Skip to content

Access keys for nzta.govt.nz

  • h Home
  • m Menu
  • 0 Show list of access keys
  • 2 Skip to content
  • 3 Skip to top

Introduction

This section provides guidance for assessing walking and cycling improvement activities that target a specific increase in levels of service in part of a walking and/or cycling network.

The walking and cycling activity class includes the following work categories:

Programmes of walking and cycling activities

Where applicable, walking and cycling activities are expected to be packaged together in a programme to deliver a complete end to end journey by foot and/or cycle.

A programme can include a component of education, promotion and/or advertising activities to attract users to new cycling infrastructure.

For activities to be accepted as a single programme (with a single assessment profile), the Transport Agency requires evidence that the activities in the programme are interdependent and that the programme is able to be delivered within a reasonable timeframe.

The programme is assessed based on its primary corridor and the single assessment profile may result in the smaller collector routes in a programme gaining a higher profile than if they were assessed on a standalone basis.

Packaging projects into a programme of works should be a more effective and cost efficient way to deliver them and this should be reflected in the ratings for the effectiveness and benefit and cost appraisal factors in the assessment.

Strategic fit for walking and cycling improvements

Default strategic fit.

By default, the strategic fit rating for walking and cycling improvements is low.

 

Requirements for medium rating

A walking and cycling activity may be given a medium strategic fit rating if the problem, issue or opportunity is:

  • part of a secondary corridor within a walking and/or cycling strategic network in a main urban area, for the purposes of utility cycling, including associated facilities to put the corridor into service; OR
  • a link to complete or complement an existing walking and/or cycling strategic network in a main urban area; OR
  • on a corridor, or site, with a medium walking and cycling crash risk; OR
  • a link from a main urban area to a substantial employment centre, outside of main urban areas, which may be considered on an exception basis where high demand is demonstrated; OR
  • a link to complete connections to the NZ Cycle Trails.

 

Requirements for high rating

A walking and cycling activity must only be given a high strategic fit rating if the problem, issue or opportunity is:

  • part of a primary corridor within a walking and/or cycling strategic network in a main urban area, for the purposes of utility cycling, including associated facilities to put the corridor into service; OR
  • on a corridor, or site, with a high walking and cycling crash risk.

 

Further information

 Further information on Strategic Fit assessment is provided in the guidance on Developing an Assessment Profile.

NZ Cycle Trails and the NLTP

Introduction

The final Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2015 (GPS) added a medium term result to the walking and cycling activity class to improve linkages to the NZ cycle trails. The Transport Agency updated the medium strategic fit criteria for the walking and cycling activity class to include projects that deliver a link to complete connections to the NZ cycle trails.

 

Defining the criteria

The addition to the criteria prioritises funding to projects that provide a link to complete connections to the NZ cycle trails.

A link may include work required to:

  • put the full end to end potential ‘Heartland Ride’, previously called ‘Cycle touring routes’, into service; or
  • complete end to end links between current cycle trails and the nearby accommodation hub and/or the transport hub for the region.

All links must be on routes identified by NZ cycle trails. These are mapped at MapHub NZ Cycle Trails(external link) or visit the NZ Cycle Trails(external link) website for more information.

Funding for the new ‘potential Great Rides’ and for maintaining the quality of existing Great Rides(external link) can be sought from NZ Cycle Trails, which also provides information and application forms(external link).

Effectiveness for walking and cycling improvements

Criteria for effectiveness

All six criteria set out below are to be assessed for any programme or activity proposed for NLTP inclusion or funding approval. The explanations are a guide to assessment, highlighting aspects that need to be considered. If any of these aspects is not applicable to the activity then it should not form part of the assessment.

Criteria Explanation Rating
Outcomes focused
  • tangible change in addressing the problem, issue or opportunity identified in the Strategic Fit assessment
  • consistency with levels of service in an appropriate classification system
L/M/H
Integrated
  • consistency with the current network and future transport plans
  • consistency with other current and future activities
  • consistency with current and future land use planning
  • accommodates different needs across modes
  • support as an agreed activity across partners
L/M/H

Correctly scoped

  • the degree of fit as part of an agreed strategy or business case
  • has followed the intervention hierarchy to consider alternatives and options including low cost alternatives and options
  • is of an appropriate scale in relation to the issue/opportunity
  • covers and/or manages the spatial impact (upstream and downstream, network impacts)
  • mitigates any adverse impacts on other results
L/M/H

Affordable

  • is affordable through the lifecycle for all parties
  • has understood and traded off the best whole of life cost approach
  • has understood the benefits and costs between transport users and other parties and sought contributions as possible
  • the opportunity to leverage Urban Cycleway Programme funding at a project and programme level has been taken, if applicable
L/M/H

Timely

  • delivers enduring benefits over the timeframe identified in the justified strategy or business case
  • provides the benefits in a timely manner
  • the programme/project will be delivered within the timing envelope of the Urban Cycleway Programme, if applicable
L/M/H

Confidence

  • manages current and future risk for results/outcomes
  • manages current and future risk for costs
L/M/H

Overall

Assessment is based on lowest rating of all components L/M/H

Further information

Further information on Effectiveness assessment is provided in the section on Developing an Assessment Profile.

Benefit and cost appraisal for walking and cycling improvements

Requirements

The required benefit and cost appraisal methodology for walking and cycling improvements is benefit-cost analysis and the required measure is the benefit-cost ratio (BCR).

The Transport Agency requires that Approved Organisations and the Transport Agency (state highways) use the Transport Agency Economic Evaluation Manual(external link) procedures and templates to determine the BCR for public transport improvement activities.

 

Ratings

If the calculated BCR is below 1.0, then the activity is considered to be economically inefficient. In this case, no rating for benefit and cost appraisal will be given.

Assuming that the BCR is 1.0 or higher, the benefit and cost appraisal for public transport improvements falls into one of three bands:

BCR range 1- 3

All activities with BCR greater than or equal to 1 and below 3 are prioritised in this band.

BCR range 3 - 5

All activities with BCR greater than or equal to 3 and below 5 are prioritised in this band.

BCR range > 5

All activities with BCR greater than or equal to 5 are prioritised in this band.

 

Non-monetised benefits and additional benefits

Non-monetised benefits may be taken into account and, if the Transport Agency considers these benefits to be significant, may result in a higher rating.

Additional benefits are usually in the form of wider economic benefits that are not specifically covered by the Transport Agency’s Economic Evaluation Manual. Additional benefits may result in a higher rating or be presented as part of sensitivity analysis.

 

Use of generic or default BCR

No placeholder, generic or default BCRs are to be used.

 

Peer review

The Transport Agency reserves the right to require a peer review of benefit and cost appraisal determinations and measures, including any non-monetised/additional benefits and adverse impacts, regardless of the scope, prior to an investment decision.

 

Insufficient information (1*)

An activity can be included in the National Land Transport Programme (NLTP) when no benefit and cost appraisal has been made or when no robust evidence is lacking to support the assessment. In such cases the rating for benefit and cost appraisal will default to 1 for improvement activities. The Transport Agency represents these activities as 1* to indicate that more information is required to achieve a robust assessment profile.

An activity will not be considered for funding approval with a 1* status.

 

Further information

Further information on Benefit and Cost Appraisal is provided in the section on Developing an Assessment Profile.

 

Top