sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Manual for Streets 2
Wider Application of
The Principles
Birmingham
1...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Manual for Streets 2 - Why?
   MfS only applicable to residential st...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
MfS1 MfS2
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
DMRB – National Guidance on Roads
•  Applicable to Trunk Roads
•  Hig...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
What is DMRB for?
Use of the Manual for Trunk Roads
1.4 The documents...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
DMRB
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
MfS (1 and 2) Key Principles
   Hierarchy – consider pedestrians fir...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Speed Limit 20mph 30mph 40mph 50+mph
User Hierarchy ● ● ● ●
Quality A...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Section A – Context and Process
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
   Two dimensional approach to Hierarchy – Movement and Place
   De...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Movement
Place
Place
Place
Place
Place
What are streets for?
Movement
Pedestrians
Cyclists
Buses
Cars/HGVs
Deliveries
Parking
Place Shopping Playing Socialising ...
What are streets for?
Movement
Pedestrians
Cyclists
Buses
Cars
Deliveries
Parking
Place Shopping Playing Socialising Eatin...
What are streets for?
Movement
Pedestrians
Cyclists
Buses
Cars/HGVs
Deliveries
Parking
Place Shopping Playing Socialising ...
What are streets for?
Movement
Pedestrians
Cyclists
Buses
Cars/HGVs
Deliveries
Parking
Place Shopping Playing Socialising ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Town and City Centres
Street Type: Multifunctional Streets a...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Town and City Centres
Street Type: Multifunctional Streets a...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Urban and Suburban Areas
Street Type: Arterial Routes and Hi...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Urban and Suburban Areas
Street Type: Arterial Routes and Hi...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Urban and Suburban Areas
Street Type: Relief Roads and Ring ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Urban and Suburban Areas
Street Type: Relief Roads and Ring ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Urban and Suburban Areas
Street Type: Boulevards
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Urban and Suburban Areas
Street Type: Boulevards
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Urban Extensions
Street Type: High Streets, Residential Stre...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Interchanges
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Village Centres
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Village Centres
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Rural Areas
Street Type Rural Roads
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Rural Areas
Street Type Rural Lanes
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Shared Space
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Context: Shared Space
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
What is Shared Space?
Shared Space: a street or place accessible to b...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Increasingly shared
Decreasingly segregated
Guardrails Conventional
k...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Business as usual
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Sharing through Re-balancing
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Shared Space - Link
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Shared Space -
Junction
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
When does a space
become shared?
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Total Segregation
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
High Segregation
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Everyday Segregation
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Low Segregation
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Minimal Segregation
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
No Segregation
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Seven Dials, London
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Casualty Data Seven Dials, Covent Garden
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Ashford Ring Road
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Shared Space DfT Research
   Research being carried out by MVA
- Gui...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Aren’t we going to be liable if someone gets hurt?
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
What’s the Problem?
•  Persistent concerns over potential for highway...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Liability and Good Urban Design
•  Designers often over-estimate thei...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Legislative duties and judgements
Highway Risk & Liability Claims
A p...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Legislative duties and judgements
Three Principles:
1.   Court ruling...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
•  No duty to give warning or maintain
warning of obvious hazards
•  ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Gorringe (Appellant) v.
Calderdale Metropolitan
Borough Council (2004...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Gorringe (Appellant) v.
Calderdale Metropolitan Borough
Council (2004...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Quality Audits
   Quality Audits introduced in MfS1 - a ‘Balanced Au...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Design and Implementation Process – LTN 1/08
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Quality Audit process for
large developments
Council sets out objecti...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
•   CIHT and DfT working towards guidance note (LTN) on Quality
Audit...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones AssociatesBeechcroft Road, Oxford
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Stages to Better Streets – London Mayor’s Strategy
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Stage 1 – Tidy Up
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Stage 2 – De-clutter
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Stage 3 – Relocate/Merge Functions
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Stage 4 – Rethink Traffic Management
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Stage 5 – Re-create the Street
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Some existing kit is plainly useless and can be removed without fear
...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Mare Street, Hackney
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Maid Marian Way, Nottingham
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Maid Marian Way, Nottingham
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Exhibition Road
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Exhibition Road
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
The Value of Better Streets
  Traditional economic evaluation relies...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Section B – Detailed Design Issues
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Application of the Detailed Guidance
Two health warnings:
1. Although...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
And not forgetting
8.1.1 The design of carriageways...is often based ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Pedestrian Needs and Footways
It’s not exactly rocket science...!
  ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones AssociatesNewlands Avenue MPR Scheme
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Newlands Avenue MPR Scheme:
Pinch point widened from 1.1m to 1.6m
Num...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Cyclists’ Needs
   Cyclists should generally be accommodated
on the ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Design of Cycle Facilities
  MfS2 refers to LTN2/08 – Cycle
Infrastr...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Design of Cycle Facilities – cont’d
  Coloured surfacing – conspicui...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Cycle parking should be provided at key
destinations –for example in ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Bus Facilities
   Bus routes and stops form key elements in walkable...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Walworth Road - Before
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Walworth Road - After
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Carriageways
   Design Speed in urban areas should generally not exc...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  Various means of reducing speed:
–  Physical features
–  Changes i...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Horizontal Alignment
  Can adopt curve radii well below DMRB Desirab...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Lane Widths
   Lanes do not have to be 3.65m (12 feet) wide.
   Nar...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Central Medians
   Helpful to pedestrians crossing the carriageway
...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Kerb Heights
   Typically 125mm – but...
   Lower kerb heights are ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Junctions, Crossings and Accesses
   Junctions often seen as problem...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Crossings
   Informal, Zebra, Signalised - all have
advantages and d...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Crossings
   Two stage signalised crossings can
be straight across.
...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Queen Street, City of London
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Priority Junctions
   Advantages: Simple, legible, can have
low dela...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Squares
   Major opportunity for placemaking
and as a traffic/parkin...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Conventional Roundabouts
   Advantages: High capacity, good safety
r...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Mini Roundabouts
   Advantages: Small land take, slow
speeds, good s...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
St Bride Street, City of London
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Traffic Signals
   Advantages: High capacity, can
incorporate pedest...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Traffic Signals – Cont’d
   Intervisibility requirements from TD 50/...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Traffic Management Systems
   Complex one-way systems often installe...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Visibility
Stopping Sight Distance
   Guidance in MfS2 incorporates ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
TMS Consultancy Research
<120m visibility to right from kerb vs "visi...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Design Speed Vehicle Type Reaction Time Deceleration Rate
60kph and b...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
SSD = vt + v2/2(d+0.1a)
where:
v = speed (m/s)
t = driver perception–...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Forward Visibility
   Apply SSD requirements in the horizontal and v...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Visibility at Priority Junctions
   X-distance of 2.4m generally app...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Parking and Servicing
   Positive and negative aspects of on-street ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Street Trees and Planting
   Green infrastructure is important to th...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Street Lighting
   Plan street lighting as an integral part of the
s...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Street Furniture
   Some street furniture is useful and
important......
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Guardrail
   Significant disbenefits - highly
intrusive, disadvantag...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Traffic Signs and Markings
   Add significantly to street clutter
 ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Signs may be mounted at any height
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
And on buildings
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Yellow backing boards significantly increase visual impact
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
As do keep left signs on retroreflective bollards
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Other mounting options are available
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Or the keep left signs can be omitted completely
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Ordinary bollards can also be overdone
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
As can centre line markings
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Junction priority can be removed
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Just two zig-zag markings is lawful at controlled crossings
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Only the double-dash marking is necessary at Give-Ways
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
One no-entry sign is lawful if carriageway less than 5m wide
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
White borders to signals can be omitted
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Roundabouts don’t have to have chevron signs
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Coloured surfacing has no legal function
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
50mm ‘Primrose’ no waiting lines are lawful anywhere
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
And aren’t needed if carriageway and footway on same level
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Section C – Case Studies
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
London Road, Southampton
•  Citycentre radial
•  9400 vehicles per da...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Before
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
After
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Walworth Road, South London
•  “A” class road
•  20,000 vehicles per ...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Before
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
After
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Conclusions
   MfS2 provides detailed guidance on a wide range
of te...
sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
Discussion!
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Manual for streets 2

2,301

Published on

Presentation by Phil Jones

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,301
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
84
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Manual for streets 2

  1. 1. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Manual for Streets 2 Wider Application of The Principles Birmingham 18 April 2011 Phil Jones, PJA
  2. 2. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Manual for Streets 2 - Why?    MfS only applicable to residential streets (?)    Concerns over HGVs and bus braking characteristics/SSDs    Fear of litigation    Comfort of familiar standards    Lack of confidence in applying MfS principles in busier locations
  3. 3. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates MfS1 MfS2
  4. 4. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates DMRB – National Guidance on Roads •  Applicable to Trunk Roads •  Highways Agency’s standard (Eng.) •  Very detailed – covers •  Horizontal and Vertical Alignment •  Carriageway widths •  Design Speeds •  Junction geometry/detailing •  Checking and audit procedures •  Often used by Local Highway Authorities •  But they don’t have to!
  5. 5. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates What is DMRB for? Use of the Manual for Trunk Roads 1.4 The documents in the manual have been prepared … specifically for Trunk Road Works throughout the UK…. Use of the Manual by Other Highway Authorities 1.5 The manual sets a standard of good practice that has been developed principally for Trunk Roads. It may also be applicable in part to other roads with similar characteristics. Where it is used for local road schemes, it is for the local highway authority to decide on the extent to which the documents in the manual are appropriate in any particular situation Introduction to the DMRB, GD01/08 (our emphasis)
  6. 6. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates DMRB
  7. 7. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates MfS (1 and 2) Key Principles    Hierarchy – consider pedestrians first    Strike a balance – traffic is not always paramount    Respect pedestrian and cycle desire lines    Permeable and connected networks are preferred    Collaborative approaches work best    Innovation is encouraged
  8. 8. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Speed Limit 20mph 30mph 40mph 50+mph User Hierarchy ● ● ● ● Quality Audits ● ● ● ● Community Function ● ● ● ● Inclusive Design ● ● ● ● Ped/Cycle Support ● ● ● ● Master Plans/Design Codes ● ● ● ● Stopping Sight Distance ● ● ● ● Frontage Access ● ● ● ● Minimise Signs and Street Furniture ● ● ● ● Connectivity/Permeability ● ● ● ●
  9. 9. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  10. 10. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Section A – Context and Process
  11. 11. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates    Two dimensional approach to Hierarchy – Movement and Place    Design choices need to respect both functions    Some Movement corridors are more important than others…    Some Places are more important than others... Motorway High Street Residential Street Rural Lane Place Status MovementStatus
  12. 12. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Movement Place Place Place Place Place
  13. 13. What are streets for? Movement Pedestrians Cyclists Buses Cars/HGVs Deliveries Parking Place Shopping Playing Socialising Eating/drinking Sitting Events
  14. 14. What are streets for? Movement Pedestrians Cyclists Buses Cars Deliveries Parking Place Shopping Playing Socialising Eating/drinking Sitting Events
  15. 15. What are streets for? Movement Pedestrians Cyclists Buses Cars/HGVs Deliveries Parking Place Shopping Playing Socialising Eating/drinking Sitting Events
  16. 16. What are streets for? Movement Pedestrians Cyclists Buses Cars/HGVs Deliveries Parking Place Shopping Playing Socialising Eating/drinking Sitting Events
  17. 17. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Town and City Centres Street Type: Multifunctional Streets and Spaces
  18. 18. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Town and City Centres Street Type: Multifunctional Streets and Spaces
  19. 19. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Urban and Suburban Areas Street Type: Arterial Routes and High Streets
  20. 20. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Urban and Suburban Areas Street Type: Arterial Routes and High Streets
  21. 21. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Urban and Suburban Areas Street Type: Relief Roads and Ring Roads
  22. 22. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Urban and Suburban Areas Street Type: Relief Roads and Ring Roads
  23. 23. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Urban and Suburban Areas Street Type: Boulevards
  24. 24. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Urban and Suburban Areas Street Type: Boulevards
  25. 25. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  26. 26. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  27. 27. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Urban Extensions Street Type: High Streets, Residential Streets
  28. 28. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Interchanges
  29. 29. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Village Centres
  30. 30. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Village Centres
  31. 31. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  32. 32. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Rural Areas Street Type Rural Roads
  33. 33. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Rural Areas Street Type Rural Lanes
  34. 34. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Shared Space
  35. 35. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Context: Shared Space
  36. 36. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates What is Shared Space? Shared Space: a street or place accessible to both pedestrians and vehicles that is designed to enable pedestrians to move more freely by reducing traffic management features that tend to encourage vehicles to assume priority. Level surface: a street surface that is not physically divided by kerb or level differences into areas for particular uses. Level surface is a feature of some shared space schemes. Shared Space Research Report, for DfT
  37. 37. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Increasingly shared Decreasingly segregated Guardrails Conventional kerbs, different materials Level Surface, Minimal/No delineation Low kerbs, common material Increasingly cooperative When does a space become shared?
  38. 38. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Business as usual
  39. 39. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Sharing through Re-balancing
  40. 40. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Shared Space - Link
  41. 41. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Shared Space - Junction
  42. 42. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates When does a space become shared?
  43. 43. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Total Segregation
  44. 44. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates High Segregation
  45. 45. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Everyday Segregation
  46. 46. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Low Segregation
  47. 47. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Minimal Segregation
  48. 48. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates No Segregation
  49. 49. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Seven Dials, London
  50. 50. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Casualty Data Seven Dials, Covent Garden
  51. 51. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  52. 52. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  53. 53. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  54. 54. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  55. 55. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Ashford Ring Road
  56. 56. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  57. 57. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  58. 58. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  59. 59. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  60. 60. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Shared Space DfT Research    Research being carried out by MVA - Guidance out in Spring 2011    Key findings:    Shared Spaces are no less safe and can be safer    Reducing the degree of segregation between users produces slower traffic, more pedestrians using whole of the space.    Solutions are emerging that mitigate the impact of Level Surfaces on disabled people.
  61. 61. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Aren’t we going to be liable if someone gets hurt?
  62. 62. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates What’s the Problem? •  Persistent concerns over potential for highway authorities – and individual officers/members – to be held liable for design faults and innovations. •  No evidence that this is actually a significant problem in practice.
  63. 63. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Liability and Good Urban Design •  Designers often over-estimate their legal responsibilities •  Designers may therefore be unwilling to consider non- conventional design initiatives (e.g. removing guard-rails) •  Irrational fear of liability can be detrimental to good design •   Need to be more informed about risk, safety & possible liability •   Need to balance these concerns with the benefits of good urban design •   Good urban design can be just as safe as traditional approaches and sometimes safer
  64. 64. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Legislative duties and judgements Highway Risk & Liability Claims A practical guide to Appendix C of ‘Well Maintained Highways’ •   Produced by UK Roads Board •   Advice, case studies and judgements on liability
  65. 65. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Legislative duties and judgements Three Principles: 1.   Court rulings repeatedly state that road users are responsible for their own safety and have a duty to take the road as they find it. This defines the road user as an intelligent being, able and expected to exercise their own judgement. 2.   The highway authority should avoid creating a trap for road users. 3.   The highway authority should not act irrationally.
  66. 66. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates •  No duty to give warning or maintain warning of obvious hazards •  No duty to erect of warning signs (including markings) for obvious hazards •  Cases: •  Gorringe v Calderdale •  Stovin v Wise & Norfolk CC Judgements
  67. 67. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Gorringe (Appellant) v. Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (2004) On 15 July 1996, on a country road in Yorkshire, Mrs Denise Gorringe drove her car head-on into a bus. It was hidden behind a sharp crest in the road until just before she reached the top. She said that the council caused the accident by failing to give her proper warning of the danger involved in driving fast when you could not see what was coming. The ‘SLOW’ road marking on the approach to the crest had become worn.
  68. 68. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Gorringe (Appellant) v. Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (2004)The House of Lords LORD STEYN •   …the courts must not contribute to the creation of a society bent on litigation, which is premised on the illusion that for every misfortune there is a remedy. LORD HOFFMANN •   People must accept responsibility for their own actions and take the necessary care to avoid injuring themselves or others. •   The users of the highway are expected to look after themselves. •   Drivers of vehicles must take the highway network as they find it. LORD RODGER •   I am satisfied that the duty to maintain the highway does not include a duty to repaint warning signs on the surface.
  69. 69. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Quality Audits    Quality Audits introduced in MfS1 - a ‘Balanced Audit’ reviewing key aspects of a design against set objectives    Some authorities (eg Kent, Solihull) have taken the concept further Policy Review Objective Setting Design Quality Auditing
  70. 70. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Design and Implementation Process – LTN 1/08
  71. 71. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Quality Audit process for large developments Council sets out objectives/terms of reference for Quality Audit Quality Audit to include: •mobility or access audit •cycling & pedestrian, equestrian audits •visual quality and place check audits •Stage F Road Safety Audit/ Road Safety Assessment •maintenance regime audit •public transport audit •Transport Assessment •technical standards audit •how streets will be used/ community audit •construction audit Information Gathering Stage Facilitator involved to resolve simple conflicts between audits Some audits carried out by qualified independent individuals/ teams, audit payments negotiated with developer Draft Quality Audit Report including outstanding items and recommendations Resolution of outstanding items Developer input Developer, Local Authority input Agreed final Quality Audit Report Subsequent stages of Road Safety Audit on approved option Developer, Local Authority input Planning Approval by Council Risk Assessment matrix used by Facilitator to help resolve outstanding issues Quality Audit process for large developments Council sets out objectives/terms of reference for Quality Audit Quality Audit to include: •mobility or access audit •cycling & pedestrian, equestrian audits •visual quality and place check audits •Stage F Road Safety Audit/ Road Safety Assessment •maintenance regime audit •public transport audit •Transport Assessment •technical standards audit •how streets will be used/ community audit •construction audit Information Gathering Stage Facilitator involved to resolve simple conflicts between audits Some audits carried out by qualified independent individuals/ teams, audit payments negotiated with developer Draft Quality Audit Report including outstanding items and recommendations Resolution of outstanding items Developer input Developer, Local Authority input Agreed final Quality Audit Report Subsequent stages of Road Safety Audit on approved option Developer, Local Authority input Planning Approval by Council Risk Assessment matrix used by Facilitator to help resolve outstanding issues
  72. 72. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates •   CIHT and DfT working towards guidance note (LTN) on Quality Audits •   Current thinking: •   Team leader for QA •   Separate reports commissioned •   Team review all reports leading to balanced recommendations Quality Audits
  73. 73. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  74. 74. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones AssociatesBeechcroft Road, Oxford
  75. 75. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Stages to Better Streets – London Mayor’s Strategy
  76. 76. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Stage 1 – Tidy Up
  77. 77. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Stage 2 – De-clutter
  78. 78. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Stage 3 – Relocate/Merge Functions
  79. 79. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Stage 4 – Rethink Traffic Management
  80. 80. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Stage 5 – Re-create the Street
  81. 81. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Some existing kit is plainly useless and can be removed without fear Stratford-upon-Avon
  82. 82. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Mare Street, Hackney
  83. 83. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Maid Marian Way, Nottingham
  84. 84. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Maid Marian Way, Nottingham
  85. 85. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Exhibition Road
  86. 86. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Exhibition Road
  87. 87. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates The Value of Better Streets   Traditional economic evaluation relies on time saved   How do we value time spent in better streets?   Guidance on Urbandesignlondon.tfl.gov.uk
  88. 88. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Section B – Detailed Design Issues
  89. 89. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Application of the Detailed Guidance Two health warnings: 1. Although numerical values are given in this section, designers are encouraged to take a flexible approach to its interpretation and application, thinking through for themselves the likely outcome of any course of action based on experience and local circumstances. 2. In preparing schemes, designers should consider the layout in totality, including the relationship of the highway to its surroundings, both in urban and rural areas. The highway should not be seen in isolation or simply as a piece of infrastructure.
  90. 90. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates And not forgetting 8.1.1 The design of carriageways...is often based on TD9/93 Highway Link Design, part of DMRB, but that document has been prepared for Trunk Roads and may not always be appropriate in other circumstances. As noted in Chapter 1 it is recommended that designers bear in mind the key principles of MfS when applying DMRB. DMRB
  91. 91. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Pedestrian Needs and Footways It’s not exactly rocket science...!    Pedestrians need direct, connected and clutter-free footways of adequate width along and across multi-functional highways    Their needs must be considered when designing links and junctions
  92. 92. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones AssociatesNewlands Avenue MPR Scheme
  93. 93. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Newlands Avenue MPR Scheme: Pinch point widened from 1.1m to 1.6m Number of pedestrians increased by 59%
  94. 94. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Cyclists’ Needs    Cyclists should generally be accommodated on the carriageway – by making conditions suitable for them.    Poor facilities are worse than no facilities – vehicles travel closer when lanes provided    Where on-carriageway facilities are provided, they should be well designed.    Off-carriageway facilities should be convenient and not put cyclists at danger at junctions
  95. 95. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Design of Cycle Facilities   MfS2 refers to LTN2/08 – Cycle Infrastructure Design   Make space for cycle lanes by reducing traffic lane widths
  96. 96. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Design of Cycle Facilities – cont’d   Coloured surfacing – conspicuity or visual intrusion?   Hybrid/protected lanes can be used   Cycle symbol alone can be useful   Off-highway shared cycle tracks – reduce pedestrian amenity, less favoured.   Updated LTN on Shared Use Paths in course of preparation.
  97. 97. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Cycle parking should be provided at key destinations –for example in local high streets
  98. 98. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Bus Facilities    Bus routes and stops form key elements in walkable neighbourhoods    Routes should be direct and reasonably straight    Bus stops should be high quality, accessible places with good information    Bus priority lanes reduce journey times and benefit cyclists but disadvantage pedestrians    Bus boarders preferred to laybys
  99. 99. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Walworth Road - Before
  100. 100. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Walworth Road - After
  101. 101. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Carriageways    Design Speed in urban areas should generally not exceed 30mph (50kph) – and can be less where necessary    Both MfS1 and DMRB confirm that drivers respond to more generous geometry by increasing speed.
  102. 102. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates   Various means of reducing speed: –  Physical features –  Changes in priority –  Street dimensions –  Reduced forward visibility –  Psychology and perception Carriageways
  103. 103. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Horizontal Alignment   Can adopt curve radii well below DMRB Desirable Minima in urban areas.   TD9/93 advises 4 steps below Des Min for speeds of 60kph and below: Design Speed, kph Curve Radius, m 4 steps below TD 9/93 Desirable Min 30 16 40 28 48 41 50 44 60 64
  104. 104. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  105. 105. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  106. 106. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Lane Widths    Lanes do not have to be 3.65m (12 feet) wide.    Narrower lanes will reduce speeds and overall carriageway width, and require drivers to pull around cyclists.    Lanes >3m not necessary in most urban situations catering for mixed traffic    Wide (>4m) lanes allow large vehicles to pass cyclists more easily.
  107. 107. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Central Medians    Helpful to pedestrians crossing the carriageway    Should not fence off unless clear safety justification    Overrun medians can be a useful feature
  108. 108. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Kerb Heights    Typically 125mm – but...    Lower kerb heights are easier for the mobility-impaired to cross and reduce vehicle dominance.    Higher kerbs appropriate at bus stops.
  109. 109. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Junctions, Crossings and Accesses    Junctions often seen as problems – to be minimised    But can also be seen as opportunities for ‘place’ functions    Essential to consider pedestrian and cycle needs    Grade separation almost always makes for poor environments
  110. 110. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  111. 111. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Crossings    Informal, Zebra, Signalised - all have advantages and disadvantages    Informal - minimal clutter, can encourage courtesy behaviour, little delay to traffic, but no absolute priority to pedestrians.    Zebra – delays can be minimal unless pedestrian flows high, can be close to junctions, more clutter.    Signalised – additional delay, more clutter, preferred by vulnerable pedestrians.
  112. 112. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Crossings    Two stage signalised crossings can be straight across.    Staggered crossings don’t have to have guardrail.    X-crossings are possible with simple all-red stages.
  113. 113. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Queen Street, City of London
  114. 114. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  115. 115. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  116. 116. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  117. 117. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  118. 118. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  119. 119. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  120. 120. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Priority Junctions    Advantages: Simple, legible, can have low delays, particularly outside peaks    Minimising number of approach lanes benefits pedestrians and cyclists. Ghost island not generally justified at 500 vpd.    Crossroads have poor accident record at higher flows and speeds. Tabling a possible solution.    Tight corner radii, footway crossovers should be considered in urban areas.
  121. 121. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Squares    Major opportunity for placemaking and as a traffic/parking solution    Can be thought of as a series of displaced informal priority junctions
  122. 122. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Conventional Roundabouts    Advantages: High capacity, good safety record for vehicles, minimal delay outside peaks.    Disadvantages - poor safety record for cyclists, barrier to pedestrians, high land take, visual impact.    Particular problem for cyclists – left turn slip lanes    Recommended approach – ‘compact’ geometry - as small as possible with narrow entries and exits.
  123. 123. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Mini Roundabouts    Advantages: Small land take, slow speeds, good safety record, minimal delay outside peaks, better for pedestrians and cyclists.    Disadvantages – Limited traffic capacity, visual impact.    No presumption against new mini- roundabouts on non-trunk roads    ‘Informal’ mini-roundabouts can work well, minimal visual impact.
  124. 124. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates St Bride Street, City of London
  125. 125. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Traffic Signals    Advantages: High capacity, can incorporate pedestrian and cycle facilities    Disadvantages – Clutter and visual impact, delays outside peaks    Tight corner radii preferred – keep pedestrians on desire lines, reduce speed of turning vehicles.    Advanced cycle lanes should usually be provided in urban areas.
  126. 126. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Traffic Signals – Cont’d    Intervisibility requirements from TD 50/04 can significantly affect ability to place buildings close to corners – is this always appropriate?    Left turn slip lanes increase clutter and pedestrian crossing complexity    Traffic signal removal experiments – need to consider pedestrian needs.
  127. 127. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Traffic Management Systems    Complex one-way systems often installed to maximise traffic capacity    Significant disadvantage to cyclists and can cause pedestrian accidents    Some towns have chosen to simplifying one-way systems.
  128. 128. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Visibility Stopping Sight Distance    Guidance in MfS2 incorporates that of MfS1 – effectively superseding it    Based on further research carried out by TMS Consultancy, plus literature searches    MfS1 parameters apply to all <60kph links:    1.5s reaction time    0.45g deceleration rate    Except for buses and HGVs (>5% of flow typically)    1.5s reaction time    0.375g deceleration rate
  129. 129. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates TMS Consultancy Research <120m visibility to right from kerb vs "visi" collisions y = 0.0163x + 3.6442 R2 = 0.0586 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Visibility Collisions
  130. 130. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Design Speed Vehicle Type Reaction Time Deceleration Rate 60kph and below Light vehicles 1.5s 0.45g HGVs 1.5s 0.375g Buses 1.5s 0.375g Above 60kph All vehicles 2s 0.375g (Absolute Min SSD) All vehicles 2s 0.25g (Desirable Min SSD)
  131. 131. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates SSD = vt + v2/2(d+0.1a) where: v = speed (m/s) t = driver perception–reaction time (sec) d = deceleration (m/s2) a = longitudinal gradient (%) (+ for upgrades and – for downgrades)
  132. 132. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Forward Visibility    Apply SSD requirements in the horizontal and vertical plane.    But in some situations may be desirable to restrict forward visibility to help control traffic speed.
  133. 133. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Visibility at Priority Junctions    X-distance of 2.4m generally appropriate, subject to capacity considerations    Y-distance based on SSD but: It has often been assumed that a failure to provide visibility at priority junctions in accordance with the values recommended in MfS1 or DMRB (as appropriate) will result in an increased risk of injury collisions. Research carried out by TMS Consultancy for MfS2 has found no evidence of this. ...unless there is local evidence to the contrary, a reduction in visibility below recommended levels will not necessarily lead to a significant problem.
  134. 134. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  135. 135. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  136. 136. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Parking and Servicing    Positive and negative aspects of on-street parking set out in MfS1 Positive   Common resource, efficient, popular.   Caters for varying demand   Adds activity   Well overlooked Negative   Possible impact on pedestrian safety   Can be visually dominant   May block footways and entrances   Can be source of crime    If done...should be done well!
  137. 137. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  138. 138. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  139. 139. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Street Trees and Planting    Green infrastructure is important to the design of places and trees are one of its most visible components    Engineers and transport planners are well placed to help deliver street trees and their benefits. •   Visual •   Shade •   Habitat •   Drainage •   Economic    Practical difficulties (footway heave and restriction, leaf drop) can be overcome through careful design and maintenance
  140. 140. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Street Lighting    Plan street lighting as an integral part of the street, including any planting    Lighting should be appropriate to context and street function    Lighting levels do not have to be constant during the hours of darkness.    Shadows and sudden changes in lighting level can be particularly problematic and should be avoided.    Consideration should be given to attaching lighting units to buildings to reduce street clutter.
  141. 141. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Street Furniture    Some street furniture is useful and important...much is not    Start with nothing – introduce only elements that are necessary    Clutter removal can be done as part of ongoing maintenance    Combine elements together where possible    Street furniture should be arranged to keep pedestrian routes clear
  142. 142. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  143. 143. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  144. 144. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Guardrail    Significant disbenefits - highly intrusive, disadvantages pedestrians, unsightly, can increase traffic speeds and create risks for cyclists.    May be necessary in some locations – but need better balanced use    Many guardrail removal schemes have worked well in road safety terms, with careful assessment    Look for alternative solutions before installing new guardrail
  145. 145. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Traffic Signs and Markings    Add significantly to street clutter    Signs must comply with Regulations, but Guidance (TSM) is just that.    There is flexibility in both types of document
  146. 146. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Signs may be mounted at any height
  147. 147. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates And on buildings
  148. 148. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Yellow backing boards significantly increase visual impact
  149. 149. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates As do keep left signs on retroreflective bollards
  150. 150. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Other mounting options are available
  151. 151. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Or the keep left signs can be omitted completely
  152. 152. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Ordinary bollards can also be overdone
  153. 153. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates As can centre line markings
  154. 154. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  155. 155. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  156. 156. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Junction priority can be removed
  157. 157. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  158. 158. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Just two zig-zag markings is lawful at controlled crossings
  159. 159. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Only the double-dash marking is necessary at Give-Ways
  160. 160. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates One no-entry sign is lawful if carriageway less than 5m wide
  161. 161. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates White borders to signals can be omitted
  162. 162. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Roundabouts don’t have to have chevron signs
  163. 163. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Coloured surfacing has no legal function
  164. 164. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates 50mm ‘Primrose’ no waiting lines are lawful anywhere
  165. 165. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates And aren’t needed if carriageway and footway on same level
  166. 166. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Section C – Case Studies
  167. 167. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates London Road, Southampton •  Citycentre radial •  9400 vehicles per day (before) •  6000 vehicles per day (after) •  5500 pedestrians per day •  400 cyclists per day •  31 collisions in 4 years (before) •  3 collisions in 10 months (after)
  168. 168. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Before
  169. 169. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  170. 170. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  171. 171. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates After
  172. 172. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  173. 173. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  174. 174. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  175. 175. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  176. 176. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  177. 177. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  178. 178. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Walworth Road, South London •  “A” class road •  20,000 vehicles per day •  180 buses per hour •  20,000 pedestrians •  250 accidents in 3 years
  179. 179. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Before
  180. 180. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  181. 181. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  182. 182. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  183. 183. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates After
  184. 184. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  185. 185. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  186. 186. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  187. 187. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  188. 188. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates
  189. 189. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Conclusions    MfS2 provides detailed guidance on a wide range of technical issues...    for a wide range of contexts and street types    It provides a ‘way in’ to DMRB and other technical guidance    While encouraging designers to...    Think! pj@philjonesassociates.co.uk Twitter.com/Phil_PJA 0121 222 5422
  190. 190. sustainable transport solutionsPhil Jones Associates Discussion!
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×