STREETSCAPE GUIDANCE
streetscape-guidance
streetscape-guidance
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
HOME<br />
INTRODUCTION<br />
PART A<br />
A vision for London’s streets<br />
PART B<br />
From strategy to delivery<br />
PART C<br />
New measures for new challenges<br />
PART D<br />
Balancing priorities<br />
PART F<br />
Appendix<br />
PART E<br />
Physical design and materials<br />
SECTION 6<br />
Introduction<br />
SECTION 7<br />
High quality footways<br />
SECTION 8<br />
Carriageways<br />
SECTION 9<br />
Crossings<br />
SECTION 10<br />
Kerbside activity<br />
SECTION 11<br />
Footway amenities<br />
SECTION 12<br />
Safety and functionality<br />
SECTION 13<br />
Street environment<br />
SECTION 14<br />
Transport interchanges<br />
Streetscape Guidance<br />
[Part E – Physical design and materials] Crossings 167<br />
9.6 Grade-separated pedestrian<br />
crossings<br />
General principles<br />
Where other design approaches are not possible,<br />
grade-separated crossings can reduce the<br />
severance effect of major highways and other<br />
barriers. They need to be designed very carefully,<br />
to make them easy to use, direct, safe and<br />
attractive. They should always cater for people<br />
on foot and on cycles.<br />
Grade-separated crossings on the TLRN are most<br />
commonly found on high speed roads (40mph<br />
or greater) and at complex junctions. In London<br />
these often take the form of subways rather than<br />
Figure 163: This footbridge L01 crossing<br />
Ruckholt Road, becomes a landmark through<br />
use of bright colours and thoughtful design<br />
footbridges to minimise the visual intrusion on<br />
the street environment.<br />
Grade-separated crossings should only be<br />
considered in exceptional circumstances where<br />
high vehicle speeds and traffic capacity need<br />
to be maintained and where there is evidence<br />
that road safety risks would not support atgrade<br />
facilities. This should be prioritised where<br />
designated cycle routes meet a barrier in the<br />
form of a motorway or topographic constraint,<br />
such as a river, and the route needs to continue.<br />
Benefits<br />
• Provides the opportunity for improved<br />
connectivity between neighbourhoods severed<br />
by a high speed road network<br />
• Separated crossings are considered safer than<br />
at-grade facilities for high speed road types<br />
• Enables continuity for cycle and pedestrian<br />
routes<br />
• Does not impact on traffic capacity<br />
• Wide land bridges can provide additional<br />
amenity and green infrastructure value<br />
Constraints<br />
• Expensive to construct and maintain<br />
• Will only be used by pedestrians if it is situated<br />
appropriately on a desire line and does not require<br />
negotiating a large number of steps or ramps<br />
• Requires additional space for constructing a<br />
landing point and approach ramp<br />
• May pose a personal security risk if not well-lit<br />
or with adequate surveillance<br />
Figure 164: A footbridge in Queen Elizabeth<br />
Olympic Park in Stratford, London