RE DEVELOPMENT OF KIDWAI NAGAR (EAST) IS A PRESTIGIOUS PROJECT UNDER MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, GOVT. OF INDIA

Transcription

1 RE DEVELOPMENT OF KIDWAI NAGAR (EAST) IS A PRESTIGIOUS PROJECT UNDER MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, GOVT. OF INDIA NBCC, A NAVRATANA CPSE UNDER MOUD, IS THE IMPLEMENTING AGENCY FOR THIS PRESTIGIOUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS Engineering and Planning Consultants

2 SCOPE PROPOSAL FOR CONNECTIVITY OF EAST KIDWAI NAGAR Towards Baba Banda Singh Bahadur Setu (BBSB Setu) phase II Safe Pedestrian Crossing at T Junction of BBSB Setu Phase II & Aurbindo Marg

3 Kidwai Nagar (East) has been identified as one of the colonies for redevelopment as General Pool Residential Accommodation (GPRA) on 27/07/1993 under Approved Zone D in Master Plan of Delhi by DDA. Existing structures (in 2013) Plot Area 86 Acres (3,48,029 Sqm) Area under Darya Khan Tomb (schedule B) 14 acres Area under Redevelopment 72 acres FAR permissible as per MPD (10,44,087 sqm) FAR achieved 203 (6,96,167 sqm) Office / commercial complex as permissible 10% (1,04,412 sqm) Car parking provided in basement nos Total Density Achieved 134 DU/ Ha Total Ground Coverage Achieved 23.43% Existing green area 13% (47,000 sq M ) Green area provided 47% (1,65,000 sq M) PROJECT STATISTICS 2444 nos. (Type I, Type II & Type V quarters ) 3 Schools, Some local shopping markets, Religious structures, etc.

4 PROJECT STATISTICS Sl No HOUSING TYPE Existing (IN 2013) PROPOSED Type I 1336 Nil Type II Type III 1025 Type IV 1472 Type V Type VI 192 Type VII 61 Total Nos. of Units

5 SITE AND ENVIRONS TOWARDS SARAI KALE KHAN VIKAS SADAN TO DHAULA KUAN DILLI HAAT PROJECT SITE SOUTH EXT. SAFDARJANG HOSPITAL AIIMS RING ROAD

6 EARLIER APPROVED ACCESS SYSTEM ACCESS 4 ACCESS 3 ACCESS 2 ACCESS 1 ACCESS 5 ACCESS 6 ACCESS 7 ACCESS 8

7 In earlier approved access system 4 nos entry/exit (namely 1 to 4 ) were present towards upcoming Baba Banda Singh Bahadur Setu (BBSB Setu) Phase II road/flyover construction. Same was to be incorporated by PWD in their connectivity drawing While PWD submitted the connectivity drawing to UTTIPEC entry/exit no 1 & 2 were incorporated but entry/exit 3 & 4 were not incorporated due to some technical reason (presence of JJ cluster). For entry/exit 3 & 4 joint survey was conducted by UTTIPEC/PWD/DMRC/NBCC In the joint survey it was observed that entry/exit 3 & 4 was not possible due to presence of JJ cluster, hence NBCC was advised to carry out the feasibility study with alternate plan NBCC appointed M/s EPC to carried out feasibility study and prepared alternate plan in concurrence with PWD and DMRC Back ground/chronology The feasibility report was submitted to UTTIPEC which was reviewed in Working Group II A, 34 th meeting held on In this meeting, group members had certain observations which were incorporated and presented in 35 th Working Group Meeting held on

8 In 35th Working Group meeting of UTTIPEC held on in which it was recommended that PWD & NBCC will integrate the safe pedestrian crossing at Aurobindo Marg T Junction and will submit the road safety audit report for further discussion in working group meeting Contd. M/s EPC and M/s RITES was engaged by NBCC to prepare proposal for Safe Pedestrian Crossing and Conduct Traffic Safety audit at T Junction of BBSB Setu Phase II road/flyover & Aurbindo Marg. Same was presented in 39 th Working Group Meeting held on The proposals of signalized at grade crossing at T Junction and underpass across Aurbindo Marg for safe pedestrian crossing was recommended by Working Group and it was advised that NBCC should submit it with the comments of all stakeholders for further consideration by Governing Body. Proposed connectivity no 3 & 4, prepared in concurrence with NBCC, PWD & DMRC and Proposal of safe pedestrian crossing at T Junction is being submitted for further consideration of Governing Body.

9 Proposed Access 3 & 4 ( Mutually agreed by PWD, NBCC & DMRC)

10 DETAIL OF MODIFIED ACCESSES BUS STOP AS PER MMI PLAN TWO LANE ONEWAY CB MARG SUGGESTIVE KASHMIRI MARKET ACCESS Pedestrian plaza CRITICAL PEDESTRIAN AREA RUMBLE STRIPS OR ANY TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES

11 VIEW OF PROPOSED ACCESS NO 3

12 DETAIL OF AFFECTED ACCESSES (ACCESS NO 3) NALA

13 NALA VIEWS OF PROPOSED ACCESS 3 FROM NMT AREA

14 VIEW FROM KIDWAI NAGAR PROJECT TOWARDS INA SIDE

15 VIEW FROM KIDWAI NAGAR PROJECT TOWARDS INA SIDE EAST KIDWAI NAGAR BONDARY INSIDE BACK EAST KIDWAI NAGAR BONDARY INSIDE

16 SAFETY AUDIT OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY MEASURES AT T- JUNCTION OF BABA BANDA SINGH BAHADUR SETU WITH AUROBINDO MARG

17 STUDY LOCATION Metro entry/exit Metro entry/exit

18 SITE APPRECIATION Downstream Ramp of BBSB Setu (Gradient 2.56%) Upstream Ramp of BBSB Setu (Gradient 2.5%) View of study location for pedestrian crossing View of Study location from Delhi haat

19 SITE APPRECIATION U/C ramp of BSSB setu in Barapullah Drain (Gradient 3.8%) INA market U/C INA Interchange entry/exit Existing Pedestrian activity on Aurobindo Marg

20 SITE APPRECIATION Pedestrians at INA metro station NMT vehicles on C.B. Marg View of Aurobindo Marg (near Petrol Pump) Traffic waiting on pedestrian signal on Aurobindo Marg

21 SITE APPRECIATION Queue of Vehicles at Petrol Pump on Aurobindo marg Pedestrian Plaza of Delhi Haat BBSB Setu U/C NBCC Complex U/C Delhi haat Metro U/C Aurobindo marg A panoramic view of Aurobindo Marg with BBSB Setu and NBCC complex on LHS and Delhi haat and U/C INA metro entry/exit on RHS

22 CHECKLIST 16 SAFETY AUDIT FOR VULNERABLE ROAD USERS Sl # DESCRIPTION OBSERVATIONS 1 Has there been a survey of non-motorised vehicle and pedestrian flows? 2 Will there be any major conflicts between motorized traffic and pedestrians and other disabled / handicapped road users? 3 Have pedestrians need for crossing the road and walking safely alongside it been adequately provided for? 4 Have measures been taken to reduce the accident risk for children going to and from roadside schools (Pedestrian guardrail may be needed to prevent children from running out into the road)? Details not available Yes, Pedestrians will have conflict with traffic on elevated road while crossing the road Zebra Crossings with Pelican signals proposed Details not shown

23 CHECKLIST 16 SAFETY AUDIT FOR VULNERABLE ROAD USERS Sl. # DESCRIPTION OBSERVATIONS 5. Have the need of cyclists and other nonmotorised vehicles been provided Cyclist will cross the road along with pedestrian 6. Where necessary, is fencing installed to guide pedestrians and cyclists at crossings or overpasses? Details not available

24 SAFETY AUDIT FOR VULNERABLE ROAD USERS Sl # SAFETY ISSUES/CONCERNS OBSERVATIONS 1 Zebra crossing proposed at the merging of 2.56% down gradient / 2.5% up gradient Two sets of Raised Bar markings proposed on down gradients to warn the drivers 2 It will be difficult for the speeding vehicle to stop on down gradient Pelican signal have been proposed to stop the traffic

25 SAFETY ENHANCMENT SPEED REDUCTION BY HORIZONTAL GEOMETRY Design speed at the intersection shall be 40% of approach speed As elevated highway design speed is 80 km/hr, speed intersection shall be 32 km/hr A reverse curve of 60m radius provided 200m before intersection i.e. a design speed of 30 km/hr A15mcurveprovidedatintersectionwithAurbindo Marg i.e. a design speed of 15 km/hr

26 STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE (IRC )

27 SAFETY ENHANCMENT RAISED BAR MARKINGS AS PER IRC 35 (2015)

28 SAFETY ENHANCMENT RAISED TABLE TOP CROSSING AS PER IRC 103(2012) Signalized turning pockets may be provided where leftturning volumes are high. Raised table top crossings may also be introduced and shall invariably be provided at slip roads, with a minimum 20-seoond pedestrian signal, to allow pedestrian and cyclists to cross the road safely and comfortably at the same level. Table top with flat surface will be preceded followed by the gradient at 1:15

29 SAFETY ENHANCMENT RAISED TABLE TOP CROSSING AS PER IRC 103(2012)

30 ESTIMATION OF PEDESTRIAN TRIPS Zoning of Project Site (INA Metro stn.) (AIIMS Metro stn.) (South-ex Metro stn.)

31 ESTIMATION OF PEDESTRIAN TRIPS Zone wise distribution of Housing units and office complex FLAT TYPE NO. OF DWELLING UNITS ZONE 1 ZONE 2 ZONE 3 Type Type Type Type Type Type Total Zone No. Office Complex (in sqm) 2 52, ,000

32 ESTIMATION OF PEDESTRIAN TRIPS Assumptions for Daily Trip Estimation Trip Factor Assumption Average house hold size 4 Per Capita Trip Rate (PCTR) 2 Peak Hour Trip Share 10% of Daily Trips

33 Assumptions for PT Trip Estimation ESTIMATION OF PEDESTRIAN TRIPS Type of Housing PT Share (%) Type 2 and Type 3 80% Type 4, Type 5, Type 6 & Type 7 40% Office complex 70% Estimated Trips Zone Daily PT Trips Peak PT Trips Influence Metro Station INA South ex AIIMS

34 ESTIMATED TRAFFIC VOLUME ON MAJOR ROADS Road Name Direction of Traffic Peak Hour Traffic (No. of Vehicles) Baba Banda Singh Bahadur Setu Aurobindo Marg To Aurobindo marg From Aurobindo marg From AIIMS Ramp AIIMS to INA INA to AIIMS C.B. Marg To Thyagraj stadium Source: Barapullah Phase 1 traffic data (2013), PWD, Aurobindo Marg and CB marg traffic data (2015), RITES

35 ALTERNATIVE OPTION EVALUATION 1. AT-GRADE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING FACILITY 2. FOOT OVER BRIDGE OVER BBSB SETU 3. SUBWAY UNDER AUROBINDO MARG

36 WALKING DISTANCE MEASUREMENT FOR ALL OPTIONS FOB Meter AT-GRADE FOOT OVER BRIDGE SUBWAY

37 ALTERNATIVE OPTION EVALUATION AT-GRADE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING FACILITY

38 STUDY OBJECTIVES Evaluation of pedestrian/vehicular delay and queue lengths for different scenarios to analyse the requirement of pedestrian facilities for safe crossing of pedestrians

39 Simulation Model Development

40 NEED FOR SIMULATION The micro-simulation models not only build confidence in the proposal but also: Model vehicular/pedestrian conflict realistically for accessing impact of various scenarios on delay/queue lengths to evaluate guidelines as per IRC Models vehicular and pedestrian behaviour accurately with scientifically calibrated models Provides credibility on the estimated delays and queues, considering various dynamic factors such as arrival rates, speeds/accelerations/ Helps model scenarios such as violations and assessment of Intelligent transport systems efficacy such as push button signals. Software Used: PTV VISSIM is a microscopic, time step and behavior based simulation model and it is the most powerful tool available for simulating multi-modal traffic flows, including cars, trucks, buses, heavy rail, trams, LRT, bicyclists and pedestrians.

41 SIMULATION METHODOLOGY Geometric Data (Road Network) Data Collection and Compilation Data Processing & Analysis Traffic/Pedestrian Data (Volumes, Composition) Network Setup in VISSIM (Simulation Software) Use calibrated parameters Calibration and Validation of the Simulation Model for peak hour Evaluation and comparison of Proposed Models Observations and Inferences AM Peak Controlled and Uncontrolled Scenario year 2016 AM Peak Controlled Scenario and violations year 2021 Capacity Analysis with grade separated options

42 MODEL INPUT PARAMETERS Parameters Warm up period of 900secs Driver Behavior Conflict areas Reduced speed area Give way coding Lateral gap Vehicle speed Lane changing distance Gap Acceptance Model Inputs Vehicular Volume Input Pedestrian Volume Input Signal timings Vehicle /Pedestrian classification and related properties Evaluations Base Model Proposed Scenario

43 SIMULATION GLOBAL PARAMETERS The simulation model is set to simulate 15 Minutes + 1 Hour of which first 15 minutes are modelled as buffer time for the build of the simulation model and last 1 hour is the peak hour. All observations were taken 3600 simulation seconds of the peak hour operations. As all micro-simulation models are stochastic in nature, there is a degree of randomness associated with all distributions. The random seed parameter controls the random number generator in the simulation. Simulation runs with identical input files and random seeds generate identical results. A micro-simulation model must therefore be run with different random seed values to average the stochastic variations in the model. The model runs with five different random seed values, from which the results are taken and averaged before presentation.

44 ASSUMPTIONS Pedestrian speed -1.2 m/sec (as per IRC ) Pedestrian Peak Composition : 60% Men, 30% Women, 10% Child Effects of pedestrian grouping, gap acceptance response to approaching vehicle, pedestrian crossing speed variations, compliance to signals For all scenarios with signalized crossing for pedestrians, the green time is kept at 20 seconds for pedestrians phase as per IRC guidelines

45 NETWORK SETUP Data Processing & Analysis Links And Connectors (Road Network) Vehicle Types with acceleration and desired speed curves Calibrated driving/pedestrian behavior parameters Calibrated driving behavior parameters are taken from the consultants previous simulation work. References our given at the end of the presentation

46 AVERAGE TRAFFIC COMPOSITION (BARAPULLAH DOWNSTREAM) Traffic Composition Desired Speed range Vehicle type Mean Desired Speed Range Car 65 Km/Hr Km/hr Two Wheeler 45 Km/Hr Km/hr

47 LITERATURE REVIEW CRITICAL GAP Min. Gap Acceptance Time: The vehicle/pedestrian must wait at red bar if the current time gap is less than the value which has been entered. Average gap accepted by the pedestrians : 5.02 s to 7.19 s based on gender and 4.73 s to 7.76 s based on age. Priority rules are used in Vissim to model gap acceptance behaviour

48 Uncontrolled Crossing Scenario with No Signals EVALUATION CRITERIA UNCONTROLLED CROSSING As per IRC , for providing controlled crossing following criteria needs to be evaluated: Peak Hour volume of pedestrians(p) and Vehicles(V) : PV 2 >2x10 8 Speed of approaching vehicles is more than 65kph Waiting time for pedestrians/vehicles becomes too long (evaluated using simulation) Accident data indicating more than 5 accidents per year due to vehicle collision Table below indicate the level of service limits as per IRC

49 EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR CONTROLLED CROSSING Controlled Crossing Scenario with No Signals As per IRC High pedestrians/vehicular volume increase cycle time beyond 120 seconds (Evaluated using Micro simulation) Vehicular traffic demands uninterrupted flow At-grade crossing fails to mitigation problems related to accident.

50 DELAY AND QUEUE MEASUREMENT SECTIONS Queue counter locations Queue Counter

51 TERMINOLOGY Vehicle delay: Average delay of all vehicles/pedestrians The delay of a vehicle in leaving a travel time measurement is obtained by subtracting the theoretical (ideal) travel time from the actual travel time. Average/Maximum queue length

52 Observations Base Year 2016 AM Peak Uncontrolled Scenario

53 AM PEAK UNCONTROLLED SCENARIO MODEL SNAPSHOT Model evaluated for 3 gap acceptance levels, of 4 seconds, 5.5 seconds and 7 seconds, with 4 seconds representing most aggressive pedestrian behaviour No Signals

54 AM PEAK UNCONTROLLED SCENARIO ESTIMATED DELAY

55 AM Peak Uncontrolled Scenario Estimated Delay Observations Average Vehicular delay for all critical gap acceptance value is more than 95 seconds, with maximum estimated average delay of 111 seconds for critical gap acceptance value of 4 seconds. For pedestrian movement average delay at critical gap values of 4 seconds, 5.5 seconds, 7 seconds, are 24 seconds, 26 seconds and 48 seconds respectively, for the movement from NBCC Complex to Metro station and 24 seconds, 26 seconds and 39 seconds respectively, for the movement from Metro station to NBCC Complex, indicating level of service C-D Maximum pedestrian delay are estimated at 87 seconds for NBCC Complex to metro station movement and 70 seconds for Metro Station to NBCC Complex movement

56 AM Peak Uncontrolled Scenario Percentile Delay Values For gap acceptance of 4 seconds and 5.5 seconds, 90% of the delay values are less than 43 sec and 42 sec. For gap acceptance of 7 seconds, only 50% of the delay values are fit in the range for LOS C for the movement for the side.

57 AM Peak Uncontrolled Scenario Estimated Vehicular Queue Length Average queue lengths for Vehicles at Pedestrian Crossing (in mts) Critical Gap Acceptance (4 Seconds) Critical Gap Acceptance (5.5 Seconds) Critical Gap Acceptance (7 Seconds) m m m

58 Observations Base Year 2016 AM Peak Controlled Scenario

59 AM Peak Controlled Scenario Model Snapshot Model evaluated for cycle time 90 seconds and 120 seconds With Signals

60 AM Peak Controlled Scenario Estimated Delay Average Vehicular delay for both cycle time is less than 21 seconds, which is significant improvement from value of more than 95 seconds estimated in uncontrolled scenario

61 AM Peak Controlled Scenario Estimated Delay Observations For cycle time of 90 seconds is average delay is 29 second for both movements For cycle time of 120 seconds, average delay increases to 37 seconds for towards metro station movement and 41 seconds for opposite movement. Maximum Pedestrian delay is estimated at 54 seconds with cycle time 120 seconds, maximum vehicular delay at 40 seconds for cycle time 90 seconds It is further observed that average values indicate the 90% percentile delay values for all the movements,

62 Average Queue Lengths Cycle time 90 seconds AM Peak Controlled Scenario Estimated Vehicular Queue Length Maximum Queue Length Cycle time 120 seconds Average Queue Lengths Maximum Queue Length 23.39m m 13.77m 95m

63 AM Peak Controlled Scenario Estimated Queues Observations Average queue lengths is estimated at more than 24m for cycle time 90 seconds Average queue lengths reduced to 13m for cycle time 120 seconds, Maximum queue length is estimated with cycle time 90 seconds at 120m Cycle time of 120 seconds provided overall better level of service for vehicles, Cycle time 90 seconds provided better LOS for pedestrians

64 Comparison of Uncontrolled & Controlled Scenarios Base year 2016

65 Comparing Average Queue Lengths for Vehicles Average queue lengths with uncontrolled scenario are very high as compared with controlled scenario It is recommended to evaluate only controlled scenarios for horizon years

66 Comparing Average Delay Average delay for pedestrians is similar in both scenarios, but for vehicles average delay reduces significantly in the controlled scenario Further, recommended to evaluate only controlled scenarios for horizon years

67 Observations Horizon Year 2021 AM Peak Controlled Scenario

68 AM Peak Controlled Scenario Year 2021 Model evaluated for cycle time 90 seconds and 120 seconds With Signals and Barapullah Downstream Volume 3679 PCU s

69 Controlled AM Peak Horizon Year 2021 Estimated Delays The graph above shows the average and maximum estimated delay for both pedestrian movement and vehicular movement for the controlled scenario

70 AM Peak Controlled Scenario Estimated Delays Observations With cycle time of 90 seconds the average estimated delay for vehicular movement is 86 seconds, which reduces to 37 seconds with cycle time of 120 seconds. Maximum delay is estimated at 142 seconds for vehicular traffic with cycle time 90 seconds For pedestrian movement, the average delay is highest with value of 42 seconds with cycle time of 120 seconds, which indicate level of service C-D.

71 Controlled AM Peak Estimated Queue Length Average estimated queue lengths are 175m & 60m with cycle time of 90 seconds & 120 sec. Recommended to have a cycle time of 120 seconds, with 20 seconds pedestrians phase,

72 Observations Horizon Year 2021 AM Peak Violations Scenario

73 Estimated Delay Controlled AM Peak Cycle time : 120 seconds It is observed with cycle time 120 seconds, that as violations increase the average delay for vehicles increase, at level of 20% average estimated delay is 70 seconds which is 30 seconds higher if no violations are observed.

74 Observations Horizon Year Capacity Analysis

75 OBSERVATIONS WITH CONTROLLED SCENARIO Need for grade separated option for the horizon years Cycle time of 120 seconds is used. Year Estimated Downstream Volumes Veh/Hr (PCUS) Average queue length(m) Average Maximum Queue Length(m) (3442) (3615) (3795) (3975) (4695) (4930) The road capacity of the section is estimated near 3800 PCU/Hour with cycle time 120 seconds In 2024, estimated volumes near capacity and the average queue lengths are estimated at 184m which indicate the controlled scenario is no more suitable atgrade pedestrian controlled crossing as higher green phase would be required for vehicles

76 OBSERVATIONS WITH CONTROLLED SCENARIO Need for grade separated option for the horizon years Cycle time of 150 seconds is used. Year Estimated Downstream Volumes PCU S and (Veh/Hr) Average queue length(m) Average Maximum Queue Length(m) (3442) (3615) (3795) (3975) (4695) (4930)

77 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Control Type Year 2016 Traffic (Level of service (LOS)) Year 2021 Traffic (Level of service (LOS)) Year 2024 and Beyond Uncontrolled Pedestrian LOS : C Vehicle LOS: Poor - - Controlled Cycle time 90 seconds Pedestrians: LOS B Vehicles LOS : Good Recommended Option Pedestrians: LOS C-D Vehicles LOS: Poor LOS very Poor Vehicular Traffic Cycle Time 120 Seconds Pedestrians: LOS B Vehicles LOS : Poor Pedestrians: LOS C-D Vehicles LOS: Good Recommended Option LOS very Poor Vehicular Traffic Grade Separated - - Recommended Option

78 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Uncontrolled crossing is not recommended due to high vehicular delays available Violations by pedestrians have significant effect on the delay for the vehicular traffic Controlled crossing is required for providing better LOS for upstream volumes more than 2400 PCU/hr on BBSB setu In this case, while proposing signals, the queue length for vehicles needs to be considered as it may extend on the main carriageway of Aurbindo marg Continuous increase in queue length on BBSB setu (downstream traffic) for Horizon years. Need for grade separated pedestrian facility after Horizon year 2024

79 PEDESTRIAN VULNERABILITY As per IRC code IRC , to qualify as a grade separated pedestrian crossing facility, a location should have: Where, P = Peak hour pedestrian flow and V = Peak hour vehicular volume The value of PV 2 /10 8 higher than or equals to 2 for any location indicates high conflict between pedestrian across movement and flow of traffic. Thus, need for a grade separated pedestrian facility.

80 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INCLUDING ACCESS 3 AND 4 WITH PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY Access-3 Access-4 PEDESTRIAN SUBWAY DETAILS ACCESS -4 DETAILS

81 ALTERNATIVE OPTION EVALUATION FOOT OVER BRIDGE ACROSS BBSB SETU

82 F.O.B ACROSS BBSB SETU Metro Station PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT NBCC COMPLEX Location Peak hour Pedestrian Across Volume (2021) Peak hour Vehicular Volume (2021) PV 2 /10 8 Across BBSB SETU The high value of PV 2 /10 8 shows the need of grade separated pedestrian facility.

83 CROSS-SECTION OF FOB OPTION Option for F.O.B over the BBSB Setu require minimum height of meters to maintain the vertical clearance of 5.5 m free above roadway.

84 SUBWAY BELOW AUROBINDO MARG Metro Station Metro Station NBCC COMPLEX Location Peak hour Pedestrian Across Volume (2021) Peak hour Vehicular Volume (2021) PV 2 /10 8 Across Aurobindo marg The high value of PV 2 /10 8 shows the need of grade separated pedestrian facility. Proposal may be adopted as per conclusion of all scenarios.

85 CROSS-SECTION OF SUBWAY OPTION Access to Delhi Haat and INA Metro station entry/exit Land requirement for Subway entry/exit

86 REFERENCES 1: *Marisamynathan., Vedagiri Perumal Study on pedestrian crossing behavior at signalized intersections, Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering : *Chaudhari, Shah, Arkatkar Examining Effect Of Individual Characteristics On Walking Speed 1 At Un-signalized Mid-block Crossings, 96th Annual Transportation Research Board meeting, Washington D.C. 3. Bains M S, Ponnu B, Arkatkar S S (2012). Modelling of traffic flow on Indian expressways 49 using simulation technique. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 43, Bains M S, Anshuman Bhardwaj, Shriniwas Arkatkar, S. Velmurugan (2013) Effect of 1 Speed Limit Compliance on Roadway Capacity of Indian Expressways, 2nd Conference 2 of Transportation Research Group of India (2nd CTRG) 5. Arasan, V.T., and Koshy, R. Z. (2005). Methodology for modelling highly heterogeneous traffic flow. J. of Transp. Engg., 131, Velmurugan, S., Errampalli, M., Ravinder, K., Sitaramanjaneyulu, K. and Gangopadhyay, S Critical evaluation of roadway capacity of multi-lane high speed corridors under heterogeneous traffic conditions through traditional and microscopic simulation models. Journal of Indian Roads Congress, 71 (3),

87