[sustran] Re: Pedestrian Overbridge

mpotter mpotter at gol.com
Fri Oct 29 13:46:24 JST 2004


If you don't mind the input of an informed consumer of pedestrian  
bridges, I've made a number of observations, mostly in Japan and  
Thailand, but more than a few in the US as well.

In my experience, these are very successful in at least two sets of  
circumstances:

1. over water, as an alternative to an unpleasant, high-traffic motor  
vehicle bridge, particularly when the pedestrian bridges  link  
attractive pedestrian-friendly precincts at either end.  I recall one  
which seemed very popular and pleasant in London across the Thames.   
The pedestrian bridge connecting the parks in central Fukuoka to the  
poplular pedestrian friendly nightlife quarter of Nakasu-Kawabata,  
which includes shade, benches, and nightly saxophone performances, is  
another example.

2. across streets where there is a pedestrian-friendly precinct at the  
level of and immediately accessible to the bridge.  Minneapolis has a  
number of these, as does Bangkok and Singapore.  These, however,  
involve highly artificial precincts aimed at street-avoidance are for  
street avoidance more than for street crossing.

3. across busy streets where there is a pedestrian-friendly precinct  
not  at the level of   the bridge, but immediately accessible once one  
has descended the steps or escalator provided.  Kitakyushu (a city of  
about 1 million 65 km or so from Fukuoka) has a number of examples  
connecting the main train station to an extensive system of popular  
shopping arcades.  Chicago has an artful (and no doubt expensive) Frank  
Gehry-designed  affair connecting two very popular walkable areas of  
its new Millennium Park.

By contrast, to build an artless affair with steps to climb up and down  
in order to simply avoid crossing a street and with no other benefits  
offered is, in my observations,  a waste of money.  People will go  
through impressive lengths to avoid using them.  Fukuoka has a number  
of these -- unloved and almost unused, waiting, I suspect, to be torn  
down some day.

The exception to these rules that I've noticed is Bangkok (there must  
be others), where there are some  streets so wide, so unpleasant and  
dangerous  and filled with a seemingly (to the hapless pedestrian) so  
endless a stream of fast-moving vehicles, that one uses the overbridge  
(we might say, "pedestrian overpass") only as an act of desperate  
resignation.

My guess is that a similar set of rules might apply to pedestrian  
tunnels.

Mark Potter
millennium3


On Oct 28, 2004, at 6:56 PM, Wetzel Dave wrote:

> Andy
> I'm no expert on pedestrian bridges.
>
> Our policy (not just in Central Business Districts) is to install  
> traffic
> light controlled pedestrian crossings wherever suitable. We are  
> replacing
> pedestrian bridges (even the one installed in 1986 at Shepherds Bush,
> designed like an express train - with MY name on!!).
>
>
> Dave
> Dave Wetzel; Vice-Chair; Transport for London.
> Windsor House. 42-50 Victoria Street. London. SW1H 0TL. UK
> Tel: 020 7941 4200
> Intl Tel: +44  207 941 4200
>
> Windsor House is close to New Scotland Yard. Buses 11, 24, 148 and 211
> pass the door. (507 passes close by).
> Nearest Tube: St. James's Park Underground station.
> Nearest mainline stations: Waterloo and Victoria (Both a walk or short
> bus ride).
> Public cycle parking available outside Windsor House.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tra3hwl at leeds.ac.uk [mailto:tra3hwl at leeds.ac.uk]
> Sent: 28 October 2004 03:09
> To: Wetzel Dave
> Subject: Pedestrian Overbridge
>
>
> Dear Mr Dave Wetzel:
>
> Through reading your email about how to encourage modal shift, I see  
> that
> only a
> lot of transport instruments working together can make help. I am  
> assessing
> a
> proposed Pedestrian Overbridge in CBD area, I want to ask you whether
> supplying
> good road signs is pretty enough to encourage people to use the  
> Overbridge.
>
> Best regards and with many thanks
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
> *********************************************************************** 
> ************
> The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential  
> and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom  
> they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty  
> and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of  
> this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the  
> intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in  
> error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying  
> of this email is strictly prohibited.
>
> If you have received this email in error please notify  
> postmaster at tfl.gov.uk.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for  
> the presence of computer viruses.
> *********************************************************************** 
> ************
>



More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list