Possible improvements of the existing solution
1) Absence of details for lateral protection and for footpaths: The project should consider the aspects concerning the perfect evidence of pedestrian itineraries and their protection especially when approaching the highway itinerary and in correspondence of the connection vertexes. For metallic railings, it would be good to consider their ergonomic in case of impact of motorcycles and bicycles. (PCMC has accepted to install lateral protections (railings) in the final layout).
2) For differently-abled users: Projecting a change of the altimetric profile of the crossings and/or an adequate plan for regimentation of waters and auto-cleaning of the itineraries. (PCMC has accepted the recommendation and will implement the slides in the final layout).
3) For visually challenged users: Integrating the project for tactile signals for visually challenged users with the acoustic one. (PCMC has agreed to install horizontal tactile signals in the final layout).
4) Signals and speed plan: Preparing of an adequate plan for signals with a specific strategy for limiting of speed and signalling of pedestrian crossings. An adequate plan is also needed for the speeds at the signals on the highways itinerary and at indications and advice signals as the entering and exiting system at the intersection is complex. (PCMC has not accepted this recommendation as “the concept of the BS Chowk is based on shared spaces and the signals are not provided intentionally”).
Pedestrian fatalities amount to about 17% and cyclists’ fatalities, about 6% of all the traffic fatalities in EU countries.
In India, accidents increased by about 22% and fatalities by 31% between 1995 and 2004.
In 2004, there were 92.618 deaths on Indian roads as against 43.4000 in EU-25 road network.
While India has only 1% of the world’s road vehicles, 6% of the world’s road accident deaths happen here.
Brazil accounted for 185 road accident fatalities per one million inhabitants and 32.9% road fatalities vulnerable road users in 2004 as against Europe’s 89 fatalities per one million inhabitants and 25% road fatalities of vulnerable road users in 2005.
5) Absence of vertical signal: Preparing an adequate plan for vertical signals to be integrated with the horizontal signals. (PCMC has not accepted this recommendation as “the concept of the BS Chowk is based on shared spaces and the signals are not provided intentionally”).
6) Absence of divisional protective islands and verification of capacity: Protecting the divisional islands, especially the cusps of separation of flows (e.g. A2-A4) with adequate devices for mitigation of impacts and specific signals. Also, verifying the pedestrian flows to correctly demarcated waiting areas based on “eventual over-saturation phenomenon”.
7) Specific lighting for crossings: Planning a specific lighting for the crossings with lights having greater luminosity than that of the roads – to increase visibility and sighting of the distant vehicles, especially for the highway itinerary.
8) Motorcyclists vs pedestrians in connections with great radius: If it is not possible to modify the geometry of the intersection, it is necessary to install specific signals that will make the motorcyclists follow a trajectory with a minimum radius and will prohibit the overtaking of vehicles in these areas. (PCMC has not accepted this recommendation since the concept of this island is based on shared spaces).
Partners of SaferBraIn
CTL – Centro di ricerca per il Trasporto e la Logistica, Italy
Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Master Plan BV, Netherlands; IMR, Brazil
A+S Consult GmbH FuE, Germany
SUNCON Pvt Ltd, India
FUSP – Foundation of Support to University of San Paulo, Brazil
Volkswagen India Pvt. Ltd., India
I&D Consulting, Belgium
I.T. Ingegneria dei Trasporti srl, Italy
9) Presence of a great attractor (Cult place): Organising differently the pedestrian waiting through the elimination of the triangular island, the connection of D1-A4 on lane enlarging of the section D1 and a crossing on A4 so placed that pedestrians can move on the great traffic island protected between A2 and A4 and cross far from D1. (PCMC might accept this recommendation after further studies).
10) Absence of specific signal for lane reserved for bus: Evidencing with adequate vertical signals near the obstacle. Eventually it could be good to shift the crossing line back with the double advantage of shifting it from the ring and having a point of optical discontinuity in correspondence of a small enlargement (with vertical signal) where the physical separation of the lane reserved for the buses starts (evidenced with the red circle). (PCMC has agreed to look into this recommendation, perhaps even agree, once the bus route gets fully functional).
Says Persia, “To assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the innovative methodologies and tools two pilot projects – one in India and the other in Brazil – will be implemented. The feedback from these pilot projects will be used to refine the methodologies and tools developed within the project.” Adds Tripodi, “We are finalising one of the documents of SaferBraIn dealing with the RSA pilot tests. This document will report the outcomes of the RSA activity and the comments of the local authorities. It will be made public soon. Concerning SaferBraIn, we will organise the final event of the project in India. The date and the exact venue will be finalised by October.”