10.07.2015 Views

Wembley Sports Park Integrated Access, Traffic and Car Parking Plan

Wembley Sports Park Integrated Access, Traffic and Car Parking Plan

Wembley Sports Park Integrated Access, Traffic and Car Parking Plan

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

AECOM<strong>Wembley</strong> <strong>Sports</strong> <strong>Park</strong> <strong>Integrated</strong> <strong>Access</strong>, <strong>Traffic</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Car</strong> <strong>Park</strong>ing <strong>Plan</strong>41<strong>Traffic</strong> signals allow for the introduction of protection for pedestrians <strong>and</strong> cyclists through controlled crossings.This provides a benefit for pedestrians <strong>and</strong> cyclists in terms of safety, but also increases accessibility to publictransport <strong>and</strong> cycling facilities. In order to reduce traffic <strong>and</strong> parking dem<strong>and</strong> for the site, it is critical to providegood access to non-car modes in order to promote sustainable transport choices but also healthier lifestyles.Signals can also be used to ban movements, i.e. between Alderbury Street <strong>and</strong> the main access road, removingmuch of the incentive for rat running through Alderbury Street.In general, the additional benefits of providing signals outweigh the advantages offered to vehicles of aroundabout. If traffic dem<strong>and</strong> for the site is to be reduced, it is extremely important to provide solutions thatfacilitate the change to sustainable alternatives <strong>and</strong> improve safety for non-car users, especially in areas wherethere are particularly high numbers of vulnerable users such as children. Table 11 gives a summary of theseadvantages <strong>and</strong> disadvantages of signals <strong>and</strong> roundabout with respect to each other.Table 11Overall Summary for Main Intersection Roundabout Vs SignalsIntersectionTypeRoundabout<strong>Traffic</strong> SignalsAdvantagesSlightly improved performance for vehiclesLow maintenance costsBest solution for reducing vehicle crashesNo additional l<strong>and</strong> take requiredPotentially lower initial construction costsImproved pedestrian <strong>and</strong> cycling safetyImproved access <strong>and</strong> integration with publictransportMitigates against rat running through AlderburyStreetDisadvantagesPoor Pedestrian <strong>and</strong> cyclist safetyRequirement for l<strong>and</strong> takePotential impact upon private propertyHigh initial construction costsRat running cannot be eliminated withoutlimiting access to Alderbury Street from SelbyStreetOn-going maintenance <strong>and</strong> operating costsSlightly poorer performance for vehicles than aroundaboutSlightly higher risk of vehicle crashesMain <strong>Access</strong> (Selby Street / Alderbury Street Intersection) – U-Turns OptionDedicated u-turn facilities in the Selby Street median were considered as an alternative mechanism to provide forright turns in <strong>and</strong> out of the <strong>Wembley</strong> <strong>Sports</strong> <strong>Park</strong>; albeit indirectly. Two right turn facilities were considered – asouth-to-south u-turn about 35m south of Alderbury Road <strong>and</strong> a north-to-north u-turn about 120m north of HayStreet. Refer to Appendix B for a sketch of the scheme tested <strong>and</strong> the detailed analysis results 3 .From the analysis, the u-turns from the south are forecast to experience average delays of 23 to 250 seconds(during each hour between 08:30 <strong>and</strong> 16:00), with queues up to 42 vehicles (300m). The u-turns from the northare forecast to experience average delays of 54 to 673 seconds (during each hour between 08:30 <strong>and</strong> 16:00),with queues up to 83 vehicles (580m). The corresponding LoS are D to F for the south-south u-turns <strong>and</strong> F for thenorth-north u-turns.The analysis predicts that the u-turn concept will not operate adequately during the Winter Saturday events withunacceptable queuing back to downstream intersections. A separate investigation is required to assess if themovements will be able to operate safely. Additionally, the concept does not provide a solution for a pedestriancrossing.3The analysis was run assuming of 2.5 seconds follow-up headways <strong>and</strong> 6.0 seconds critical gaps for the u-turns.T:\60218676 - <strong>Wembley</strong> PK TA\8 Issued Docs\8.1 Reports\Comprehensive <strong>Integrated</strong> <strong>Access</strong> RevF.docxRevision F - 8 February 2012

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!