Category: Transportation

Airport wayfinding: Easy for everyone

A broad view of the inside of an airport building with people coming and going. Airport wayfinding is good for everyone..Airlines are working to improve accessibility, but airports also need to step up. People with disability are making regular complaints, and older people are likely to just give up travelling by air. Not good for the travel industry or tourism. So a well researched guide is welcome in this space. Wayfinding is far more than just good signage – it starts with the whole building design. Airport wayfinding is about the customer experience and promoting independent travel. That’s regardless of age or ability.

Enhancing Airport Wayfinding for Aging Travelers and Persons with Disabilities is a comprehensive guide for wayfinding professionals, signage designers, and interior designers. It is published by the US Transportation Research Board’s Airport Cooperative Research Program. It comes with a checklist that emphasises community consultation as part of their universal design approach to wayfinding. The PDF is free but you need to sign in.

Make flying less miserable

Inside the cabin of an aircraft, people are queuing in the aisle to take their seatsWhat brings repeat business to an airline? Improving snack selection, smiling staff, warm welcome messages on video screens? None of these. Anyone who has travelled by air, even those who do it regularly, will know that the aircraft itself is rarely the issue. The issue is anxiety. And you can double that for anyone with a cognitive or physical condition which makes it more difficult. So what can be done to make flying less miserable?

An interesting article in FastCompany explains how the anxiety begins before leaving home. Will I miss my flight? Is my baggage under the weight limit and will it arrive safely? Will there be room for my carry-on? And in the current situation, will I catch COVID? The anxiety continues with queues for passport control, waiting for baggage and finally getting to the destination. No wonder travel is tiring.

So the answer to improving customer satisfaction and repeat business is finding ways to reduce anxiety and smooth the the travel experience. The article makes no mention of travellers who need additional supports, but the content of the article has some good points. It is basically about designing the travel experience to be more convenient and easy to use – aligning with universal design concepts. 

A woman in a blue dress is on a travelator with suitcases.There are lessons here for any business selling an experience. The title of the FastCompany article is, Three shockingly obvious ways to make flying less miserable. 

Airport design can improve travelling experience

Aerial view of a large airport showing seating and shops.

Whether people fly once or twenty times a year, their stress levels are similar. And familiarity with airports does not reduce stress. Many other factors add to increase tension and negative responses. Travel excitement can easily become travel stress. Long waits in security lines, and getting lost in the terminal are just two stress factors. But airport design can improve the travelling experience. 

Airport design has a major role to play in reducing stress levels for travellers. A research study looked at how stress levels are affected by different scenarios within the airport, and what conditions help alleviate this stress. More importantly, what design features create or alleviated stress.

The study found that security screening was the most stressful. Stress reducers were found to be additional seating, art, signage and access to live greenery. Ready availability of charging points for laptops and phones and more personal space also help to reduce stress.

Improving the Air Travelers Experience Through Airport Design is a thesis that has a lot more detail on airport design including security screening, wayfinding, use of colour and visual information. Most people are able to deal with the stressors of air travel, but for those who can’t, improved design elements might make air travel possible. 

 

Inclusive transit: It’s not the vehicle, it’s the built environment

An older woman using a walking cane walks over a paved section towards the roadway.What is the potential of autonomous vehicles for people who currently don’t drive? And how do public transit organisations get to understand the issues for this group? Answer: ask the potential users. So a focus group study was set up to find out. The researchers found that regardless of the vehicle type, the built environment was a major barrier to using public transport. So even if autonomous vehicles are well designed, if the built environment isn’t accessible, it won’t help as much as first thought. However, transport experts learned that they need to do more work on their policies and strategies to be more inclusive.

Title of the article is, “A focus group study on the potential of autonomous vehicles as a viable transportation option: Perspectives from people with disabilities and public transit agencies”. Institutional access is via Science Direct, or you can ask for a free copy from the authors on ResearchGate. The study was carried out in Texas, USA.

Abstract: Autonomous vehicle (AV) technology is becoming one of the most promising alternatives to improve mobility for people with disabilities. Nevertheless, how people with disabilities perceive AV as transportation services has not been explored. Also, limited information exists about how public transit agencies comprehend and perceive autonomous vehicle transportation (AVT) services. This study discusses mobility issues for people with disabilities and explores the potential of AVT to serve that population, particularly those with visual impairments or physical disabilities. Researchers conducted six focus groups comprising people with disabilities (N = 23) and public transit service experts (N = 10) in Austin, Texas and Houston, Texas. Each session was audio-recorded and analyzed using conventional content analysis. This study identified people with disabilities’ mobility issues related to: (1) current transit services (including fixed-route and paratransit services) and (2) the quality of neighborhood built environments. Both people with disabilities and transit experts expected that AVT could mitigate current mobility issues, especially in improved built environments. However, participants with disabilities also expressed concerns and anxieties regarding AVT. Transit experts agreed that more targeted strategies would be needed to overcome possible barriers to AVT for people with disabilities. This study provides insights on shaping AVT strategies and policies relevant to improving mobility for people with disabilities.

Bus and tram stops by universal design

A young woman is sitting in a bus shelter and looking down the road. The shelter is lit and has an information board. Bus and tram stops by universal design.Public transport is often perceived as an inefficient way to travel, especially in terms of time taken. Not good for customer service or engagement. A new research paper reports on a detailed analysis of bus and tram stop positioning using a holistic universal design approach.

The following scenario from the paper’s conclusions will be familiar to some:

“To get from my house to the nearest restaurant is a mile-and-a-half walk, which takes me about 30 minutes each way. To get to the same restaurant by bus, I must walk half a mile, then cross a heavily traveled arterial street with no pedestrian protection to arrive at the nearest stop (it’s unprotected) for a route that passes the restaurant. Once the bus arrives, I have to ask the driver where the bus is going, since there’s no signage at the stop, pay the fare, and then watch as the bus stops six times in the remaining mile, all of those stops on the same arterial street I just crossed to board the bus. It takes me 10 minutes to walk the half-mile to the bus stop, and according to the Met Transit schedule, it takes the bus another 20 minutes to negotiate the remaining mile to the restaurant, so walking or riding the bus are equivalent in terms of time spent. It’s the sort of bus service that encourages people to drive a car instead.”

A universal design approach looks at the whole area and the street linkages that encourage active travel. The article addresses the placement and design of the stops in detail. There’s some joined up thinking for the eighteen elements identified including: safety, convenience, lighting, routing patterns, width of footpaths and pedestrian activity. The pros and cons of different stop placements are listed in a table. The research found that add-ons, such as WiFi and USB ports, were not highly regarded, but service frequency and faster travel times were. Shelters at stops and up to date information were critical design elements.

A transit stop in itself serves more than one purpose: it signals the presence of a transit service, information about the service, information about surrounding destinations, and a place to wait. This article draws together the many elements that transport designers should consider in providing, what is in essence, a good customer service experience.

The title of the article is: Urban Design of On-Street Stops and Road Environments: A Conceptual Framework.

Abstract

Transit stops should be situated where they are convenient to use and the safety of passengers and alternative road users has been taken into consideration.

A review of literature has indicated that there are some important factors that should be taken into consideration at the design and planning stage. These factors have been found to have the ability to influence the location of a transit stop and transit shelter.

The underlying focus of this paper is that on-street stops and their connecting roads are viewed as a holistic environment, instead of an ordinary place or location for transit modes to make a stop. This environment includes elements such as: Accessibility through street connectivity, street and road design, and transit stop design.This paper develops a conceptual model that links the various variables together, highlighting how one affects the other and their impact on the overall ability to produce a good passenger experience, which is the fundamental goal of any successful on-street stop design.

This paper concludes that transit stops are easier to locate when there is high street connectivity which determines to a large extent how transit passengers gain access to transit service. Also, proper design and configuration of on-street stops and connecting roads lead to increased safety, thereby leading to increased ridership and revenue and also impact how everyone on the street interacts with the transit system.

 

Towards user-centric transport in Europe

Woman with a baby stroller using the platform lift to get onto the raised bus stop platform .The bus stop is a tube shaped shelter. User-centric transport.Transportation researchers in Europe are seeking the best solutions for innovative and inclusive mobility. The Mobility 4EU project is all about the user perspective in different types of transport. It covers technological, social, legal and economic aspects of mobility and transportation. The project ended in March 2019. It resulted in several conference papers published in a 2020 book by SpringerLink titled Towards User-Centric Transport in Europe 2. This follows the 2019 publication under the same title. Some of the chapters are freely available on ResearchGate – use a Google search to find them. 

Three chapters from ResearchGate

Mainstreaming the Needs of People with Disabilities in Transport Research argues mainstreaming disability should not exclude conducting disability-related transport research. Using the method of mainstreaming disability does not exclude the necessity of conducting special disability-related transport research. Available on ResearchGate.

Universal Design as a Way of Thinking about Mobility looks at universal design as a policy objective for transport policy using the Norwegian experience as an example. Universal design is a useful vision, but a difficult policy objective. It’s also available on ResearchGate. 

Bus driver helps woman with her wheelie walkerOlder People’s Mobility, New Transport Technologies and User-Centred Innovation reports on findings from four focus groups examining mobility challenges and automated vehicles were also discussed. There were mixed feelings about automated vehicles, often dependent upon the individual’s willingness to accept technology taking over their own skills and abilities, trust in the technology and concerns over future built environments. It’s also available on ResearchGate. 

There are other chapters on active mobility, car sharing, mobility as a service, and the door to door travel chain. 

 

Counting costs that don’t count

Road workers in hi-vis vests are laying bitumen. Counting costs don't count.
Workers repairing the road

Ever wondered why economic arguments seem to fall on stony ground even when they’ve been well researched and even asked for? Seems politicians’ personal experience counts more when decisions are being made. A Norwegian researcher wanted to find out why road-building priorities diverge from those suggested by cost-benefit analysis. It is likely that many other policy decisions are made in a similar way, not just road investments. That’s why sometimes counting costs don’t count.

Here is an excerpt from the findings about why factors other than cost criteria mean that counting costs don’t count:

Political institutions have created a kind of gift relationship in the road sector, with the state as donor and municipalities as recipients.

To the extent that the state cannot scrutinize all assumptions and calculations of traffic, costs and benefits, an information asymmetry arises and favours the local receivers.

In cases of local/national conflict of interest, some key politicians and other stakeholders at the donor side either have their own agendas (such as campaigning), or their loyalty is with the recipient rather than the donor (society).

It seems reasonable that elected representatives are less likely to vote in accordance with the benefit/cost ratios of projects the more sceptical they are to the method of CBA. When sceptical, they are apt to look for alternative decision support, even if several studies have found CBA results to be quite robust.

The intention has not been to argue that the benefit/cost ratio should be decisive when setting priorities among projects on classified roads, but rather to highlight circumstances that tend to push CBA results into the background. The principle of choosing projects with high benefit/cost ratio may be supplemented by so many other assessment criteria that the difference between professional and political judgement is dissolved.”

The title of the article is, Why don’t cost-benefit results count for more? The case of Norwegian road investment priorities. Published in Urban, Planning and Transport Research an open access article.

Abstract:

The starting point is that the benefit/cost ratio is virtually uncorrelated to the likelihood of a Norwegian classified road project entering the list of investments selected for the National Transport Plan. The purpose of the article is to explain what pushes cost-benefit results into the background in the prioritization process.

The reasons for their downgrading point to mechanisms that are at work not only in Norway. Explanatory factors are searched for in incentives for cost-ineffective action among planners, bureaucrats and national politicians, respectively, as well as in features of the planning process and the political system.

New data are used to show that the road experts’ list of prioritized projects changes little after submission to the national politicians, suggesting that the Norwegian Public Roads Administration puts little emphasis on its own cost-benefit calculations. Besides, it is shown that the petroleum revenues of the state do not provide a strong reason for neglecting cost-benefit accounts.

The overall contribution of the article is to offer a comprehensive explanation why professional and political authorities in Norway set road-building priorities diverging massively from those suggested by cost-benefit analysis.

Learning through experience

A scene of the station showing people near the ticket barrier gates. Claremont College students from different disciplines joined the EnviroLab Asia 2019 Clinic Trip to Japan. A short video shows them checking out accessibility at Umeda train station and Ogimachi Park. The trip included time with Osaka Institute of Technology’s Robotics Department working on a project. They explored robotic technologies and universal design and created a model high tech recreational space for older people. The students conclude that barrier free places are not just for people with disability – it’s about including everyone. 

Abstract:  Studying Accessibility in Japan shows the research project led by Professor Angelina Chin (history, Pomona) with students who studied universal design and accessibility in Japan during the EnviroLab Asia 2019 Clinic Trip. The group also worked with the Osaka Institute of Technology’s Robotics Department.

Editor’s note: This is a video only publication – I couldn’t find any written material other than the abstract. The download button takes you to a high definition of the video, not a document. It is a very large file.

Inclusive Light Rail Project

Two older men with winter jackets look happy as they stand by the train.The Bergen Light Rail system is a good example of what can be achieved using a universal design approach. As with most projects this size there are detractors and resisters. But it was accessibility that brought people together to design one of the most successful town planning projects in Norway.  

The rail system has brought many aspects of the city together. Not only is the light rail accessible, the whole city is more accessible now and further improvements are planned. People who said they never use public transport, now use it happily.

The key is that the inclusiveness of the design is barely noticeable. Step free access, step free carriages, automatic doors, simple displays, and effective sound and light signals are good for everyone. The architect says it is the first public transport system in Norway that utilises inclusive design at all levels. 

“When the planning of the new light rail began in 2006, inclusive design was not stated as a requirement. Many regulations must be considered in a project of this scale. This led to noise and resistance from politicians in the city, which had to be overcome before the project could start. This was followed by discussions about accessibility, the locations of stops near transfer points, transfers to bus and train and step-free transitions. 

At the early stage of the project a collaboration was established with FFO (the Norwegian Federation of Organizations of Disabled People). The design team showed them drawings and discussed the ideas with them which inspired many new solutions.”

The story is by Design and Architecture Norway and has a short video.  Norway has an overarching plan and policy – Norway Universally Designed 2025 and the update. 

 

When universal design isn’t enough

An orange tram is arriving at the light rail station.Norway, with its policy and strategies for universal design, has one of the best accessible transport systems. But physical access is not enough to encourage many non-users to catch the bus or train. So, is there a limit to the level of accessibility that should be rolled out? There will always be people with and without disability who will never use public transport. The measure of success isn’t getting more patronage from people with disability; it’s about maintaining current patronage and new travellers in the future – with and without disability.

Designing a more convenient, easy to use system is good for everyone, now and in the future. A good all round experience can encourage people to leave the car at home. That is, if the transportation takes them to where they want to go efficiently and effectively. While universal design works for most, there will always be a need for individualised solutions.

The title of the paper is, Public transport and people with disabilities – the experiences of non-users.

From the conclusion:

Lastly, our study raises the question of whether universal design or accessibility for all is a good policy objective in public transport. Many of our informants are unable to travel by public transport, even though the system is among the most universally designed available. They would be unable to travel by public transport even if implementation of the measures which constitute universal design today was close to perfect. We write this, not to deny that a good universally designed public transport system is an attractive solution, it will help many, but that there will still be some who will not be reached through the universal design agenda. Therefore, there will still be a need for individual solutions, which could increase the individual’s sense of freedom, participation in working life and value added in society among those who do not have physical and/or mental premises for travelling by public transport.

A related project is the Bergen Light Rail system.

Transport for All

Logo of Public Transport Victoria.The Disability Resources Centre’s report to the Victorian Government about the public transport system shows room for improvement. The key findings were related to the provision of travel information, priority seating, and parking. Negative public attitudes extended to harassment, abuse and even assault. Being treated with disrespect, or assisted inappropriately by transport staff was also an issue. There are 8 recommendations for the Victorian Government to consider. The title of the 49 page report is, Transport for All. It is unlikely that the findings are only applicable to Victoria. Other states might like to take note as well. An affordable and accessible public transport system is essential for all travellers in carrying out day to day life. As respondents noted, what’s good for people with disability is also good for everyone else.

It is useful to note that the Victorian Government provided funding for this report.

The Norwegian Government also has a report on why people with disability are not using their accessible public transport. It’s more than infrastructure – as noted above.

 

Mobility as a Service

Part of the front cover of the discussion paper.Public policy on transportation is desperately trying to keep up with the technology. We are looking at a shift from personally owned vehicles to mobility consumed as a service. This already happening as younger generations are choosing ride-share systems rather than car ownership. But will future mobility services be inclusive of people regardless of income, ethnic background, age or disability? 

AARP Public Policy Institute in the US has looked closely at the issues in an attempt to stay ahead of the policy curve. Their discussion paper argues that the current disruption offers an unprecedented opportunity to expand mobility for everyone. “If implemented fully and thoughtfully, Universal Mobility as a Service has the potential to lead to a more equitable transportation system, where tens of millions of non-drivers are able to more fully participate in the economic, social and civic life of their communities”. The paper rightly points out that it can’t be universal without Universal Design from vehicle design through to customer interaction. There is a video with an overview on the main Future of Transportation page. 

Public transportation systems are also discussed, as well as serving rural communities and other policy issues. There is lots to digest in this comprehensive discussion paper. The title of the report is Universal Mobility as a Service: A bold vision for harnessing the opportunity of disruption.  

Accessibility Toolbar