DESIGN PRACTICE NOTE MOBILITY VEHICLE SIMULATIONS AT PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS

Transcription

1 Approval Amendment Record Approval Date Version Description 21/05/ Initial issue under MTM 04/08/ Clearance for mobility vehicles amended and details for fencing and paving added PRINTOUT MAY NOT BE UP-TO-DATE; REFER TO METRO INTRANET FOR THE LATEST VERSION Page 1 of 6

2 Table of Contents 1. Purpose Scope Background The Issue The Requirement References Related Documents Appendices... 6 PRINTOUT MAY NOT BE UP-TO-DATE; REFER TO METRO INTRANET FOR THE LATEST VERSION Page 2 of 6

3 1. Purpose The purpose of this design practice note is to clarify MTM requirements where an existing active pedestrian crossing is to be fitted with electromagnetic gate latches. 2. Scope This Design Practice Note shall apply to all proposed modification works to active pedestrian crossings where the fencing arrangement does not comply with, or is not reasonable to be modified to comply with VRIOGS Criteria for Infrastructure at Railway Level Crossings - Pedestrian Crossings and Standard Drawing STD_C0001 Revision A Background The State Government Level Crossing Upgrade Program has identified a number of high risk pedestrian crossing sites where pedestrians have been observed forcefully opening the escape gate while a train is approaching. The installation of an electromagnetic gate latch on the escape gate should mitigate the risk that the emergency escape enclosure is used incorrectly by pedestrians wishing to cross the track when the motorised gate is closed. Fitting the sites with the electromagnetic latches without upgrading the crossing to comply with current standards, introduces a risk that a mobility vehicle(s) using the crossing may not be able to safely manoeuvre through the escape exit in a continuous movement. The user may panic and reverse back into the danger zone, or freeze. The majority of these high risk sites have fencing arrangements that were installed to former PTC standards that do not comply with current standards for mobility vehicle accessibility. While the preference is for these crossings to be upgraded to meet current standards, this is not always practical due to the location of adjacent infrastructure such as boom barriers, station platforms, signals boxes, property boundaries/fences etc. Therefore, the Design Practice Note aims to ensure that modifications to the existing pedestrian crossing do not impede the access of mobility scooters. 4. The Issue With limited funding available to upgrade existing high risk pedestrian crossing locations, completing full DDA compliant upgrade of each site would reduce the number of sites where magnetic gate latches can be installed. Given that a potential consequence of someone using the escape enclosure incorrectly is a fatality, there are strong reasons to maximise the number of sites where electromagnetic gate latches can be installed. It is therefore necessary to develop a consistent set of guidelines to adequately assess the proposed upgrade site, trying to maximise the number of sites that the latches can be fitted without introducing additional risks to mobility vehicle users. 1 Note that STD_C0001 is a draft at the time of release of this document (Version 2) PRINTOUT MAY NOT BE UP-TO-DATE; REFER TO METRO INTRANET FOR THE LATEST VERSION Page 3 of 6

4 The purpose is to ensure that pedestrian crossings can be modified to include the safety benefits afforded by electromagnetic gate latches and retain the safe passage of mobility vehicles. 5. The Requirement Where an existing pedestrian crossing fencing layout does not comply with current standards, a Standard Waiver shall be submitted to determine and document if the risk of the non-compliance is acceptable. If there is a SFAIRP argument to not modify the existing fencing arrangement to meet the current standards, the designer shall use swept path modelling to demonstrate that the pedestrian enclosures allows passage of a mobility vehicle in a continuous forward movement and meets the following functional requirements: The pedestrian enclosure design shall allow safe passage of a mobility vehicle through the crossing, including the emergency escape enclosure. The pedestrian enclosure design shall allow a minimum clearance of 75mm between the defined mobility vehicle swept path and both sides of the enclosure or an obstruction. It shall be acceptable to move the escape path fence post nearest to the track to achieve the minimum swept path 75mm clearance with the mobility vehicle simulation. The edge raised pavement markers shall remain angled 90 degrees to the rail or angled towards the power gate s open position per the layout drawing, to direct visually impaired cane users to the correct open gate position. This will mitigate the risk of injury by walking into the gate edge. Additional asphalt shall be added, as required, to splay the pathway to cover the swept path of mobility vehicles and match the final position of the escape path fence post. It is acceptable for mobility vehicles to travel over the raised pavement markers, onto the additional splayed asphalt to allow safe passage into the emergency escape enclosure. The side of the motor unit and the hand rail above the motor unit facing the track shall be painted yellow. The gated emergency escape enclosure design shall ensure a second mobility vehicle closely following the first (end to end) can be stored in the safe zone clear of the tracks. The swing arm for a motor in an Alternate Arrangement (motor in the centre of the enclosure) should not impact the turning movement of the mobility vehicle due to the gate needing to be closed in order for the mobility vehicle to access the emergency escape enclosure. However, consideration shall be given for a mobility vehicle to be parked beyond the swing arm when the motorised gate opens. Refer to Figure 1. PRINTOUT MAY NOT BE UP-TO-DATE; REFER TO METRO INTRANET FOR THE LATEST VERSION Page 4 of 6

5 Figure 1 Two mobility vehicles clear of tracks. The mobility vehicle scooter swept path shall be assessed to determine the worst case scenario which should be governed by which side of the crossing the emergency escape enclosure is positioned. The two crossing scenarios to be considered are: The centreline of the mobility vehicle aligned with the centreline of the crossing; and The centreline of the mobility vehicle offset 450mm left of the centreline in the direction of travel (simulating a vehicle travelling in the centre of the left lane of the 1800mm wide track crossing). The design shall include movements into and from the enclosure for the following mobility vehicle requirements (Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002) Maximum width 750mm by maximum length 1300mm (note that AS specifies a maximum width of 800mm. It is understood this is for a parking area and the actual vehicle width is 750mm as has been adopted by DSAPT (minimum width between bus wheel arches) and Main Roads (QLD) and Qld. Government. Turn 180 degrees within an area of 2070mm by 1540mm. Specific vehicle parameters such as wheel track width, axle centres and maximum turning angle can be defined by the designer, as long as they meet the above requirements and are documented with the design submission. These functional requirements do not allow for the following: Varied driver aptitude, or defining a speed at which the mobility vehicle movements should be modelled. PRINTOUT MAY NOT BE UP-TO-DATE; REFER TO METRO INTRANET FOR THE LATEST VERSION Page 5 of 6

6 6. References Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002 PTV Victorian Fares and Ticketing Manual 2015 Transport and Main Roads Wheelchairs and Mobility Scooters, A guide for safe Travel in Queensland 7. Related Documents VRIOGS Criteria for Infrastructure at Railway Level Crossings - Pedestrian Crossings STD_C0001 Revision A 1 AS Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices - Railway crossings. 8. Appendices Nil PRINTOUT MAY NOT BE UP-TO-DATE; REFER TO METRO INTRANET FOR THE LATEST VERSION Page 6 of 6