The primary objective of the research was to develop a standardised tool to assist practitioners in selecting the most appropriate pedestrian crossing facility. The tool brings together feasibility criteria and economic assessment procedures for various jurisdictions in New Zealand and Australia, and accounts for recent research regarding the pedestrian perceptions of walkability at facilities. The research and tool enable practitioners to more effectively achieve Austroads strategic goals including improved customer service, enhanced network productivity and supporting environmentally sustainable transport. A high level assessment of Australasian research identified that it would be appropriate to apply a common pedestrian facility selection tool to both Australia and New Zealand, and identified that the NZ Transport Agency Pedestrian Facility Selection Guidelines and spreadsheet tool would form a good starting point for the development of this tool (Tate 2007, Tate & Wabil 2007). There were a number of gaps identified in existing walkability and pedestrian level of service research where there is a lack of suitable models for assessing the relative benefits of various types of facilities for midblock and intersection crossings. The analysis identified that the walkability of crossings could be evaluated by isolating the individual elements of perceived delay, perceived safety and comfort. The Community Street Review (CSR) dataset collected by Abley & Turner (2011) was analysed to establish predictive regression models for the three individual walkability elements. Models were developed to relate operational and environmental (independent) variables to the perceived delay, safety and comfort (dependent) variables. The regression analysis of the CSR data successfully yielded equations for the perceived delay component of walkability, and an equation to derive overall walkability as a function of the three individual elements for each crossing facility type. Regression equations relating the independent variables to perceived safety and comfort exhibited poor fit. Two focus groups were conducted, one in Christchurch and one in Wellington, to address the remaining gaps in the walkability model, specifically accounting for pedestrian perceptions of safety, and validating the overall walkability equation as a function of safety and delay separately for midblock and intersection applications. Additional data was collected during the focus group surveys around the non-compliance rates of pedestrians at traffic signals. The walkability inputs derived from the CSR data and focus group survey analysis have been combined to provide three Pedestrian Level of Service indicators, relating to perception of delay, perception of safety and overall walkability. The pedestrian facility selection tool developed by this research assesses uncontrolled, zebra and signalised crossings with or without kerb extensions, raised platforms and median islands for both midblock and intersection applications. The tool provides a feasibility assessment to recommend pedestrian crossing facilities which are considered to be appropriate for the traffic environment. Feasible facilities can then be evaluated, with outputs of pedestrian and vehicle delay, safe sight distances, Pedestrian Level of Service and economic evaluation outcomes. The facility selection tool is written in JavaScript with an HTML front end, and runs in the users’ web browser. It is available through the Austroads website http://bit.ly/austroads_pedestrian. (Author/publisher)
Abstract