Understanding Pedestrian Perceptions of Walkability
Keywords:
pedestrian facilities, pedestrian perception, pedestrian level of service, pedestrian environment, sidewalks, crosswalksAbstract
To promote walking as well as provide adequate pedestrian facilities the preferences and perceptions of the pedestrians have to be understood and included in the design methodology for pedestrian facilities. Developing design methodologies with user perception can be useful in creation of pedestrian infrastructure that can receive appropriate patronage and enhance modal share for walk trips. The main focus of this part of the study is on the pedestrian’s perceptions and preferences towards various pedestrian facilities including sidewalks, signalized and un-signalized intersection crosswalks, pedestrian sign and signals, crossing options and environmental conditions to recommend how facilities can be improved or redesigned to satisfy their needs. This study examines user perceptions of a number of pedestrian facilities and pedestrian environments in Bhopal, India to identify if there is significant correlation between pedestrian perceptions of satisfaction and pedestrian environment. The study finds that the absence or presence of a facility, its physical status and surrounding environment plays an important role in the mechanics of pedestrian’s perceptions. Adequate facilities in proper operating conditions surrounded with pleasant environmental conditions enhance the user’s perception of the walking path level of service. Hence the study findings can be used to design the city corridors to improve our everyday experience of walking.
References
2. Landis BW, Vattikuti VR, Ottenberg RM et al. Modelling the roadside walking environment: a pedestrian Level of Service. Transportation Research Record 2001; 1773: 82 – 88.
3. Petritsch T, Landis B, McLeod P et al. Pedestrian Level of Service for urban arterial facilities with sidewalks. Transportation Research Record 2006: 84 – 89.
4. Lee JYS, Lam WHK. Levels of service for stairways in Hong Kong underground stations. Journal of Transportation Engineering 2003; 129(2): 196-202.
5. Mumayiz S. and Ashford N., 1986, ‘Methodology for planning and operations management of airport terminal facilities’ Transportation Research Record, 1094, 2435.
6. PQN Final Report. COST 358 Pedestrians’ Quality Needs, 2010. Available at: www.walkeurope.org.
7. Rouphail NM. Midblock Crosswalks: A user compliance and preference study. Transportation Research Record 1984; 959: 41-47.
8. Seneviratne PN, Morrall JF. Level of service on pedestrian facilities. Transportation Quarterly 1985; 39(1): 109-23.
9. Singh K, Jain PK. Methods of assessing pedestrian level of service. Journal of Engineering Research and Studies JanuaryMarch 2011; 2(1): 116-24.
10. Singh K, Jain PK, Agrawal PK. Scenario of Pedestrian Safety in India. NICMAR Journal of Construction Management April-June 2011; 26(2): 50-60.
11. Tanaboriboon Y, Jing Q. Chinese pedestrians and their walking characteristics: Case study in Beijing. Transportation Research Record 1994; 1441: 16–26.
12. Wang W, Li P, Wang W et al. Exploring Determinants of Pedestrians Satisfaction with, Sidewalk Environments: Case Study in Korea Journal Of Urban Planning And Development June 2012; 138(2): 166-72.