Category: Transportation

Benefits and costs of footpaths

Footpaths are an essential part of any travel chain – walking and wheeling are the most basic and universal form of travel. But do we invest enough in footpaths? Compared to investment in roads and cars, probably not. That’s according to an article by Todd Litman. His recent study examines the benefits and costs of footpaths as a sustainable form of travel.

Improving walking conditions can provide many benefits. However, many streets lack footpaths and those that do exist are sub-standard.

A group of people waiting to cross the road on a a sunny day. Footpaths benefits and costs.

Litman’s article looks at cost studies in the North American context. In summary the data indicate that typical U.S. communities spend $30 to $60 annually per capita on footpaths. But footpaths only appear where there are laws to mandate them. That means that not every street has a footpath or has one on only one side of the street. This is an underinvestment in footpaths that needs to be remedied.

People who cannot drive and must use public transport and need a footpath for mobility, are seriously disadvantaged. The article compares infrastructure spending on walking (1%), cycling (2%), public transit (7%), and roads (90%). Comparisons with other factors provide more information in the article and potential funding options are discussed.

Some of the benefits

Other studies showed that increasing walking reduced vehicle miles and reduced crash rates. One study estimated that completing footpath networks would reduce vehicle miles by 3%. This would provide, per capita, about $30 in annual roadway savings, $60 in annual parking savings $180 in vehicle cost savings. Reductions in traffic congestion, pollution and health benefits add to the benefits.

Although the article calls for a significant increase in footpath spending, compared to what is spent on roads and parking, this is a small amount. Completing footpath networks also helps achieve social equity goals. The most physically and economically disadvantaged groups tend to rely more on walking including walking to transit stops.

The title of the article is, Completing Sidewalk Networks: Benefits and Costs.

From the abstract


This study examines the benefits and costs of completing urban sidewalk networks. Most communities have incomplete or lack sidewalk networks. Many of those that do exist are inadequate and fail to meet universal design standards. This is unfair to people who want to walk, and increases costs by suppressing walking and increasing motor vehicle traffic.

Recent case studies provide estimates of sidewalk expenditures and the additional investments needed to complete sidewalk networks. North American communities typically spend $30 to $60 annually per capita on sidewalks. However, they would need to double or triple these levels to complete their networks. Compared with current pedestrian spending this seems large. But it is small compared with what governments and businesses spend on roads and parking facilities, and what motorists spend on their vehicles.

Sidewalk funding increases are justified to satisfy ethical and legal requirements, and to achieve various economic, social and environmental goals. There are several possible ways to finance sidewalk improvements. These usually repay their costs through savings and benefits.

Teenagers and transport

Transport, both public and private, is the glue that holds our everyday lives together across our lifespan. Consequently, it is expected that inability to get to places and activities will have a negative effect on our lives, physically and mentally. One group that is often left out of transport studies is later age teenagers. So researchers in New Zealand decided to look at the issues for teenagers and transport.

The rate at which young people are getting their drivers licence is reducing in developed countries. Walking, cycling and using public transport are all good for physical health. But if social and economic life is restricted, how does this affect mental wellbeing?

The researchers wanted to find out how transport impacted the wellbeing of students aged 16-18 years. They used the photovoice method which puts cameras into participants’ hands to help them document and communicate issues of concern. This participatory method puts the power with those who usually have little power to generate new knowledge.

Teenagers photographed their feet to document walking as the key aspect of getting around. They all walked at some point in their journey.

Image from ScienceDirect

A montage of teenagers feet documenting the transport mode of walking.

What teenagers said

Regardless of the destination, photos and narratives of those who lived close to town and were able to walk displayed independence, happiness and positive aspects of wellbeing. The key themes emerging from the study were financial, social and mental wellbeing, safety, and barriers to choice.

The financial aspects included the cost of getting a licence and the cost of fuel when a car was available to them. Getting to sport without a car was difficult. According to one participant, even if the bus ran regularly, rugby gear wasn’t allowed on the bus.

Social and mental wellbeing was enhanced by walking and for some, listening to music at the same time. Those who lived out of town did not walk as much due to distance, but they were willing to walk to school or to a friend if it was less than an hour.

Safety for cyclists was based on infrastructure where they were competing with pedestrians or vehicles. Safety for pedestrians was related to cars and the worry about whether they would stop for crossings. Pedestrians felt more unsafe at busy times when cars are coming and going with pick ups and drop offs. Out of town there are no footpaths and the hilly terrain reduces visibility for cars.

Barriers to choice and feeling trapped at home. Weather and the dark early mornings restricted choices of how to travel. Female students said wearing skirts prevents them from cycling. The public bus system is considered inadequate and perceived by all as a major barrier.

Walking is good

Delaying licencing and driving due to financial costs had the benefit of encouraging walking and therefore improved wellbeing. However, not having a licence was an obstacle which had a negative impact on wellbeing. Safety featured prominently in the photographs especially the dilemma of whether cars would stop for them on crossings. Complicated trip chains discouraged the teenagers from making the trip.

The title of the article is, The influence of transport on well-being among teenagers: A photovoice project in New Zealand. There is partial access, but you will need institutional access to read the whole thing. Or you can read the article on ResearchGate.

There is no reference to teenagers who are unable to walk or walk long distances. Perhaps they self-selected themselves out of the project.

From the abstract

Transport mobility greatly affect teenagers׳ ability to independently access their social networks, key activities and destinations. Consequently, it makes sense to consider the role that transport plays in influencing well-being among older adolescents. The aim of this study was to investigate how older teenagers perceive the impact of transport on their well-being.

“Photovoice” uses photographs to enhance assessments of community needs, to empower participants, and to provide a comprehensive description of an issue. This method was utilized among senior secondary school students aged 16–18 in Southland, New Zealand (n=18; 50% male). Group discussions concerning transport and well-being provided richness and depth to each photograph displayed.

Transport infrastructure played a key role in supporting well-being among participants. Regardless of the destination, photos and narratives by participants who lived close to town, and who were able to walk to destinations as part of their daily trip chain, displayed independence, happiness and positive social aspects of well-being. Living farther away from town elicited photo stories of loneliness and decreased autonomy, with respect to transport.

Photovoice projects are a valuable way to engage youth and provide context for new research topics such as this. New knowledge generated by this project will inform future research focused on transport and the well-being of young people.

Inclusive Design Wheel for transport

The University of Cambridge’s Inclusive Design Team, have applied their Inclusive Design Wheel to transport. As with many frameworks, it lists a step-by-step process, but with a twist. It is a co-design process. The key principle of the Inclusive Design Wheel is that the process is highly iterative and involves users.

The Inclusive Design Wheel for Transport consists of four phases of activity: Manage, Explore, Create and Evaluate

The Inclusive Design Wheel for transport showing the four phases of the framework.

The Wheel is flexible and it is not always necessary to carry out all activities in every iteration. Successive cycles of Explore, Create and Evaluate are used to generate a clearer understanding of needs.

Each of the four phases is broken down into guiding tasks. For example, in the Explore phase, engage with users, examine user journeys, and capture wants and needs. In the Create phase, involve users, stimulate ideas, and refine ideas. In the Evaluate phase, agree success criteria, gather expert feedback and gather user feedback.

The Inclusive Design Wheel is a detailed online toolkit. While some of the steps appear obvious, the step-by-step process keeps you on track. This is a useful tool which can be applied in other contexts.

The underpinning research

The Inclusive Design Team completed their Dignity project on digital access to transport. They worked in four European cities to see how best to help travellers and providers. The aim of the project was to see how all stakeholders can help bridge the digital gap. They did this by co-creating more inclusive solutions using co-design methods. Their Inclusive Design Wheel is the result and is applicable to all aspects of public transport.

The evolution of paper-based train and bus timetables to digital formats has benefits and drawbacks. On one hand, digital formats offer more detailed information to help plan journeys. On the other, the amount of information can be overwhelming – that is, if you can find what you are looking for. And if you don’t have access to digital services then this format is of no use at all.

At first glance the Inclusive Design Wheel looks complex. The research team used feedback from the research project to fine tune the framework to its current form.

A graphic showing a complex circular chart with many elements. It looks very academic and take time to read and perhaps understand.

The Dignity report is long, comprehensive, and uses academic language. It details the methods in all four cities: Ancona Italy, Barcelona Spain, Flanders, Belgium, and Tilbug Netherlands.

Universally designed infrastructure planning

An aerial view of a new highway junction with overpasses.

One of the underpinning tenets of universal design is to involve users in the design process – at the beginning. Involving citizens in early stages of design can avoid costly retrofits, but more importantly, it is more likely to give people what they want. That means they are more likely to use it. Transport planning can also be universally designed. An article in The Fifth Estate argues that to leave out citizens is asking for trouble, and it is also undemocratic. Infrastructure is a public thing regardless of  who owns it, runs it or controls it. It is about good city governance. Planners need to do three things:

  1. consult and engage citizens early in infrastructure planning
  2. improve quality and access of citizen engagement at the strategic planning stages
  3. use more sophisticated strategic planning tools and practices to improve decision-making

The original article was in The Conversation. 

Digital first and last mile

A young woman is sitting in a bus shelter and looking down the road. The shelter is lit and has an information board.

Many car trips in Australia are less than 2km. So there is room for a re-think in personal e-mobility and digital solutions.  The Future of Place project recently ran an online workshop on the digital last mile. It drew together technology and data solutions to support first and last mile experience. The key question was what does the last mile of the future look like? It therefore follows: will everyone be included in the digital first and last mile solutions?

Four guests gave their expertise to the workshop. Katherine Mitchell reminded us that regular commuters have high levels of digital literacy. But not everyone has a smart device. She focused on accessibility, safety, confidence and wayfinding.

Damien Hewitt posed the idea of bus stops offering more local information, not just about transport or timetables. Stephen Coulter discussed the opportunities for micro-mobility and e-mobility. With 12 billion car trips of less than 2km made each year it’s time for transformation.

Oliver Lewis advocated for a greater level of digitisation to manage assets for real time experiences for users. He also introduced the idea of “Digital Twins”. An example of a digital twin is a digital 3D model of a real physical object or process. It helps predict how a product will perform.

Workshop participants gave their ideas via a process of “card-storming”. The results were captured in a document which is no longer on the Smart Cities Council website.  

Public transport: Trips not made

It’s easy to measure the trips made on public transport and produce statistics as a guide to transport planning. But what do you do about trips not made – how do you measure them? The only way is to ask people for their public transport stories about trips made or foregone. Qualitative research is as valid as any other method, but it doesn’t give simple answers in the form of statistics.

Iutruwita/Tasmania has no passenger rail services apart from scenic train trips for tourists. The bus is the main public transport service. Otherwise it is taxis or rides from friends and family.

Two yellow buses.

A qualitative study of 30 young people with disability in Tasmania reveals the importance of public transport in everyday life. Without access to it, people with disability are unable to work, get an education, and choose where to shop. Getting to medical appointments are difficult or missed unless someone drives them.

The researchers used community chats, World Café methods, and individual chats to gain information from participants. The research team recruited young people with disability as researchers as well as participants.

The verbatim accounts provide good insights into the importance of public transport in everyday living. This was especially the case for people who do not drive or own a car. And of course, if it is difficult for people with disability, it is likely difficult for many other people. For example parents with young children and older people.

Key points from the study

People with disability find using public transport difficult. Across the system there were tension points in physical, cognitive, digital accessibility, reliability and affordability. Briefly, the themes emerging from the study were:

– Difficulty planning the trip – confusing and poor access to information.

– Difficulty getting to the bus – unsafe surface, poor lighting, long distances.

– Nervous/uncomfortable wait for the bus – lack of real time information, no shelters or seats.

– Being vigilant on the bus – crowding, bullying, driver-passenger interactions, not knowing whereto get off.

– Stuck getting home – unpredictability of services and lack of real time information.

The sum total of the stories resulted in a refrain of “I can’t do anything”. There was a sense of restriction and missing out. “Unless you have someone to take you, you can’t go.”

The article is titled, “I have mentally cancelled a lot of trips”: Trips not made by disabled people due to public transport inequity in lutruwita/Tasmania.

There is a summary report on the Anglicare Tasmania website.

From the abstract

People with disability of all ages continue to experience transport disadvantage. Barriers to transport have been well documented. However, less is known about the consequences of journeys not made because of these barriers.

In this article, we share the trips not made and their impact on the everyday lives of 30 disabled people. The participants were disabled young people, from lutruwita/Tasmania, Australia.

Health, work, education, seeing friends/family and leisure trips are forgone due to public transport not being inclusive of disabled persons. Their stories suggest public transport use is still dependent on who you are, where you live and the complexity of the journey.

For transport equity, substantial change is needed in how the transport user is considered in transport planning and network delivery.

And even if you have access to a car…

Isolation due to private transport is also an issue if you don’t have a driver’s licence. A study by Monash University found that mental health, self-doubt and physical disability are reasons people opt not to drive. When you live in a regional area not being able to drive leads to greater isolation and barriers to work. A magazine article has more.

Put pedestrians first

Transport planners and engineers will be familiar with both the Safe System approach and the Movement and Place framework. The implicit assumption is that these approaches will put pedestrians first. But will they? The quest for reducing car use is focused on people walking and cycling more. Bike riders have successfully advocated for better cycling conditions in major cities. But has the infrastructure been beneficial for walkability and wheelability?

A universal design approach takes and inclusive whole of population view. It acknowledges that pedestrians are diverse and have varying abilities in negotiating street infrastructure.

A busy intersection in Sydney showing pedestrians, a cyclist and a bus. Put pedestrians first.

Transport planners and engineers are guided by regulations related to the concept of mobility. However, this means things like transport demands, traffic impact and land use. A pedestrian’s view of mobility is more about moving around easily, safely and without impediments.

When the issue of equity arises, it is often framed from a transport disadvantage view. That means identifying specific pedestrian groups who need special treatment or accommodations. A commonly used collective term for all these groups is “vulnerable pedestrians”. But all pedestrians are vulnerable in the presence of motor vehicles. This terminology implicitly perpetuates negative stereotypes which lead to planning assumptions that are not necessarily accurate.

Older pedestrians are not all “slow walkers” and not all slow walkers are older. Given that most older people live in the community, it is a nonsense to just do special pedestrian treatment around aged care facilities. Same thing for children – they do more than just go to school.

See more on this discussion in Jane Bringolf’s article in Sourceable titled, Planning for walkability: Put pedestrians first. If we are serious about encouraging people to get out of their cars, it’s time to put pedestrians at the top of the road user hierarchy.

Making streets safer for pedestrians

This Fast Company article poses the idea that these painted designs are safer for pedestrian. However, not everyone will be safer if there is too much visual “noise”.

Aerial view of an intersection where bright artworks are painted on the corners of the intersection.

There’s a simple way to make streets safer for pedestrians.

According to a Fast Company article, most serious accidents happen at intersections. One way to prevent them is not a new traffic signal but a bucket of paint. Street art, literally on the roadway at intersections, seems to provide one solution.

The bright colours are difficult for drivers to miss and tend to cause them to slow down. Or at least, to be more cautious and more attentive to pedestrians. If it works as a traffic calming solution then it’s a good idea. However, is it a good idea for all pedestrians?

People with cognitive conditions and reduced visual perception could find the painted surfaces distracting. While the street art is welcome on the endless asphalt, it would be good to get user testing from different groups.

Aerial view of a street intersection showing the street art painted on the road surface. There is a mix of different brightly coloured patterns.

Don’t need new signals, just a bucket of paint.

The Fast Company article has many pictures of attractive brightly coloured artworks at intersections which tell the story. The pilot project was funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies and now it’s being rolled out in different states.

More than three quarters of the projects studied saw reduced traffic crashes after the artworks were installed. Now Bloomberg Philanthropies plans to continue the work in Europe.

The title of the article is, “The ridiculously simple way to make streets safer for pedestrians”.

Photos from the Fast Company blog site.

Walking and wheeling not equitable

A survey of people with disability in England found that getting out and about in their neighbourhood difficult if not impossible. Two not-for-profit organisations ran a six month inquiry which revealed waking and wheeling is not equitable for all. Similar experiences have been identified in Australia. Footpaths and time to cross the road feature strongly.

“We believe everyone should have the right to walk or wheel around our neighbourhoods with ease, independence and confidence.”

Front cover of the report on walking and wheeling. It shows people with various mobility devices walking along a neighbourhood street.

Transport accessibility gap

Physical barriers to wheeling and walking are only part of the issue. Participants said they are afraid of negative comments from other people when walking or wheeling. Not having the right mobility aid was also an barrier to traveling safely and independently.

Disabled people take 38% fewer trips across all modes of transport than non-disabled people.  This pattern is similar for walking and wheeling. In England, for example, disabled people take 30% fewer walking trips than non-disabled people. ”

Image from the report showing a man in a wheelchair and a woman walking across a zebra crossing.

What to do about it?

The Executive Summary of the report lists 9 solutions with recommendations. First on the list is to involve people with disability in walking and wheeling policy and practice. Dedicated and well maintained footpaths are another key feature for improvements.

“It’s very frustrating seeing beautiful smooth roads for cars whilst walking on pavement surfaces that are falling apart.” Workshop participant

Image from the report showing a broken footpath. The text reads, Create dedicated pavement funding to maintain and improve pavements.

Footpath clutter, bollards, outdoor dining, and electric vehicle chargers need to be managed better. Some people don’t leave their homes on garbage collection days. Then comes the issue of interacting with cycle paths and cyclists. More formal crossings, kerb ramps and tactile paving would encourage them to walk or wheel more.

We need more time to cross the road

Transport engineers use a standard walking speed to time traffic signals at I.2m per second. UK transport guidance updated this to 1.0m per second but this is still to quick for slow walkers and people wheeling. This makes people feel unsafe and limits their ability to get out and about. Research cited by Australian researchers found that people using a cane or crutch walked 0.8m per second and people using a walker 0.63m per second.

The blog article with an overview is titled, Disabled Citizens’ Inquiry: Giving disabled people a voice in walking and wheeling policy and practice. You can also download the Executive Summary and the Full Report of the Inquiry. The report comes in alternative formats too.

Although this is report is based on English conditions, the findings support other research in Australia and elsewhere. The section on Transportation on this website has more.

Maintaining dignity on buses and trains

“Mind the Gap” on public transport has an additional meaning for people with disability and other marginalised groups. It’s not just the barriers and inconveniences, it’s also the indignity that people experience. Gaps result from barriers in infrastructure, communication systems and attitudes. Consequently, not everyone is able to maintain their dignity on buses and trains.

More than 30% of people with disability in Australia experience difficulties using public transport. Consequently, this impacts on their ability to participate in the economy and society.

A boy in a powered wheelchair is mounting the ramp into the Queensland Rail train. A woman stands behind him and the station guard looks on. A man with a baby stroller and boy wait nearby to enter the train carriage. The image is from the Access and Inclusion webpage.

Image from Queensland Transport’s Access and Inclusion Strategy.

Perceptions of dignity are about not feeling discrimination, shame or humiliation. Positive experiences of acceptance and inclusion help maintain dignity even when things might not work well. A research study in Queensland explored these issues with people with disability.

The researchers found that dignified mobility experiences were not isolated or momentary. Rather, entire travel journeys that were accessible, inclusive, equitable, promoted independence and enhanced self-worth contributed to dignified mobility experiences. And it wasn’t all about infrastructure.

Interpersonal interactions experienced in physical, digital and communication spaces across travel journeys were just as important as physical barriers. A sense of dignity came from feeling respected, appropriately helped and being treated like anyone else. Both tangible and intangible aspects of the whole journey need consideration. The researchers point to a universal design approach.

Universal design, access to accessible and inclusive information, and empathic attitudes help create dignified mobility experiences for people with disability when using buses and trains.

Picture of the Esplanade Busport showing the stop sequence of the trains from the adjoining train station

The research paper provides key information for a universal design approach to dignified journeys. They include detail on accessible and inclusive information and the need for empathic systems and staff.

The title of the article is, The dignity experience of people with disability when using trains and buses in an Australian city.

From the abstract

When transport systems are accessible and inclusive, people with disability experience dignity. When personal mobility is constrained by physical, social and/or communication, barriers, people with disability experience exclusion and risk to their dignity.

This study explored the role of trains and buses in an Australian city in supporting access, inclusion and dignified mobility experiences for people with disability. Twenty-six semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants with diverse visible and invisible disabilities.

The findings highlight the complexities involved with navigating public transport systems while maintaining dignity. Accessible and inclusive information, infrastructure, and interactions with staff ensured dignified mobility experiences.

Dignified mobility experiences represent a complex and dynamic interaction between personal experiences and preferences, impairment-specific requirements, transport infrastructure, interpersonal experiences, and information inclusivity.

Designing bus transit with universal design

Norway has a long-held commitment to universal design across all sectors. However, with the best will in the world the concept is still poorly understood in transport infrastructure. When Trondheim initiated its new rapid bus transit system, universal design underpinned the design parameters. But designing bus transit infrastructure requires some joined up thinking and joined up standards.

The Trondheim infrastructure experience

The case study of Trondheim in Norway shows how the best laid plans can go awry if there isn’t joined up thinking at the planning stage. Once this was realised the next step was finding ways to remedy the situation. That’s because Trondheim replaced their whole fleet with the new metro buses.

At a late stage in the planning process, with construction of the stations and delivery of the buses well underway, it was discovered that the stations and the buses had been built to different accessibility standards.

The new bus transit infrastructure in Trondheim. A long articulated bus in bright lime green and dark grey.

Photo of the Trondheim bus transit

In a conference paper Jacob Deichmann outlines the issues and the different ideas and lists them in a handy table. All the stations were built to Norwegian State guidelines for accessible design. The “kneeling” buses were designed and built in Belgium. But there was a big gap between bus and kerb edge. The size of the gap also depended on the skill of the driver in getting as close as possible to the kerb.

Once this discrepancy was discovered advocacy groups complained to the media and to politicians. The response was that they met the access standards, but manual flip ramps would be added. However, this does not provide equitable access as someone has to deploy the ramp taking up valuable travel time. And efficient travel times was a key element of the system.

The paper has a chart giving an overview of the different remedies suggested based on product research. It lists the various ramp systems, gap-fillers and bus pads at kerbside. The chosen solutions were training of drivers in the short term. In the medium term there was to be a trial of motorised ramps, the bus pad and a guiding system. Longer term solutions were the gap-filler method and raised platforms.

When standards and guidelines aren’t enough

Both the platform designer and the bus manufacturer followed valid guidelines and best practice. The lack of consistency in the guidelines makes it difficult for non experts in universal design to make the best choices. In the worst case scenario, following standards can prevent a universal design approach.

More training on universal design is required at the planning and procurement stage. The underlying concept of providing an equitable and accessible means of transport needs to be fully understood.

The title of the conference paper is Universal Design in the Metrobuss System of Trondheim, Norway – Challenges and Solutions.

The short video below shows the convenience of an automated Perth bus ramp deployed for a wheelchair user and then everyone else used it.

Automatic ramp on a Perth bus was used for a wheelchair user and then everyone else.

A better example of universal design is the Bergen Light Rail project.

Safe children means safe adults

Many parents would like their children to travel to school independently, but they think it’s unsafe to do so. Taking a universal design approach, if we improve pedestrian infrastructure for children, we also make it better for everyone. Safe children means safe adults.

Children are more likely to live closer to school than their parents will live to their workplaces. But do they feel safe to walk? However, walking or riding to school is at the same time workers are driving off to their workplaces – often in a hurry.

School crossing. A man with a child in each hand is crossing the road on a zebra crossing that has a crossing supervisor and an orange flag with the words, children crosing.

Prue Oswin’s survey of parents on the Sunshine Coast revealed their perceived and real barriers to safe walking for their children. Crossing roads without designated crossings was of the most concern. Crossing at roundabouts and roads without a pedestrian refuge island was also concerning. Zebra crossings were the most favoured by parents especially if they were raised. These are the same issues for people with disability and older people.

Pedestrian hot spots tell one story, pedestrian absence tells another. This is where statistical data do not measure journeys not made. Consequently, relying on such data is misleading in the quest to get more people walking and wheeling in their neighbourhoods.

The Safe System approach is about preventing traffic crashes resulting in serious injury. The basic premise is that if a driver or pedestrian makes a mistake, a serious accident is less likely. Oswin’s study shows that there are gaps in this approach that traffic engineers need to address.

Spin offs

The most obvious spin-off from more walking are the health benefits which lead to better concentration and wellbeing. Also if children get walk to and from school independently, parents, usually women, are able to increase their workforce participation. Other beneficiaries are people with mobility impairments, and people who are blind or have low vision. Parents themselves might also be encouraged to walk more.

Designing for people at either end of the age bell curve means that everyone else is included. Consequently, the often forgotten group, children, are key piece of the inclusion jigsaw.

The title of Oswin’s conference paper is, Activating transport to schools with a Safe System, renewable energy and community engagement. There is also a slide deck with lots of photos, graphics and data that underpin the paper and the research.

An academic research paper supports these findings. The paper is titled, Children’s and parents’ perceptions on safe routes to schools: a mixed-methods study investigating factors influencing active school travel.

Abstract

The proportion of children walking or riding to school is dwindling in Australia, while pedestrian injuries are among children’s leading causes of death. A mixed-methods survey was conducted on children and parents of two schools in Australia to understand travel behaviours and attitudes towards active transport to school (ATS).

Results showed that road safety perceptions predicted ATS, unlike distance to school and stranger danger. The design of the routes to school was found to be crucial in facilitating ATS, to address the fear of road danger. Practical implications include the need for more controlled pedestrian crossings and protected bike paths.

Feeling safe, walking and wheeling

If we want to get everyone walking and wheeling for their health, and the health of the environment, a few things have to change. If people don’t feel safe walking and wheeling, they will avoid the journey or take the car. Many people who are blind or have low vision fear a collision with vehicles and cyclists. That makes them feel unsafe on our streets, and means they are less likely to venture from well-known routes in their community.

Pedestrians who are blind or have low vision have difficulty knowing when it is safe to cross at non-signalised crossing points. This is compounded by traffic volume and speed. Not every person with low vision uses a cane or dog indicating to drivers they have reduced vision.

Two young women stand at a pedestrian crossing. One is holding the arm of the other. There is a car in the background on the crossing. Are they feeling safe walking and wheeling?

If you want to know more about the issues encountered by people who are blind or have low vision, take a look at the study by Victoria Walks. They conducted a survey of people with vision impairment and carried out some street audits. The aim was to gain a better understanding of the road and footpath safety issues encountered by this group.

“Difficulty in judging whether it is safe to cross the road” was the biggest overall concern, followed by tripping hazards on the footpath. Crossing the road at non-signalised intersections was not an option for many. Given that most mid-block crossings and intersections are not signalised, this severely limits this group’s mobility. But they are not the only ones. People with poor depth perception and some cognitive conditions find it difficult to judge when to cross.

Interaction with other road users

Drivers are required to give way to pedestrians. However, at traffic lights for example, motorists failing to give way was the biggest concern for people who are blind or have low vision. Failing to give way to pedestrians on the footpath across driveways was another real problem. Shared paths with cyclists, pedestrians with dogs, and just other pedestrians were also an issue.

People who are blind or have low vision are not the only ones with poor road and footpath experiences. Consequently, if we can get it right for this group, every pedestrian should benefit.

An older woman wearing a straw hat, carrying an orange bag, and using a walking cane, crosses the road.

Site audit issues for safe walking and wheeling

Issues common to most areas audited were:
– Tripping hazards and obstructions on the footpath such as low hanging tree branches, shop sandwich boards, and outdoor dining.
– Poor kerb ramp design that potentially sends pedestrians with a vision impairment into the middle of an intersection rather than directly across the road.
– Differences between the width of a crossing and the width of the kerb ramp used to access it causing a potential trip hazard.
– Missing or poorly functioning Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSI) or audio tactiles.

The title of the report is Road Safety for Pedestrians who are Blind or Have Low Vision. There is more detail about each audit location in Victoria and what was recommended. Also more detail from the survey, all of which is instructive.

Shared spaces as successful places

Artist impression of evening in George Street Sydney showing a shared street.
An artist’s impression showing the QVB stop in the George Street pedestrianised zone

What role do shared spaces play in “successful places”? And what are shared spaces anyway? A report compiled by the Transport Research Centre at UTS for the NSW Government attempts to answer these questions. The focus of the report was to understand how shared spaces can enhance the development of “successful places”, a key strategic priority of Transport. 

Varied terminology on the topic of shared spaces is not helpful and needs a standard definition. Another issue is whose opinion counts most. Is it user perceptions or transport performance measurements? And implementation is difficult even though there are many guidelines and there are few case studies.

What is a shared space?

The report offers the following definition.

“A public street or intersection that is intended and designed to be used by all modes of transport equally in a consistently low-speed environment. Shared space designs aim to reduce vehicle dominance and prioritise active mobility modes. Designs can utilise treatments that remove separation between users in order to create a sense of place and facilitate multi-functions.”

 Findings

Broadly, high level critical findings include:

  • The shared space design concept is one tool for forming successful places across the community.
  • A spectrum of intervention and design options are available to transport professionals to achieve a shared space within the road network.
  • Defining relationships between design parameters and performance metrics are key to determining the factors leading to implementing successful shared space.
  • Current guidelines, standards and practical processes limit the application of novel shared space solutions.

The title of the Shared Spaces Review is, Evaluation and Implementation of Shared Spaces in NSW: Framework for road infrastructure design and operations to establish placemaking. Examination of existing Shared Space knowledge. The Transport Research Centre, University of Technology Sydney conducted the research for Transport for NSW. 

The report is comprehensive and detailed with some international case studies to illustrate issues and findings. The report provides recommendations and current best practice for Transport for NSW. 

Intergenerational shared spaces 

Having interaction between generations, particularly older and younger people is beneficial for everyone. Julie Melville and Alan Hatton-Yeo discuss the issues in a book chapter, Intergenerational Shared Spaces in the UK context. 

The authors discuss how the generations are separated by life activities and dwelling places. The design of the built environment is a major concern because is not conducive to sharing spaces across the generations.

While this book is not specifically about universal design, it is about inclusive practice and social inclusion.

Google Books has the full book, Intergenerational Space, edited by Robert M Vanderbeck and Nancy Worth.

What happens when tactiles fail

Taking another perspective, Dean Homicki has some short videos explaining the details that matter and why. His latest video is the placement of tactiles at a railway crossing. He titled it, “Why the chicken shouldn’t, couldn’t and didn’t cross the rail-road“.

Walking in Berlin

A working paper based on five participants with disability highlights the small but important details that form barriers to getting around in the public domain. The results of their neighbourhood movements are traced in a map showing the barriers.

The usual barriers are encountered and are specific to Berlin and most likely representative of suburban neighbourhoods in Australia as well. Another paper to add to the collection.

The shortened title of the report is, An explorative case study involving disabled people in Berlin.

It’s not the bus that’s inaccessible

Imagine you could travel to only 1% of the city where you live – areas that were easily accessible to other residents. The main problem is it’s not the bus system itself that’s inaccessible. It’s all the infrastructure around it such as footpaths and kerb ramps. That’s the claim by researchers in Columbus, Ohio.

“People with mobility disabilities need to get to and from bus stops to use public transportation, and that isn’t easy in many parts of the city.”

The roadway is marked with the words "bus stop" in yellow lettering.

The study of wheelchair users who rely on public transport, found that powered wheelchair users were a little better off than manual users. The researchers used high-resolution, real-time data on the usage of buses by people with and without disabilities.

In one analysis, the researchers found how many of the bus stops could get users to various places in the city within 30 minutes. Manual wheelchair users had 75% fewer bus stops they could use compared with non-disabled users. For powered wheelchair users, they experienced 59% fewer stops. Even when they gave them more time to complete the journey, it was little better. That means wheelchair users are confined to self-segregated parts of the city.

Public transit is not a business, it is not just a social service.  It is crucial urban infrastructure and footpaths are part of that.

Ohio Theatre facade showing a level footpath and kerb ramp for the crossing. It isn't the bus that's inaccessible.

The title of the article is, Why buses can’t get wheelchair users to most areas of cities.

The research paper is titled, Disparities in public transit accessibility and usage by people with mobility disabilities. You will need institutional access for a free read.

From the abstract

Many people with mobility disabilities rely on public transit to access crucial resources and maintain social interactions. However, they face higher barriers to accessing and using public transit.

We used high-resolution public transit real-time vehicle data, passenger count data, and paratransit usage data from 2018 to 2021 to estimate and compare transit accessibility and usage of people with and without mobility disabilities. We found significant disparities wheelchair users’ accessibility relative to people without disabilities.

The city center has the highest accessibility and ridership, as well as the highest disparities in accessibility. We also find that people with reduced mobility using a fixed-route service are more sensitive to weather conditions. Most will ride in the middle of the day rather than during peak hours.

The spatial pattern of bus stop usage by people with disability is different to people without disabilities. This suggests their destination choices are driven by access concerns.

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 research paper reports on a detailed analysis of bus and tram stop positioning using a holistic universal design approach.

A common story

“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.”

Placement and design are critical

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. Service frequency and faster travel times were more highly regarded than add-ons, such as WiFi and USB ports. 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.

From the 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.

On-street stops and their connecting roads are viewed as a holistic environment, instead of an ordinary place or location 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. It highlights how one affects the other and their impact on the overall ability to produce a good passenger experience.

Transit stops are easier to locate when there is high street connectivity which determines how transit passengers gain access to a transit service. The design and configuration of on-street stops and connecting roads lead to increased safety, thereby leading to increased ridership.