[sustran] Re: Pedestrian overpasses
Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory
edelman at greenidea.eu
Tue Mar 16 18:19:26 JST 2010
Hi Walter and everyone,
Walter Hook wrote:
> Well, certainly we generally agree that its best to have at grade, but
> we tend to live in a second best world.
CERTAINLY, or even third best!
>
> We tend to recommend that brt stations be placed away from junctions
> because otherwise it slows down the busway because of bus stop/traffic
> signal interference, as witnessed in Delhi, significantly slowing both
> bus speeds and mixed traffic speeds. Placing the bus stop next to the
> intersection has its ideological merits but frequently results in
> slower speeds and capacity not only for motorists and also for bus
> passengers.
>
> This offset makes it more complicated for pedestrians who have to
> cross mid block somewhere. Some BRT roads still have three mixed
> traffic lanes even mid block, though not very many. TransMilenio
> does. TransJakarta does, etc. Maybe the road is a national road
> carrying a lot of long distance truck traffic, a lot of charter buses,
> minibuses, shared taxis, who knows.
>
> Sure, the best solution for three or more lanes of mixed traffic per
> direction might be a slow bump before the mid block ped crossing, and
> an elevated crosswalk, and a ped crossing signal, IF the traffic
> signal phase for pedstrians is reasonably short, when there are three
> lanes or more of mixed traffic to cross, but many such roads are wide
> national roads where there are currently restrictions against slow
> bumps and other major administrative and political hurdles which you
> just cannot overcome in a short time.
YES, and I should have clear that narrowing a street would come first --
and also that I thought we were talking about more central areas. Sujit
refers to streets which have a "historical reason" for being wide - and
it would seem that on these an overpass would be aesthetically
challenging at least. Based on what Joachim says the crossings on these
would ideally be a totally new street-bridge with ends perhaps a block
back on both sides. Though I think a more common "new mobility" example
is the cycling-oriented underpasses in Dutch suburbs or less dense areas.
Indeed, these underpasses - and the pedestrian green wave I suggest -
facilitate fast non-motorised traffic and are actually better if
grade-separated, providing that there is nothing at... road level of
interest OR if on a street both options are possible.
>
> If you just make people cross at grade but fail to provide a safe
> crossing environment for whatever reason, it is probably better to
> have a pedestrian flyover in a second best world. I've tried to cross
> mid-block in Jakarta at an at-grade traffic signal where I had to wait
> for the signal for a long time and then NOBODY respected the
> pedestrian crossing signal anyway, and I can tell you, in that
> situation I am very happy for the locations where there is a
> pedestrian overpass.
SURE, and then you can also hang fake drivers from the overpass to show
what happens to drivers who disobey!
>
> That doesnt mean there should not also be an at grade crossing. i am
> all for giving the pedestrians as many choices as possible.
CURIOUS how often do local authorities agree to pay for both
>
> So while it is fairly easy to take an ideological position on the
> matter, there may be a lot of local factors and political realities
> that dont give two hoots about a pure ideological position and
> actually do care about traffic flow, etc.
BUT - suggest I from my armchair - "(motorised) traffic flow" is a
(pure) idealogical position!
>
> So if we offer an at grade option, would we still be against also
> providing a pedestrian overpass?
>
> Pedestrian overpass design matters a lot. many of them are too high,
> the gradient is too steep, etc. What if there are escalators or
> elevators?
>
> In some cases they get used by a lot of people who are simply trying
> to cross the street who have trouble crossing the street anyway, in
> conditions where despite YEARS of advocacy efforts we have simply
> FAILED to convince the authorities to improve the surface condition.
THANKS for your hard work.
>
> So, I am not sure a hard line against them is constructive.
>
> best
> walter
HOPE I was able to clarify some points in my earlier email.
- T
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory
> <edelman at greenidea.eu <mailto:edelman at greenidea.eu>> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> First - I hope this does not seem and odd question - for the "experts"
> whom Carlos spoke of and others who ask ITDP about it, etc, what
> is the
> conceptual or philosophical starting point for a "street"? (And I mean
> all spaces for life between buildings, to paraphrase our dear Mr
> Gehl).
> Is the simple space between buildings the natural street, with
> everything else adding both positive (e.g. fast collective public
> transport, access for emergency vehicles) and/or negative (e.g. any
> private automobiles, or at least those moving over typical cycling
> speed)
>
> Or is the starting point the
> total-Hell-we-need-a-flyover-dont-we?-children-are-scared-to-cross-BUT-if-vehicles
> dont-move-fast-enough-the-same-children-will-somehow-starve road?
>
> Second - for wider streets with heavy/fast road vehicles - why not a
> pedestrian signal which allows the slowest walking people to cross in
> one go (no islands), assuming they get to the edge just as the light
> turns green for them? Or on any major pedestrian routes, how about
> having a "green wave" <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_wave> for
> pedestrians with signals based on walking speed along a single
> route? I
> see no need at all for a pedestrian flyover, even for streets with BRT
> or light rail and close intervals. So I am agreeing with Colin, but
> Walter, you seem to have some reason to disagree but I can't
> figure out
> what it is...
>
> - Todd (in Europe, on a pretty busy street)
>
> Walter Hook wrote:
> > we've been asked to advise on this issue in many cities and
> under many
> > contexts. I believe that some basic general principals can be
> followed but
> > also a gut feeling is usually to be trusted. People can
> normally cross two
> > lanes of reasonably high speed traffic reasonably easily but not
> three or
> > more if they are not at a traffic signal that is going to be
> respected.
> > even two lanes are hard if the average speeds are very high,
> but as a rule
> > of thumb, i would say two lanes of mixed traffic, at grade, and
> three lanes
> > of mixed traffic probably a flyover is better.
> >
> > w.
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 5:47 AM, Colin Brader
> <brader at itpworld.net <mailto:brader at itpworld.net>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Dear Carlos
> >>
> >> I think you may be generalising a little. Having undertaken
> user needs
> >> analysis, as part of developing a BRT conceptual design in the
> >> Philippines, I have found a strong preference for at-grade
> crossings. I
> >> believe it is then the designers job to either ensure that the
> at-grade
> >> crossing is safe - adequate green times for predicted
> pedestrian volume,
> >> appropriate sight lines and signal design, or if the locality
> is such
> >> that safety cannot be assured, design an over bridge that does not
> >> require overt effort to use. The designers appraisal must take full
> >> consideration of the conditions within which the crossing is being
> >> placed.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Colin Brader
> >> Director
> >> Integrated Transport Planning Ltd
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: sustran-discuss-bounces+brader=itpworld.net
> <http://itpworld.net>@list.jca.apc.org <http://list.jca.apc.org>
> >> [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+brader
> <mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces%2Bbrader>
> <sustran-discuss-bounces%2Bbrader>=
> >> itpworld.net <http://itpworld.net>@list.jca.apc.org
> <http://list.jca.apc.org>] On
> >> Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
> >> Sent: 15 March 2010 01:42
> >> To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport
> >> Subject: [sustran] Pedestrian overpasses
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> The issue of everyone preferring pedestrian overpasses instead of
> >> level-crossings is pretty much ubiquitous in developing
> countries in
> >> Asia and Latin America (I assume Africa, but I don't know this as a
> >> fact). But the most interesting part is that many "experts" and
> even
> >> pedestrians prefer those overpasses, and when asking for
> "safety" in a
> >> crossing they ask for an overpass instead of an adequate
> crossing! I've
> >> been shouted at in meetings where I deny the need to have a
> specific
> >> overpass and urge planners to design a crossing instead... they
> don't
> >> understand that overpasses should be the last recourse, that
> they are
> >> also much more expensive and provide a very negative message to
> many
> >> (you, pedestrian, must do extra effort to cross, while the car
> must just
> >>
> >> whizz by).
> >>
> >> This just shows how much we still have to work on these issues...
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >> Carlos.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12/03/2010 01:25, jane. wrote:
> >>
> >>> Here there is no reason given. Like most things in China, they
> simply
> >>>
> >> just one day appear. Well, it was announced in the newspapers just
> >> before construction started, but as I recall, they were simply
> notices.
> >> But I suppose the justification would be something along the
> lines of
> >> "improving traffic."
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________
> >>> From: Eric Britton<eric.britton at ecoplan.org
> <mailto:eric.britton at ecoplan.org>>
> >>> To: Cornie Huizenga<cornie.huizenga at slocatpartnership.org
> <mailto:cornie.huizenga at slocatpartnership.org>>;
> >>>
> >> jane.<voodikon at yahoo.com <mailto:voodikon at yahoo.com>>
> >>
> >>> Cc: Salil Bijur<salilb at gmail.com <mailto:salilb at gmail.com>>;
> Global 'South' Sustainable
> >>>
> >> Transport<sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
> <mailto:sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>>;
> >> Kanchan<kittykanchan at gmail.com
> <mailto:kittykanchan at gmail.com>>; JasonChang<skchang at ntu.edu.tw
> <mailto:skchang at ntu.edu.tw>>
> >>
> >>> Sent: Thu, March 11, 2010 11:04:11 PM
> >>> Subject: Pedestrian Budget
> >>>
> >>> Just to be sure I understand rightly the basics on this one.
> >>>
> >>> The idea, if one scratches, is to get the "other stuff" - i.e.,
> >>>
> >> walkers,
> >>
> >>> cyclists -- out of the way of motorized traffic so that
> drivers can
> >>>
> >> arrive
> >>
> >>> unencumbered and on time at their destinations? (No matter how the
> >>>
> >> concept
> >>
> >>> is otherwise billed.)
> >>>
> >>> Do I have that right?
> >>>
> >>> Kind thanks for informing,
> >>>
> >>> Best/Eric Britton
> >>>
> >>> PS. If anyone is up to it, this could be an excellent
> truth-seeking
> >>>
> >> piece
> >>
> >>> for World Streets, with the necessary independent balanced
> coverage of
> >>> course. Candidates?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Note: New Paris tel. +331 7550 3788 . Kindly change your records.
> >>>
> >>> World Streets . www.worldstreets.org
> <http://www.worldstreets.org>
> >>> 8/10, rue Jospeh Bara . Paris 75006 France
> >>> +331 7550 3788 . eric.britton at newmobility.org
> <mailto:eric.britton at newmobility.org> . Skype newmobility
> >>> New Mobility Partnerships . www.partners.newmobility.org
> <http://www.partners.newmobility.org>
> >>> 9440 Readcrest Drive . Los Angeles, CA 90210
> >>> +1 213 984 1277 . fekbritton at gmail.org
> <mailto:fekbritton at gmail.org> . Skype ericbritton
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> >>>
> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------
> >>> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to
> >>>
> >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join
> the real
> >> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights.
> >>
> >>> ================================================================
> >>> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of
> people-centred,
> >>>
> >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing
> countries
> >> (the 'Global South').
> >>
> >>>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to
> >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join
> the real
> >> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights.
> >>
> >> ================================================================
> >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
> >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing
> countries
> >> (the 'Global South').
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to
> >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join
> the real
> >> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights.
> >>
> >> ================================================================
> >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
> >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing
> countries
> >> (the 'Global South').
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Todd Edelman
> Green Idea Factory
>
> Urbanstr. 45
> D-10967 Berlin
> Germany
>
> Skype: toddedelman
> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081
>
> edelman at greenidea.eu <mailto:edelman at greenidea.eu>
> www.greenidea.eu <http://www.greenidea.eu>
> www.flickr.com/photos/edelman <http://www.flickr.com/photos/edelman>
>
> CAR* is over. If you want it.
>
> "Fort mit der Privatautostadt und was Neues hingebaut!"
> - B. Brecht (with slight modification)
>
> * "Car" is a sub-category of automobile, i.e. one used
> inappropriately, opportunistically or without creativity
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to
> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join
> the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights.
>
> ================================================================
> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of
> people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus
> on developing countries (the 'Global South').
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Walter Hook
> Executive Director
> Institute for Transportation and Development Policy
> 127 W 26 St, Ste 1002
> New York, NY 10001
> 1-212-629-8001
> www.itdp.org <http://www.itdp.org>
>
> Promoting sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide.
--
--------------------------------------------
Todd Edelman
Green Idea Factory
Urbanstr. 45
D-10967 Berlin
Germany
Skype: toddedelman
Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081
edelman at greenidea.eu
www.greenidea.eu
www.flickr.com/photos/edelman
CAR* is over. If you want it.
"Fort mit der Privatautostadt und was Neues hingebaut!"
- B. Brecht (with slight modification)
* "Car" is a sub-category of automobile, i.e. one used inappropriately, opportunistically or without creativity
More information about the Sustran-discuss
mailing list