of which 40 have a primary focus on Active Transportation. Not-for-profit
organizations,
private
companies
or
individuals,
universities
and
colleges,
First
Nation
Communities/Organizations, and others are eligible. The program funds projects to a maximum of 50% of
eligible costs (cash or in-kind) and to a maximum of $150,000 over a three-year period.
At this time it is unclear whether applications will be accepted in 2013.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs/environment-most-menu-711.htm
Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Green Municipality Fund
The Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) provides funding through the Green Municipal Fund to
support the creation of sustainable communities in five sectors of municipal activity including
transportation. One example of a transportation capital project would be a modal shift, which is the
change in travel patterns from one type or mode to another and specifically includes:
-
improvements to active transportation infrastructure around transit nodes;
-
development or completion of walking and cycling networks and systems planned around travel
to work, school, shopping or culture, that promote safety, accessibility and viable alternatives to
car travel; and
-
the development of complete streets (roadways designed and operated to enable safe, attractive
and comfortable access and travel for all users).
The FCM offers grants to cover up to 50% of eligible costs for plans, feasibility studies and field tests to a
maximum of $175,000. They also offer below-market loans, usually in combination with grants, to cover
80% of eligible costs for capital projects. Loan maximum is $10 million, and the grant amount is set at up
to 20% of the loan to a maximum of $1 million (grants are typically 10% of loan amount approved).
This funding is made available to all municipal governments and their partners in eligible projects.
Applications are accepted year-round.
http://www.fcm.ca/home/programs/green-municipal-fund/about-gmf/gmf-update.htm
1.2 Provincial Programs
New Brunswick Environmental Trust Fund
The Environmental Trust Fund provides assistance for action-oriented projects with tangible, measurable
results, aimed at protecting, preserving and enhancing the Province's natural environment. Many projects
focus around Climate Change Adaptation, water quality, recycling programs, energy conservation, and
community education. The Trust awarded $20,000 towards helping to establish and promote a
sustainable transportation system in the Tantramar region as part of their 2012-2013 projects.
Eligible groups include community groups, NB municipalities, non-profit NB organizations, and institutions
furthering sustainable development. Proposal must come under at least one of the six categories to be
considered for funding: protection, restoration, sustainable development, conservation, education, and
beautification. Department Staff will analyze applications to ensure they meet the program's criteria. The
Environmental Trust Fund Advisory Board then reviews all applications and makes recommendations to
the Minister. Once projects are approved, the Minister will announce the ETF awards.
The Fund reimburses actual costs up to, but not exceeding, the approved amount for eligible activities.
The Letter of Offer sent to successful applicants explains reimbursement, time frames and other
procedures. It constitutes a contractual agreement between the successful proponent and the
department. Awards are for expenses incurred within the fiscal year (April 1 - March 31) in which they are
announced. Based on an evaluation of the work completed, the Fund reserves the right not to continue
providing assistance to multi-year projects
Online applications are being accepted for the 2013/14 fiscal year.
http://app.infoaa.7700.gnb.ca/gnb/Pub/EServices/ListServiceDetails.asp?ServiceID1=13136&ReportType
1=ALL
1.3 Other Programs
Bicycle Trade Association of Canada (BTAC)
The Bicycle Trade Association of Canada provides grants of up to $5,000 to support grassroots cycling
projects with a connection to specialty bike retailers. Eligible projects must encourage and promote
cycling and support bicycle advocacy. The Association will fund projects that have significant potential for
changing behaviours, and that have a measurable success. Priority is given to bicycle organizations and
projects that build capacity for cycling. A key goal of the grants program is to fund projects and
communities that have not received BTAC funding in the past.
Contact: Bill Yetman, NTAC executive Director, 416-427-2807, [email protected]
www.btac.org/grant_program/index.html
Evergreen
As a national charity working to create sustainable communities, schools and homes, Evergreen offers a
range of community funding projects. Evergreen's Common Grounds Grants are offered to support
community groups in protecting and restoring urban green spaces. All proposed projects must be open to
the community, have strong volunteer-involvement component, and must be located entirely on publicly
accessible lands. Eligibility school and community groups must be working in partnership with local
government or other institutional partner.
Walmart - Evergreen Grants of up to $10,000 are also offered for community-based restoration and
stewardship initiatives in urban and urbanizing areas, including naturalization, community food gardens
native planting initiatives, youth based and intergenerational projects. Applications are available mid-
January 2013.
In 2012, the Causeway Work Centre received funding from the Walmart - Evergreen grant for the Right
Bike Project. This project provides a public bike-sharing program that addresses the need for affordable
and sustainable transportation options in the Ottawa area.
www.evergreen.ca
(Note: The Evergreen website also provides an up-to-date list of additional funding resources)
Additional Revenue Streams
Additional revenue streams should be explored including:
-
Integrating advertising into trail signage, benches, bike racks and bike lockers.
-
Route Sponsorship Program
-
Local business owners who support AT sponsoring AT initiatives
o
TD Friends of the Environment
o
MEC
o
Public Health Agencies of Canada - Active Health
o
Health and Stroke Foundation - NB - Physical Activity
o
NS Trails Federation Website - Funding Sources for Trails
o
CN Eco connextions - From the ground Up
o
Environment Canada - Green Source Funding Database
http://www.ec.gc.ca/financement-funding/sv-gs/index_e.cfm
o
Green Communities Canada
www.greencommunitiescanada.org/
APPENDIX P - Phasing and Costing
1 Phasing and Costing
The following is a breakdown of what is included in the projects highlighted in Section 9.2 - Phasing and
Costing.
1.1 Trites Rd (Callaghan Rd to Callowhill Rd)
Estimated length: 550 m
Applicable Standard: Urban Collector Minor AT
Estimates of probable construction costs: $200,000 - $250,000
Time Frame: 1 - 2 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. The project includes installing
a 2 meter wide sidewalk along one side of the street and a 3 meter wide multi-use trail along the other
side. The estimated cost also includes installing 5 benches and some topsoil and sod along the edges of
the sidewalks and multi-use trails. The estimate probable construction cost does not include grading or
any upgrades or reinstatements to the street.
1.2 Hillsborough Rd (Hawkes St to the future Bridgedale Blvd)
Estimated length: 1.1 km
Applicable Standard: Arterial
Estimates of probable construction costs: $300,000 - $350,000
Time Frame: 2 - 3 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. The project includes painting
in bike lanes on either extremity of the road and installing a 2 meter wide sidewalk along the north side of
the road. The estimated costs also includes the planting street trees every 10 meters along both sides of
the road, 10 benches, some topsoil and sod along the edges of the sidewalk and trees and reinstating the
driveways the sidewalk crosses. The estimated probable construction cost does not include the costs
associated with land acquisition to achieve the desired and/or necessary right-of-way width.
1.3 Hawkes St
Estimated length: 200 m
Applicable Standard: Urban Local Primary AT
Estimates of probable construction costs: $40,000 - $60,000
Time Frame: 2 - 3 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. Hawkes Street currently
connects Hillsborough Road to the Riverfront Trail, but there is no AT infrastructure along Hawkes Street.
This project involves installing a 2 meter wide sidewalk on one side of the street with 2 benches and
reinstating the driveways the sidewalk crosses. The estimated probable construction cost does not
include grading or any costs associated with upgrading or reinstating the street.
1.4 Cleveland Ave (Gunningsville Blvd to Pinewood Rd)
Estimated length: 175 m
Applicable Standard: Urban Local Primary AT
Estimates of probable construction costs: $35,000 - $50,000
Time Frame: 2 - 4 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. Cleveland Avenue currently
extends from Coverdale road south to just past Pinewood Road. The road suddenly stops and turns into a
dirt path. The estimate probable cost includes installing a 2 meter wide sidewalk along one side of the
future road, 2 benches and planting trees every 10 meters along the sidewalk. The estimated probable
construction cost does not include grading for the sidewalk and designing and constructing the future
road.
1.5 Findlay Blvd (Whitepine Rd to Coverdale Rd)
Estimated length: 1.4 km
Applicable Standard: Arterial
Estimates of probable construction costs: $300,000 - $350,000
Time Frame: 3 - 5 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. Findlay Boulevard currently
extends from Coverdale road south to Gunningsville Boulevard. There is a multi-use trail along Findlay
Boulevard from Gunningsville Boulevard to Whitepine Road. This project involves extending the multi-use
trail along Findlay Boulevard from Whitepine Road to Coverdale Road. The probable cost consists of
installing a 3 meter wide multi-use trail along the west side of Findlay Boulevard located on the outside of
the existing fence. The costs also include 7 benches, a painted line down the center and a meter wide
topsoil and sod along the edges of the multi-use trail. The estimate probable construction cost does not
include grading or any connections to Riverview High School.
1.6 Sussex Ave
Estimated length: 1.0 km
Applicable Standard: Urban Local Primary AT
Estimates of probable construction costs: $200,000 - $250,000
Time Frame: 4 - 6 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. This project involves installing
a 2 meter wide sidewalk along one side of Sussex Avenue and planting trees every 10 metres alongside
the sidewalk. The probable cost also includes reinstating the driveways the sidewalk crosses, installing 5
benches and placing some topsoil and sod along the sidewalk. The estimated probable construction cost
does not include grading or any other costs in upgrading or reinstating the street.
1.7 Callowhill Road
Estimated length: 1.4 km
Applicable Standard: Urban Collector Minor AT
Estimates of probable construction costs: $550,000 - $600,000
Time Frame: 5 - 7 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. This project involves installing
2 meter wide sidewalk along both sides of the street, planting trees along both sides of the street every 10
meters, reinstating the driveways the sidewalks cross, installing 13 benches along the sidewalk and
placing 1 meter wide strip of topsoil and sod along both sidewalks. The estimated probable construction
cost does not include grading or any other costs to upgrade or reinstate the street.
1.8 Coverdale Rd (Causeway to Gunningsville Blvd)
Estimated length: 1.8 km
Applicable Standard: Arterial
Estimates of probable construction costs: $950,000 - $1,100,000
Time Frame: 6 - 9 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. This project involves
replacing the current sidewalk with a 2 meter wide sidewalk and a 3 meter wide multi-use trail. The pricing
also includes the planting of trees every 10 meters along both sides of the street, the installation of
amenities such as benches, the reinstatement of driveways and the placement of 1 meter wide strip of
topsoil and sod along the sidewalk and multi-use trail. The estimated probable construction cost does not
include grading, land acquisitions or upgrades or reinstatement of the street.
1.9 Coverdale Rd (Trites Rd to the Causeway)
Estimated length: 1.1 km
Applicable Standard: Arterial
Estimates of probable construction costs: $350,000 - $450,000
Time Frame: 8 - 10 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. This project involves
replacing one of the current sidewalks with a 3 meter wide multi-use trail. The pricing also includes the
planting of trees along both sides of the street, the reinstatement of driveways and the installation of 15
benches. The estimated probable construction cost does not include grading, land acquisitions or street
upgrades or improvements.
1.10 Coverdale Rd (Trites Rd to Patricia Dr)
Estimated length: 1.4 km
Applicable Standard: Arterial
Estimates of probable construction costs: $450,000 - $550,000
Time Frame: 9 - 10 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. This project involves installing
a 3 meter wide multi-use trail along the north side of the street, planting trees along the existing sidewalk
and multi-use trail, reinstating the driveways the sidewalk and multi-use trail cross and installing 16
benches along the multi-use trail and existing sidewalk. The estimated probable construction cost does
not include grading, land acquisitions or upgrades or reinstatements to the street.
1.11 Hillsborough Rd (Hawkes St to Gunningsville Rd)
Estimated length: 2.6 km
Applicable Standard: Arterial
Estimates of probable construction costs: $1,250,000 - $1,450,000
Time Frame: 11 - 13 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. This project involves
replacing the current sidewalks with a 2 meter wide sidewalk and a 3 meter wide multi-use trail. The
pricing also includes the planting of trees every 10 meters along both sides of the street, the installation of
26 benches along the sidewalk and multi-use trail, the reinstatement of driveways and the placement of 1
meter wide strips of topsoil and sod along both the sidewalk and multi-use trail. The estimated probable
construction cost does not include grading, land acquisitions or upgrades or reinstatements to the street.
1.12 Coverdale Rd (Patricia Dr to the future connection with West Riverview Blvd)
Estimated length: 1.2 km
Applicable Standard: Arterial
Estimates of probable construction costs: $550,000 - $650,000
Time Frame: 13 - 16 years
The figure below illustrates the location and extent of this particular project. This project involves installing
a 2 meter wide sidewalk and a 3 meter wide multi-use trail, the planting of trees every 10 meters along
the sidewalk and multi-use trail, the installation of 14 benches, the reinstatement of driveways and the
placement of a 1 meter wide strip of topsoil and sod along both the sidewalk and multi-use trail. The
estimated probable construction cost does not include grading, land acquisitions or upgrades or
reinstatements to the street.
APPENDIX Q - Definitions
1 Definitions
Accessibility - refers to the ability to and ease at which persons of all ages and physical abilities are
able to utilize AT infrastructure. The level of accessibility differs depending on a person's physical
abilities. For instance while a gravel trail is accessibility to many, it is not very accessible to someone
using a wheelchair, stroller or walker. Universal accessibility refers to infrastructure has been designed to
allow for the ease of use of all potential users.
Active Transportation (AT) - Includes any form of human powered transporation such as walking,
biking, skate boarding, wheelchairs, and roller blading. It is both a recreational and commuter activity.
Bike Lane - A bike lane is a dedicated space for cyclists located within the travelled portion of the street
but separated from vehicles by a solid or dashed white line. Symbols are painted within the bike lane at
regular intervals to further distinguish the spaces use for cyclists.
Connectivity - Refers to the ease of access to various neighbourhoods and destinations in and around
the community by various modes of transportation.
Landscaped Strip - A linear vegetative strip located parallel to sidewalks, trails or other active
transportation infrastructure. This can be located between the sidewalk and road or on the opposite side
of the sidewalk. Landscaped strips can be used to create a physical and/or visual barrier from the
vehicular portion of the road while enhancing the aesthetics of the overall street.
Route, Primary - Refers to the AT routes that are required to accommodate the greatest volume of use
and general provide access to major destinations in an around the community. These are often located
along major collector and arterial vehicular routes but can also come in the form of multi-use trails not
necessarily located with street right-of-ways.
Route, Secondary - These are AT routes designed to connect neighbourhoods with primary routes and
other destinations within the community. These are generally located along collector or local streets. AT
infrastructure along these routes can consist of dedicated bike lanes, shared streets or multi-use trails.
Route, Tertiary - Refers to an AT route that will be used predominantly by residents living within the
immediate neighbourhood to connect with primary and secondary routes. These are typically located
along local streets and generally feature shared route signage though a multi-use trail is a desirable
alternative.
Shared Route - means a street where vehicles and cyclists share the same travel area. These are
typically incorporated into lower volume streets though they may be necessary where streets lack the
appropriate paved width or right-of-way to incorporate dedicated bike lanes. These routes feature shared
route signage and in certain instances pavement markings.
Trail - A trail refers to an unpaved linear route designed predominantly for use by pedestrians and those
running. These generally feature either a dirt, crushed stone or gravel surface that is not considered as
accessible for those using bicycles, wheelchairs, strollers and walkers. In the winter months trails can
either be cleared or adapted into routes for cross-country skiers or snoeshoers. An example of a trail
would be the Riverfront Trail.
Trail, Multi-Use - For the purpose of this Plan, a multi-use trail refers to a paved linear trail located
outside of the travelled portion of a street which is universally accessible. An example of a multi-use trail
is the infrastructure along Gunningsville Boulevard.
Wayfinding - relates to signage designed to enhance users ability to navigate the AT network in
Riverview. This includes larger signage outlining the overall network posted at key destinations, signage
along individual routes indicating proximity to other routes and destinations as well as signage indicating
the end or beginning of a route.