annexes - Project Waalbrug

Transcription

Improving transport accessibility to Nijmegen center
Frontpage
Project Waalbrug
ANNEXES
bla
Improving car accessibility
to Nijmegen center
Research to viable solutions improving
car accessibility towards 2025
Belongs to:
Delft, May 12, 2010
Version 1.0 – Status Final
Arjen van Diepen (1522620)
Bernat Goni Ros (1560255)
Vikash Mohan (1150391)
Tim van Leeuwen (1296124)
Delft University of Technology
MSc Transport, Infrastructure & Logistics
TIL5050 – Interdisciplinairy Project
May 12, 2010
1
Improving car accessibility to Nijmegen center
Report of the Interdisciplinary Project course (TIL5050), part of the Transport, Infrastructure and
Logistics (TIL) Masters Programme at Delft University of Technology. Faculties of Technology,
Policy and Management, Civil Engineering and Geosciences and Mechanical, Maritime and
Materials Engineering.
Supervised by: Ir. M.W. Ludema
Dr. ir. R. van Nes
M.W.Ludema@tudelft.nl
R.vanNes@tudelft.nl
2010, Technische Universiteit Delft, PO BOX 5, 2600 AA Delft, The Netherlands
May 12, 2010
Annexes-I
Index
I.
DEFINITION OF ACCESSIBILITY: A LITERATURE REVIEW
1
II. OD MATRIX
3
III. TRAFFIC NUMBERS FOR MOST IMPORTANT WAAL-CROSSING CAR TRAFFIC IN 24 HOUR
PERIOD
4
IV. TRAFFIC INTENSITIES
5
IV-I MORNING PEAK INTENSITIES 2010
IV-II EVENING PEAK INTENSITIES 2010
IV-III MORNING PEAK INTENSITIES 2020
IV-IV EVENING PEAK INTENSITIES 2020
IV-V EVENING PEAK I/C RATIO 2012
IV-VI EVENING PEAK I/C RATIO 2020
IV-VII MORNING PEAK I/C RATIO 2012
IV-VIII MORNING PEAK I/C RATIO 2020
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
V. TRAFFIC LIGHT SURVEY
13
VI. PARKING TARIFFS IN ZONE 2, 4 AND 6
15
VII. ROAD CHARACTERISTICS ACCESSIBILITY MODEL
16
VIII.
19
VIII-I
STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
STAKEHOLDER – ISSUE RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM
23
IX. ACCESSIBILITY EFFECTS OF MEASURES
24
IX-I EFFECTS OF MEASURE 1: INFRASTRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WAALBRUG
ROUTE
IX-II EFFECTS OF MEASURE 2: IMPROVING OF THE WAALSPRINTER SERVICE
IX-III EFFECTS OF MEASURE 3: PARKING POLICY IMPROVEMENTS
24
26
28
X. NOISE & AIR QUALITY EFFECTS OF MEASURES
30
X-I EFFECTS OF MEASURE 1: INFRASTRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WAALBRUG
ROUTE
X-II EFFECTS OF MEASURE 2: IMPROVING OF THE WAALSPRINTER SERVICE
X-III EFFECTS OF MEASURE 3: PARKING POLICY IMPROVEMENTS
30
31
32
May 12, 2010
Annexes-II
XI. ESTIMATION OF COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTING MEASURES
33
XI-I ESTIMATIONS FOR MEASURE 1: INFRASTRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
WAALBRUG ROUTE
XI-II ESTIMATIONS FOR MEASURE 2: IMPROVING OF THE WAALSPRINTER SERVICE
XI-III ESTIMATIONS FOR MEASURE 3: PARKING POLICY IMPROVEMENTS
33
35
37
XII. LARGE MAPS
38
XII-I WAALBRUG ROUTE
XII-II WAALCROSSINGS
XII-III WAALSPRONG
XII-IV GEOGRAPHICAL SCOPE – NORTHERN ZONES
XII-V TRAIANUSPLEIN – CURRENT SITUATION
XII-VI TRAIANUSPLEIN – WITH MEASURE 1: INFRASTRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS
38
39
40
41
42
43
May 12, 2010
Annexes-III
I.
Definition
of
literature review
accessibility:
a
The concept of accessibility is based on the premise that space constrains the number of
opportunities available; consequently, accessibility influences both the travel costs and
the levels of service use and participation in desired activities of people living in a
specific area (Morris, 1979). There are wide variations in the definition of accessibility
and the appropriate definition always depends upon the intended application. Some
fields of application are: business or industrial location selections, travel demand
forecasting, population distribution and growth and transportation planning (Allen,
1993).
The following are well-known definitions of accessibility:
•
“The benefits provided by a transportation/land-use system” (Ben-Akiva and
Lerman 1975).
•
“The ease with which any land-use activity can be reached from a location using a
particular transport system” (Dalvi and Martin 1976).
•
“The ease with which activities or destinations can be reached from a certain place
and with a certain transport system” (Morris, 1979).
•
“The extent to which land-use and transport systems enable (groups of) individuals
to reach activities or destinations by means of a (combination of) transport
mode(s)” (Geurs, 2004).
Based on their definition, Geurs and van Wee (2004) identify four components of
accessibility:
•
The land-use component reflects the land-use system, consisting of: a) the amount,
quality and spatial distribution opportunities supplied at each destination; b) the
demand for these opportunities at origin locations; and c) the confrontation of supply of
and demand for opportunities, which may result in competition for activities with
restricted capacity.
•
The transportation component describes the transport system, expressed as the
disutility for an individual to cover the distance between an origin and a destination
using a specific transport mode; included are the amount of time (travel, waiting and
parking), costs (fixed and variable) and effort (including reliability, level of comfort,
accident risk, etc.). This disutility results from the confrontation between supply and
demand. The supply of infrastructure includes its location and characteristics (e.g.
maximum travel speed, number of lanes, public transport timetables, travel costs). The
demand relates to both passenger and freight traffic.
•
The temporal component reflects the temporal constraints, i.e. the availability of
opportunities at different times of the day, and the time available for individuals to
participate in certain activities (e.g. work, recreation).
May 12, 2010
Annexes-1
•
The individual component reflects the needs (depending on age, income, educational
level, household situation, etc.), abilities (depending on people’s physical condition,
availability of travel modes, etc.) and opportunities (depending on people’s income,
travel budget, educational level, etc.) of individuals. These characteristics influence a
person’s level of access to transport modes and spatially distributed opportunities
Ingram (1971) makes a distinction between relative and integral accessibility. Whereas
relative accessibility describes the degree of connection between any two points,
integral accessibility describes the degree of connection between a given point and all
others amongst a spatial set of points (region). Essentially, relative accessibility is a
measure of the effort involved in making a trip, while integral accessibility is a measure
of total travel opportunities (Oberg 1976).
May 12, 2010
Annexes-2
II.
OD Matrix
Tabel 1 OD Matrix Traffic Model Stadsregio Arnhem Nijmegen
May 12, 2010
Annexes-3
III.
Traffic numbers for most important
Waal-crossing car traffic in 24 hour
period
(Source: Goudappel (2009))
Table III-1 Car traffic to/from Nijmegen Center 2005/2020
Car traffic to/from Nijmegen City Center
2005
From
To Nijmegen From Nijmegen Total
Arnhem Zuid
1694
2056
Arnhem Centrum
607
611
Arnhem Noord
324
290
Arnhem Oost Velp
356
338
Overbetuwe
634
677
Huissen
391
439
Gendt, Angeren, Doornenburg
285
291
Bemmel
966
804
Waalsprong
2925
3003
Elst
1067
1096
Total
9,250
9,606
2020
3750
1219
614
695
1311
831
575
1770
5929
2163
1710
1995
660
643
319
287
411
385
838
879
433
465
257
259
1001
840
8004
8122
1128
1148
18,856
14,762
15,021
Growth
abs
%
3705
1303
606
796
1717
897
516
1841
16126
2276
-46
84
-7
101
405
67
-60
71
10197
113
-1%
7%
-1%
15%
31%
8%
-10%
4%
172%
5%
29,783
10927
22%
Table III-2 Car traffic to/from Nijmegen South 2005/2020
Car traffic to/from Nijmegen South
2005
Area
1,108
1,155
Arnhem South
Arnhem Center
486
430
265
230
Arnhem North
Arnhem East Velp
296
253
847
780
Overbetuwe
Huissen
273
259
198
188
Gendt, Angeren, Doornenburg
Bemmel
554
430
1,394
1,257
Waalsprong
Elst
659
618
Total
6,081
May 12, 2010
5,601
2020
1,124
917
495
549
1,627
533
386
984
2,651
1,277
10,544
Growth
abs
%
1,284
1,320
2,604
1,480
569
493
1,063
146
291
263
555
59
372
315
687
138
1,225
1,161
2,386
759
327
309
636
103
189
180
369
-17
563
438
1,001
17
5,198
5,003
10,202
7,551
770
728
1,498
221
10,789
10,211
21,000
10,457
Annexes-4
132%
16%
12%
25%
47%
19%
-4%
2%
285%
17%
21%
IV. Traffic intensities
IV-i Morning peak intensities 2010
Figure IV-1 Morning peak intensities 2010
May 12, 2010
Annexes-5
IV-ii Evening peak intensities 2010
Figure IV-2 Evening peak intensities 2010
May 12, 2010
Annexes-6
IV-iii Morning peak intensities 2020
Figure IV-3 Morning peak intensities 2020
May 12, 2010
Annexes-7
IV-iv Evening peak intensities 2020
Figure IV-4 Evening peak intensities 2020
May 12, 2010
Annexes-8
IV-v Evening Peak I/C ratio 2012
Figure IV-5 Evening peak I/C ratio 2012
May 12, 2010
Annexes-9
IV-vi Evening Peak I/C ratio 2020
Figure IV-6 Evening peak I/C ratio 2020
May 12, 2010
Annexes-10
IV-vii
Morning peak I/C ratio 2012
Figure IV-7 Morning peak I/C ratio 2012
May 12, 2010
Annexes-11
IV-viii
Morning peak I/C ratio 2020
Figure IV-8 Morning peak I/C ratio 2020
May 12, 2010
Annexes-12
V.
Traffic Light Survey
Variable
Capacity lane1800
Capacity (p/h)
Waalbrug
Traianus 1
Traianus 2
S / B&Dweg
From Waalbrug
2500
1800
1800
1980
To Waalbrug
2500
1800
1980
1980
S / Hertogstr.
1800
1800
S. / Hendrikstr.
1980
1620
Waalbrug
2500
2500
Traianus junction 1
1800
50
Bus lane
CT:
100
35
1260
50
1800
May 12, 2010
Annexes-13
Traianus junction 2
1800
50
1440
40
100
CT:
360
10
55
1980
Junction Singels /B&Dweg
1980
55
CT:
100
25
55
1980
450
Junction Singels/Hertogstraat
1800
50
CT:
100
50
1800
Junction Singels/P. Bernhardstraat.
1980
720
55
40
CT:
100
45
1620
May 12, 2010
Annexes-14
VI. Parking tariffs in zone 2, 4 and 6
Table VI-1 Parking tariffs in zone 2, 4 and 76
Zone 4
Streets
Molenpoort
Marienburg
Stadhuis
(new) Plein 1944
(new) St Josephhof
Zone 2
Kefkensbos
Waalkade
Casino
Streets
Streets
Eeiermarkt
Zone 6
Wedren/Julianaplein
Streets
Singels South
Singels North
May 12, 2010
Tariff
(normal/shopping
nights)
Progressive
2,10 / 2,30 /h
2,10 / 2,30 /h
Tariff
2,10 / 2,30 /h
2,00/ 2,20 /h
progressive
Capacity public
Capacity permit
300
330
340
326
Capacity public
600
117
100
80
220
200
120
Capacity permit
224
10,00 / day
Tariff
6,00 / day
2,10 / 2,30 /h
420
Capacity public
300
400
140
Capacity permit
75
330
Annexes-15
VII. Road characteristics accessibility
model
From
Arnhem South
To
Ressen
1
Arnhem Center
Ressen
2
Arnhem North
Ressen
3
Arnhem East
Ressen
4
Overbetuwe
Ressen
5
Huissen
Ressen
6
May 12, 2010
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
M-S
9.7
73
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
12
60
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
14.7
58.8
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
18.2
72.8
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
12.9
77.4
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
10.4
45
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
7.973
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
12.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
15.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
15.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
10.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
13.867
min
M-N
9.7
73
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
7.973
min
12
60
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
14.7
58.8
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
18.2
72.8
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
12.9
77.4
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
10.4
45
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
12.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
15.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
15.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
10.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
13.867
min
E-S
9.7
73
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
7.973
min
12
60
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
14.7
58.8
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
18.2
72.8
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
12.9
77.4
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
10.4
45
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
12.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
15.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
15.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
10.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
13.867
min
E-N
9.7
73
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
7.973
min
12
60
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
14.7
58.8
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
18.2
72.8
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
12.9
77.4
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
10.4
45
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
12.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
15.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
15.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
10.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
13.867
min
Annexes-16
Elst
Ressen
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
6.7
50
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
Junction Lent Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
8
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
2.1
50
2200
5400
0.41
100%
0
km
7
Ressen
Lingewaard
Ressen
car/h
car/h
8.040
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
3.195
min
6.7
50
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
2.1
50
3100
5400
0.57
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
8.040
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
3.507
min
6.7
50
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
2.1
50
2600
5400
0.48
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
8.040
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
3.331
min
6.7
50
0
3600
0.00
100%
0
km
2.1
50
2700
5400
0.50
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
8.040
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
3.365
min
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
3600 car/h
3600 car/h
3600 car/h
3600 car/h
0.00 15.000 0.00 15.000 0.00 15.000 0.00 15.000
100%
100%
100%
100%
0 min
0 min
0 min
0 min
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
5.6
42
0
1800
0.00
100%
0
km
Junction Lent Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
11
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
2
30
0
1800
0.00
100%
0
km
1.2
50
1600
2500
0.64
100%
0
km
9
Bemmel
Waalbrug
10
Waalsprong
km/h
Junction Lent
Waalbrug
12
May 12, 2010
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
11 km
44 km/h
11 km
44 km/h
11 km
44 km/h
11 km
44 km/h
car/h
car/h
car/h
car/h
km/h
car/h
car/h
8.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
4.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
2.078
min
5.6
42
0
1800
0.00
100%
0
km
2
30
0
1800
0.00
100%
0
km
1.2
50
1900
2500
0.76
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
8.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
4.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
2.218
min
5.6
42
0
1800
0.00
100%
0
km
2
30
0
1800
0.00
100%
0
km
1.2
50
1800
2500
0.72
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
8.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
4.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
2.170
min
5.6
42
0
1800
0.00
100%
0
km
2
30
0
1800
0.00
100%
0
km
1.2
50
1900
2500
0.76
100%
0
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
8.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
4.000
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
2.218
min
Annexes-17
@Waalbrug
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
1
50
2100
2500
0.84
100%
0
km
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
0.5
50
1100
3200
0.34
100%
0.25
km
Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
0.5
50
200
1600
0.13
100%
0.25
km
to P. Bernard Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
16
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
0.5
50
1300
3200
0.41
100%
0.36
km
Center South Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
17
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
0.4
30
200
1000
0.20
100%
0
km
Center West Length
Speed
Intensity
Capacity
18
I/C Ratio
% org speed
T.T. Delay
0.7
50
1100
3200
0.34
100%
0.5
km
13
Waalbrug
Singels
14
Waalbrug
Center East
15
Singels
P. Bernard
P. Bernard
May 12, 2010
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.929
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
0.984
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
0.896
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.120
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
0.900
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.527
min
1
50
2300
2500
0.92
100%
0
km
0.5
50
1100
3200
0.34
100%
0.21
km
0.5
50
300
1600
0.19
100%
0.68
km
0.5
50
1300
3200
0.41
100%
0.33
km
0.4
30
200
1000
0.20
100%
0
km
0.7
50
1200
3200
0.38
100%
0.5
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
2.013
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
0.944
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.350
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.090
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
0.900
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.546
min
1
50
2300
2500
0.92
100%
0
km
0.5
50
900
3200
0.28
100%
0.25
km
0.5
50
350
1600
0.22
100%
0.25
km
0.5
50
1400
3200
0.44
100%
0.36
km
0.4
30
200
1000
0.20
100%
0
km
0.7
50
1200
3200
0.38
100%
0.5
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
2.013
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
0.958
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
0.933
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.134
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
0.900
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.546
min
1
50
2500
2500
1.00
100%
0
km
0.5
50
1350
3200
0.42
100%
0.21
km
0.5
50
250
1600
0.16
100%
0.68
km
0.5
50
1550
3200
0.48
100%
0.33
km
0.4
30
200
1000
0.20
100%
0
km
0.7
50
1300
3200
0.41
100%
0.5
km
km/h
car/h
car/h
2.099
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
0.977
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.338
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.124
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
0.900
min
km/h
car/h
car/h
1.564
min
Annexes-18
VIII. Stakeholder Analysis
After applying a stakeholder analysis it becomes clear which stakeholders were involved
within the accessibility problem, how their role and core values in the project could be
defined and how much power (in terms of money, position etc.) they had in this project.
Eventually, with these insights, the Municipality of Nijmegen can determine which
parties always have a significant authority and thus they can partly adapt their strategy
in the case they want to improve car accessibility.
The central issue in this research and starting point in the stakeholder analysis is: the
Limited car accessibility of Nijmegen City Center (during peak hours), (Current/Expected
situation) due to the highly congested Waalbrug route during peak hours (cause).
In the overview below all the identified stakeholders related to the accessibility problem
in Nijmegen are listed:
•
Local Government (Gemeente Nijmegen)
•
City Region (Stadsregio)
•
Province (Province Gelderland)
•
National Government
•
Kamer van Koophandel (KVK)
•
Entrepreneurs City Center
•
‘Offensief Bereikbaarheid’
•
Commuters
•
Environmental organizations
•
Inhabitants
•
Local Political parties of Nijmegen (PVDA, VVD, SP, CDA, Groenlinks)
May 12, 2010
Annexes-19
Tabel 2 Stakeholder Objectives, Perceptions and resources
May 12, 2010
Annexes-20
May 12, 2010
Annexes-21
May 12, 2010
Annexes-22
VIII-i Stakeholder – issue relationship diagram
May 12, 2010
Annexes-23
IX. Accessibility effects of measures
IX-i Effects of measure 1: Infrastructural improvements
to the Waalbrug route
Table IX-1 Road section #14 - Traianusplein
Element
TT Supp
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
North
South
North
Time
Morning
Morning
Evening
Evening
Original
15s
13s
15s
13s
New
8s
8s
8s
8s
% Difference
47%
38%
47%
38%
South
North
South
North
Morning
Morning
Evening
Evening
0,984
0,944
0,958
0,977
0,864
0,864
0,838
0,897
12%
8%
13%
8%
Direction
South
North
South
North
Time
Morning
Morning
Evening
Evening
Original
2100
2300
2300
2500
New
1900
1850
1950
1800
% Difference
10%
20%
15%
28%
South
North
South
North
Morning
Morning
Evening
Evening
1,929
2,013
2,013
2,099
1,848
1,828
1,868
1,809
4%
3%
7%
14%
Table IX-2 Road section #13 - Waalbrug
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Table IX-3 Road section extra lane southern direction Waalbrug + lane to center east
Element
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
South
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
2,825
2,946
New
1,939
2,048
% Difference
31%
30%
New
1,429
1,429
% Difference
29%
32%
Table IX-4 Road section extra lane northern direction Waalbrug
Element
Gen. Travel Cost
May 12, 2010
Direction
North
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
2,013
2,099
Annexes-24
2.00
1.50
0 - Center East
1.00
1 - Center East
0 - Center South
0.50
1 - Center South
0.00
Els
t
ro
ng
aa
lsp
W
Be
m
m
el
ge
wa
ar
d
Lin
ss
en
Hu
i
er
be
tu
we
Ea
st
V
em
1 - Center West
Ar
nh
Ov
elp
rt h
No
em
Ar
nh
Ar
nh
em
Ce
So
ut
nt
er
h
0 - Center West
em
Ar
nh
Generalized Travel cost (min/km)
Generalized Travel Time between center & origin
2.50
Figure IX-1 Generalized Travel Time between center & origing measure 1
May 12, 2010
Annexes-25
IX-ii Effects of measure 2: Improving of the Waalsprinter
service
Table IX-5 Road section #8- Ressen – Junction Lent
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
2200
2700
New
2100
2600
% Difference
4,5%
3,7%
South
North
Morning
Evening
3,195
3,365
3,161
3,331
1,0%
1,0%
Table IX-6 Road section #12 – Junction Lent - Waalbrug
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
1600
1900
New
1500
1800
% Difference
4,8%
5,3%
South
North
Morning
Evening
2,078
2,218
2,033
2,170
2,2%
2,1%
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
2100
2500
New
2000
2400
% Difference
4,8%
4,0%
South
North
Morning
Evening
1,929
2,099
1,888
2,055
2,1%
2,1%
Table IX-7 Road section #13 - Waalbrug
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
1100
1350
New
1035
1285
% Difference
9%
7%
South
North
Morning
Evening
0,984
0,977
0,975
0,968
0,9%
0,9%
Table IX-9 Road section #15 – Waalbrug – Center East
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
200
250
New
165
215
% Difference
17,5%
14,0%
South
North
Morning
Evening
0,896
1,338
0,888
1,330
0,9%
0,6%
Table IX-10 Road section #16 – Traianusplein - Singels
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
May 12, 2010
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
1300
1550
New
1235
1485
% Difference
5,0%
4,2%
South
Morning
1,120
1,111
0,8%
Annexes-26
North
Evening
1,124
1,115
0,8%
Table IX-11 Road section #17– Singels – Center South
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
200
200
New
175
175
% Difference
12,5%
12,5%
South
North
Morning
Evening
0,900
0,900
0,887
0,887
1,4%
1,4%
Table IX-12 Road section #18 – Singels – Center West
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
1100
1300
New
1060
1260
% Difference
3,6%
3,1%
South
North
Morning
Evening
1,527
1,564
1,520
1,557
0,5%
0,5%
2.00
1.50
0 - Center East
1 - Center East
1.00
0 - Center South
0.50
1 - Center South
0.00
Els
t
ro
ng
aa
lsp
W
Be
m
m
el
ge
wa
ar
d
Lin
ss
en
Hu
i
er
be
tu
we
Ea
st
V
em
1 - Center West
Ar
nh
Ov
elp
rt h
No
em
Ar
nh
Ar
nh
em
Ce
So
ut
nt
er
h
0 - Center West
em
Ar
nh
Generalized travel cost between center & origin
2.50
Figure IX-2 Generalized travel time between center & origin of measure 2
May 12, 2010
Annexes-27
IX-iii Effects of measure 3: Parking policy improvements
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
1100
1350
New
1000
1250
% Difference
9%
7%
South
North
Morning
Evening
0,984
0,977
0,971
0,963
1,3%
1,4%
Table IX-14 Road section #15 – Waalbrug – center west
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
200
250
New
300
350
% Difference
50%
40%
South
North
Morning
Evening
0,896
1,338
0,920
1,363
2,5%
1,9%
Direction
South
North
South
North
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Morning
Morning
Evening
Evening
Original
1300
1550
22s
20s
22s
20s
New
1200
1450
20s
18s
20s
18s
% Difference
8%
6%
9%
9%
9%
9%
South
North
South
North
Morning
Morning
Evening
Evening
1,120
1,090
1,134
1,124
1,077
1,060
1,104
1,081
3,8%
2,8%
2,6%
3,8%
Table IX-15 Road section #16 - Singel
Element
Intensity
TT Supp
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Table IX-16 Road section #17 – Singel – Center south
Element
Intensity
Effect
Gen. Travel Cost
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Original
200
200
New
150
150
% Difference
25%
25%
South
North
Morning
Evening
0,900
0,900
0,874
0,874
3%
3%
Original
1100
1300
New
1050
1250
% Difference
5%
4%
Table IX-17 Road section #18 – Singel – Center west
Element
Intensity
Direction
South
North
Time
Morning
Evening
Effect
May 12, 2010
Annexes-28
Gen. Travel Cost
South
North
Morning
Evening
1,527
1,564
1,518
1,555
0%
0%
2.00
1.50
0 - Center East
1 - Center East
1.00
0 - Center South
0.50
1 - Center South
0.00
Els
t
ro
ng
aa
lsp
W
Be
m
m
el
ge
wa
ar
d
Lin
ss
en
Hu
i
er
be
tu
we
Ea
st
V
em
1 - Center West
Ar
nh
Ov
elp
rt h
No
em
Ar
nh
Ar
nh
em
Ce
So
ut
nt
er
h
0 - Center West
em
Ar
nh
Generalized travel cost between center & origin
2.50
Figure IX-3 Generalized travel time between center & origin of measure 3
May 12, 2010
Annexes-29
X.
Noise & Air
measures
Quality
effects
of
X-i Effects of measure 1: Infrastructural improvements
to the Waalbrug route
Table X-1 Air Quality for infrastructure measure
0situation
CO
NO2
Location
1007,3
29,0
Canisiussingel
Alternative
Difference
Score (-/0/+)
PM10
27,5
CO
1007,3
NO2
29,0
PM10
27,5
CO
0
NO2
0
PM10
0
CO
0
NO2
0
PM10
0
Oranjesingel
973,1
28,0
27,0
973,1
28,0
27,0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Gavinweg
895,7
24,7
26,0
891,4
23,9
25,9
4,3
-0,8
-0,1
0
0
0
Table X-2 Noise levels for infrastructure measure
Period/Location
Morning peak
Canisiussingel
Oranjesingel
Evening peak
Canisiussingel
Oranjesingel
May 12, 2010
LAeq (0-situation LAeq (Infrastructure Difference
2020) (dB(A))
measure) (dB(A))
Score (/0/+)
60,2
59,7
60,2
59,7
0,0
0,0
0
0
60,8
60,0
60,8
60,0
0,0
0,0
0
0
Annexes-30
X-ii Effects of measure 2: Improving of the Waalsprinter
service
Table X-3 Noise levels for Waalsprinter measure
Period/Location
Morning peak
Canisiussingel
Oranjesingel
Evening peak
Canisiussingel
Oranjesingel
LAeq
(0- LAeq
(Waalsprinter
situation
measure)
2020) (dB(A))
(dB(A))
Difference
Score (-/0/+)
60,2
59,7
60,2
59,7
0,0
0,0
0
0
60,8
60,0
60,7
60,0
-0,1
0,0
0
0
Table X-4 Air Quality levels for Waalsprinter measure
0situation
Alternative
Difference
Location
CO
NO2 PM10 CO
NO2 PM10 CO NO2
Canisiussingel 1007,3 29,0 27,5
1005,5 28,9 27,5
-0,1
1,8
Oranjesingel
973,1 28,0 27,0
972,0 27,9 27,0
-0,1
1,1
-0,1
Gavinweg
895,7 24,7 26,0
895,1 24,6 26,0
0,6
May 12, 2010
Score (-/0/+)
PM10 CO NO2 PM10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Annexes-31
X-iii Effects of measure 3: Parking policy improvements
Table X-5 Air Quality for parking measure
0situation
Alternative
Difference
Score (-/0/+)
Location
CO
NO2 PM10 CO
NO2 PM10 CO NO2 PM10 CO NO2 PM10
Canisiussingel 1007,3 29,0 27,5
1005,9 29,0 27,5
0
0
0
0
0
1,4
Oranjesingel
973,1 28,0 27,0
973,1 28,0 27,0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Gavinweg
895,7
24,7
26,0
895,7
24,7
26,0
0
0
0
0
Table X-6 Noise levels for parking measure
Period/Location
Morning peak
Canisiussingel
Oranjesingel
Evening peak
Canisiussingel
Oranjesingel
May 12, 2010
LAeq
(0- LAeq (Parking Difference
situation 2020) policy
measure)
(dB(A))
(dB(A))
Score (-/0/+)
60,2
59,7
60,2
59,7
0,0
0,0
0
0
60,8
60,0
60,7
60,0
-0,1
0,0
0
0
Annexes-32
0
0
XI.
Estimation
of
implementing measures
costs
for
XI-i Estimations for measure
1: Infrastructural
improvements to the Waalbrug route
1. Redesign Traianusplein
2. Using south lane to access City Center
3. Using north lane to Bemmel
Ad 1: Redesign Traianusplein
-
-
-
-
Construction costs:
o Length viaduct = approx. 0,5 km
o Length with entrance and exit viaduct = 0,3 km
o Total average length to estimate construction costs = 0,8 km
o Price of asphalt = € 50.-/m²
o Number of lanes;(assumption) 1: width = 3,50 m
o Total asphalt square = 800 m *3,50 m = 2800 m²
o Construction costs = 2800 m * 3,50 m* € 50.-/m² = € 490.000,Maintenance costs:
o Assume that there will be only 1 ZOAB(reduces noise) layer of asphalt
o Maintenance costs of ZOAB asphalt = €3,- /m²/yr
o Total maintenance costs = € 8400,-/yr
Engineering costs:
o Costs for a design and feasibility study viaduct: €10.000,- (assumption)
Extra costs(additional costs): Like building elements(colums) for the viaduct
o €20.000
Total investment costs for redesigning the Traianusplein(year 0) = €520.000,(exclusive the maintenance costs; these starts in year 1)
Ad 2: Using south lane to access City Center
-
-
Construction costs:
o There are no construction costs expected for realising this measure. Due
to the fact that the current bus lane will be used as a lane dedicated for
people that have destination city center.
Maintenance costs:
o There will be a faster wear process due to the fact that there will be more
vehicles driving (350 veh/hr) on the bus lane compared with the current
situation (only the local busses and waalsprinter) (assumption also 1
layer ZOAB asphalt)
o Dimensions Bus lane: Length = 1,5 km. Width= 3,0 m
May 12, 2010
Annexes-33
o Maintenance costs for this lane are on average: €13.500/yr.
-
Total Investment costs for increasing the Waalbrug capacity in southern
direction by using the bus lane = €0,Ad 3: Using north lane to Bemmel
-
Construction costs:
o There will be some construction costs because the idea here is to
transform the current cycle lane to a car lane for drivers going to
Bemmel.
o Length lane = 1,5 km
o Width = 3 m
o Asphalt costs = 1,5 km *3 m *€ 50.-/m² = €225.000,-
-
Maintenance costs:
o Maintenance costs for this lane are on average: €13500/yr.(same
assumptions used as southern lane)
-
Extra costs(additional costs): Like costs for signs (‘’pollers’’/road blocks/re device
(cycle)lane)
o €15.000
-
Total Investment costs for increasing the Waalbrug capacity in Northern
direction by transforming the cycle lane into a car lane = €250.000,Total Investment (except maintenance costs) costs for Alternative 1 (Infrastructure
measures): €760.000,-
May 12, 2010
Annexes-34
XI-ii Estimations for measure 2: Improving of the
Waalsprinter service
•
•
•
•
-
Idea Alternative:
Making the side lane of the Waalbrug in direction north a dedicated bus lane for the
Waalsprinter (only on the Waalbrug).
Making several improvements in the P&R facility at Ressen to offer higher level of
security and comfort.
In order to increase the level of security in the P&R, higher fences would be installed
To make the transfer process more comfortable, several changes would be made
o Covered walking paths from the parking areas to the waiting room and the
bus stop would be provided, to protect passengers from rain and wind
o Escalators to go from the biggest parking area to the waiting room and the
bus stop would be installed
o In the waiting room, comfortable seats, vending machines (food, drinks and
coffee) and a TV set would be provided
o Real –time information about bus arrival in the waiting room and bus stop
o Panel/Screen for dynamic real time information about parking availability
and bus arrival times located at the highway before the P&R entry points
Cost Improving Waalsprinter service:
o Investment costs:
The costs of making the side lane of the Waalbrug in direction
north are being assumed to be the same as the cost estimation of
the measure in the infrastructure alternative.
Construction costs:
• There will be some construction costs because the idea
here is to transform the current cycle lane to a bus lane for
the Waalsprinter
• Length lane = 1,5 km
• Width = 3 m
• Asphalt costs = 1,5 km *3 m *€ 50.-/m² = €225.000,
Maintenance costs:
• Maintenance costs for this lane are on average:
€13500/yr.(same assumptions used as southern lane)
o Extra costs(additional costs): Like costs for ‘’barriers’’(e.g. bussluis) to not
let car users use this lane
€10.000
- Costs walking paths = €5000 (roof and construction and higher fences)
costs (public) escalator1 = €15.000 (price escalator + installation)
1
http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/288563053/public_escalator.html
May 12, 2010
Annexes-35
-
Comfort waiting room: €10.000,- (warming/cold
facilities(summer/winter),comfortable seating chairs), dynamic
information system in waiting room of arrival and departure
times, television and sound installations
Costs for screen/panel dynamic information highway before P&R:
€5000
Total Investment costs for improving the Waalsprinter service = €270.000,-/yr
Total maintenance = €13500,-/yr
May 12, 2010
Annexes-36
XI-iii Estimations for
improvements
measure
3:
Parking
policy
The idea in this alternative is to improve the current parking policy with the main
goal to accommodate parking based on origin. This will be done by navigating
cars to strategic parking places based on the origin (direction) of the cars.
Routing/navigating will be based on parking information systems.
Example of PRIS implementation in the Municipality of Breda2;
Improvements to be made are:
Applying PRIS (Parking Route Information Systems) panels(signs)
Implementation of PRIS consists of several parts3:
(installation)Poles(palen)
Static panels(boards)
Dynamic boards
Operating systems (inclusive software)
Communication equipment
Cable work
Installations work
Investment costs:
Number of PRIS panels needed(estimation): 3
Costs (estimation based on several sources of PRIS
implementations like in municipality Venray)4:
• €200.000, Yearly operation & Maintenance costs: €10000, - (5% of Investment costs).
2
http://www.breda.nl/doc/Bestandenmap/parkeerbedrijf/index.swf
3
http://raad.delft.nl/commissies/duurzaamheid/2000/nota/d_2000_030_n.html
4
http://www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/ID/5EE5FD12EBAC108785256DF80070CB44?Op
enDocument&Query=CApp
http://www.venray.nl/bis/dsc?c=getobject&download=true&s=obj&!sessionid=13tW8nhb9oWQd
xXGwqyxTagQ31UqYCWNZ5zySrofBaqCs3l14qVxDU@p5G78L9!z&objectid=29471&!dsname=Ven
rayExtern&getastype=PDF
May 12, 2010
Annexes-37
XII. Large maps
XII-i Waalbrug route
Figure XII-1 Waalbrug route
May 12, 2010
Annexes-38
XII-ii Waalcrossings
May 12, 2010
Annexes-39
XII-iii
Waalsprong
Waalsprong
City center
Figure XII-2 Waalsprong (source waalsprong.nl)
May 12, 2010
Annexes-40
XII-iv
Geographical Scope – Northern zones
Northern zones
North
East
Arnhem
Center
South
North
Huissen
Overbetuwe
New A15
Elst
Bemmel
Lingewaard
Waalsprong
Center
Nijmegen
West
South
Figure XII-3 Geographical scope - northern zones
May 12, 2010
Annexes-41
XII-v Traianusplein – Current situation
2300
r ug
alb
Wa
2500
850
950
1650
BUS
200
650
1350
BUS
BUS
100
T1
350
100
Ce
n
te
re
as
t
1450
650
buslane
450
1000
1650
1300
Ub
be
ct r g
io
n se
w
m eg
an
y)
1650
250
G
er
100
Traianusplein
100
(d
ir
e
Evening Peak 2020
Without measures
2300
T2
O
n
ra
si
je
e
ng
l
2100
1400
200
500
1400
500
500
400
Graadt van
Roggenstraat
Mr.
Franckenstraat
May 12, 2010
Annexes-42
XII-vi
Traianusplein – with Measure 1: Infrastructural
improvements
1950
alb
rug
1800
Wa
700
350
850
950
300
1650
700
200
650
450
700
Ce
nt
e
re
as
t
350
750
650
100
350
100
300
1650
350
950
(d bb
ir
ec er
tio g
n se
G
er w e
m
an g
y)
950
250
100
Traianusplein
100
U
Evening Peak 2020
With Measure 1
1600
T2
Or
n
si
je
an
l
ge
1400
1400
200
500
1400
500
500
400
Graadt van
Roggenstraat
Mr.
Franckenstraat
May 12, 2010
Annexes-43

annexes - Project Waalbrug

Transcription

Similar documents

High-quality public transport in Nijmegen

nach nijmegen