COVID-19 SERVICES UPDATE: Information on Waka Kotahi services, extensions and more

SCAM ALERTS: Report a phishing scam or learn about the latest phishing emails

ONLINE SERVICES: We currently have an issue with receiving some payments and are working to resolve this issue as quickly as possible. We apologise for any inconvenience.

EASTER WEEKEND – PLAN AHEAD: Heading away for the long weekend? Check our holiday journeys tool(external link)

SCAM ALERTS: Refund email and Vehicle licence (rego) renewal phishing emails

While this investment proposal is similar to those made by our transport sector partners, it is a fictitious example. To get the best understanding of how we might apply the IAF, please also read the IAF. You may also find it helpful to refer to the results alignment criteria in the IAF which you will find on our website’s Planning and Investment Knowledge Base page.

Investment Assessment Framework 2018–21 NLTP [PDF, 707 KB]
Planning and Investment Knowledge Base

The proposal

A separated cycleway is proposed between a train station and a nearby secondary school in a low decile area. At present, a shared path with markings exists.

A problem occurs when a number of students arrive on trains and use the path to walk and cycle to school at the same time, causing bunching. Other cyclists and pedestrians must navigate around groups of students and there is a perceived safety risk.

The path runs alongside a high volume arterial road that can be used for cycling. However, it’s used by a significant number of freight vehicles travelling from the nearby industrial park to the state highway. Students and others in the community have raised concerns about using it.

While there have been no recorded fatal or serious accidents involving cyclists or pedestrians in the last five years, the proposed route as a whole is also known locally as a minor collision hotspot.

A red light camera has recently been installed at one of the road’s busiest intersections where motorists regularly run red lights. This has not solved the issue as vehicles still make illegal left-hand turns while pedestrians and cyclists are crossing with the phase.

As well as being served by the train station, the surrounding area has a number of bus routes. An effective travel management plan means that the secondary school has a much higher active mode share than the regional average.

Applying the IAF to this proposal

The first consideration we make is if this proposal aligns with our policy for investment. As this is a proposal for funding for a walking and cycling investment that is not part of another road improvement or public transport improvement activity, it is eligible for consideration.

Looking at the issue, it best fits under the walking and cycling activity class as a safety issue.

The council has developed a strategic case that identifies the issue and provides some anecdotal evidence to support the case for intervention. However, more work is needed to provide robust evidence around the problems and potential benefits.

We would then consider this issue against the very high results alignment criteria.

From the information that we have been given, if this proposal went ahead it would not address a very high predicted walking and cycling safety risk, as there have been no serious accidents in the last five years. This issue relates to a perceived risk, not a predicted risk which would be supported by evidence.

Next, as defined under the high results alignment criteria, we decide from the information given to us if people are choosing not to cycle because they feel it is not safe. We question if there is a high perceived safety risk that is impacting the uptake of cycling as a transport option. This is not the case, because the secondary school has a much higher active mode share than the regional average.

Looking at the medium criteria, we can see that the issue relates to a perceived safety risk to the on-going use of cycling and fits a medium results alignment rating.

We then consider cost–benefit appraisal. At this point in the proposal’s business case development, we don’t have the full cost and benefit information. Therefore, we will provide a Low* rating until a full appraisal is completed.

Overall, this strategic case would have been more compelling with robust evidence around the problem. While development of a single-stage business case may get into the NLTP, its funding approval will probably require further development of the strategic case as a pre-requisite for consideration.

We could also have considered this issue under the road safety promotion and demand management activity class criteria. However, in this case, it would still only have achieved a medium rating for results alignment. When the council fully develops the proposal to include more information and evidence, we will be able to decide on the most appropriate activity class.

We hope you found this information useful. Please remember to take a look at our other examples of how we apply the IAF.

Examples of how we apply the IAF

If you have any questions about this information, or want to understand more about what we can invest in and how we can support your work, please contact your investment advisor, or Director Regional Relationships, or email us at