Victoria_Park_Re port Final.pdf - City of Charlottetown
Victoria_Park_Re port Final.pdf - City of Charlottetown
Victoria_Park_Re port Final.pdf - City of Charlottetown
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Final</strong> <strong>Re</strong><strong>port</strong> • June 2013<br />
VICTORIA PARK COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN<br />
The redevelopment <strong>of</strong> the boardwalk as a multi-modal facility addresses a number<br />
<strong>of</strong> pressing considerations. The seasonal configuration <strong>of</strong> a dedicated cycle track<br />
and pedestrian boardwalk does not accommodate users such as rollerbladers,<br />
skateboarders, parents with jogging strollers, or those with mobility assist devices.<br />
Many <strong>of</strong> these kinds <strong>of</strong> users would not feel safe on the cycle track, but are not able to<br />
use the existing narrow boardwalk.<br />
The construction <strong>of</strong> the boardwalk itself is not robust enough to maintain a high level<br />
<strong>of</strong> durability required from such a popular municipal infrastructure asset, and requires<br />
significant maintenance effort. The very nature <strong>of</strong> its surface, although pleasant to<br />
walk on, is challenging for those with mobility restrictions, and it can become quite<br />
slippery in winter conditions. The construction is not sufficient to sup<strong>port</strong> the weight<br />
<strong>of</strong> snow clearing equipment, and is not wide enough to accommodate tires without<br />
damaging the adjacent grass. The ongoing strategy to replace individual boards as<br />
they break leads to uneven sections <strong>of</strong> the boardwalk, which impacts its accessibility<br />
and safety. In the long run, the improvement <strong>of</strong> the boardwalk has the significant<br />
potential benefit, both for the community in terms <strong>of</strong> user experience, and for the <strong>City</strong><br />
in terms <strong>of</strong> life cycle assessment and operational efficiency.<br />
Interim Solution<br />
The existing boardwalk cross section is not wide enough to facilitate multi-modal<br />
trans<strong>port</strong>ation. A seasonal cycle track addresses this need in part, but does not<br />
accommodate other wheeled users such as rollerbladers, parents with strollers, and the<br />
mobility impaired. The boardwalk’s construction, although quite pleasant to walk on,<br />
requires a significant investment in terms <strong>of</strong> maintenance and upkeep. As the boardwalk<br />
requires reconstruction, consideration should be given to converting it towards a<br />
more traditional asphalt multi-use trail with a wider cross section. The Trans<strong>port</strong>ation<br />
Association <strong>of</strong> Canada (TAC) advocates a 4.0 metre width for safe multi-modal active<br />
trans<strong>port</strong>ation facilities. If the <strong>City</strong> were to upgrade the boardwalk to a trail <strong>of</strong> between<br />
4.0 - 5.0 metres in width, it would be able to safely manage the existing peak pedestrian<br />
traffic, while accommodating other types <strong>of</strong> wheeled users. A speed limit, public<br />
outreach program, and regulatory signage would all be sup<strong>port</strong>ing initiatives to help<br />
make this transition towards multiple use.<br />
A multi-use trail, when properly designed, is safer for both cyclists and pedestrians. The<br />
typical recreational cyclist is not comfortable on the road, and prefers a multi-use facility.<br />
They are statistically safer sharing a facility with pedestrians, as opposed to motor<br />
vehicles. A more advanced or utilitarian cyclist who travels at a faster speed behaves<br />
more like a vehicle, and is safer on a road. This type <strong>of</strong> cyclist generally does not use<br />
a dedicated multi-use facility in any event, and will travel on the road. In the case <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>Victoria</strong> <strong>Park</strong>, these utilitarian cyclists would be able to share the carriageway with<br />
internal park traffic.<br />
6.14<br />
Existing <strong>Park</strong> Driveway Cross Section<br />
87