1 / 29

Walkability and Pedestrian Facilities in Asian Cities - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Walkability and Pedestrian Facilities in Asian Cities. Sameera Kumar Anthapur Transport Researcher Sudhir Gota Technical Manager . Transed 2012 New Delhi 20 September 2012. How walkable are our cities? .

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Walkability and Pedestrian Facilities in Asian Cities' - necia

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Walkability and pedestrian facilities in asian cities

Walkability and Pedestrian Facilities in Asian Cities

Sameera Kumar Anthapur

Transport Researcher

Sudhir Gota

Technical Manager

Transed 2012

New Delhi

20 September 2012

How walkable are our cities
How walkable are our cities?

“improving walkability entails improvement not only in the physical infrastructure but equally in the minds of people”

How people travel in asian cities is changing
How people travel in Asian cities is changing

CAI-Asia, 2011

  • cities which has more than 75% of  trips by bus, metro, cycles and walking

  • cities which have 50 to 75% of trips by bus, metro, cycle and walking.

  • cities with 50% of trips by private modes such as two wheelers, cars, taxis etc.


Walkability assessment methodology
Walkability Assessment Methodology

Walkability Assessment - residential, educational, commercial, public transport terminals

  • Field Walkability Surveys (modified Global Walkability Index)

    • Pre-identified routes

    • 9 Parameters - Walking Path Modal Conflict, Availability of Walking Paths, Availability of Crossings , Grade Crossing Safety, Motorist Behavior, Amenities, Disability Infrastructure , Obstructions, Security from Crime

  • Pedestrian Preference Interview Surveys

    • Profile of the respondents – travel behavior

    • Preference of the respondents on walkability and pedestrian facilities improvements

  • Survey on Policies and Guidelines & Stakeholder survey

  • Field walkability assessment results 1
    Field Walkability Assessment Results (1)

    "Pleasure to walk"

    "Waiting To walk"

    "Walk at your own risk"

    Walking environment varies significantly depending upon the location

    Pedestrian preference survey results 1
    Pedestrian Preference Survey Results (1)

    People Interviewed in 19cities > 6,500

    30% of people interviewed came from households without motorized vehicles

    Majority of people (61%) were in the age group 15-30 years

    Walking constitutes 40% of trip mode share.

    67% of all trips are less than 30 minutes and less than 6 km

    Pedestrian preference survey results 2
    Pedestrian Preference Survey Results (2)

    • 42 % - the pedestrian environment is “bad” or “very bad”

    • 15% - facilities are “good” or “very good”

    • Respondents top priority:

      • Wider, level and clean sidewalks/ footpaths

      • Reduced/slower traffic on the road

      • Removal of obstacles/ parked cars from sidewalks/ footpaths

    • Crossings

      • 47% prefer at-grade crossings and 33% skywalks

      • 74% prefer crossings that are within 100 meters

    Pedestrian preference survey results 3
    Pedestrian Preference Survey Results (3)

    Without improvements in pedestrian facilities, 75% of respondents would shift from walking to other modes when affordable

    Policies institutions and guidelines survey results 1
    Policies, Institutions and Guidelines Survey Results (1)

    Policies and Guidelines - Sri Lanka

    10% of urban road space for NMT - Action Plan for Traffic Management in Greater Colombo (2008)

    Policies and Guidelines - Traffic and Road Transport Act of Indonesia

    If a pedestrian crossing does not exist, pedestrians must take care of their own safety when crossing the road and people with disabilities must wear special signs that are visible to motorists

    Policies institutions and guidelines survey results 3
    Policies, Institutions and Guidelines Survey Results (3)

    Policies and Guidelines: Indian Road Congress

    • Footpath separated with carriageway with an insurmountable kerb

    • Pedestrian crossings at mid block only when the distance between intersections is minimum of 300m.

    • Provision of controlled crossings at mid blocks when peak hour volumes of pedestrians and vehicles are such that PV2 > 1 million (Undivided carriageway), PV2> 2 million (divided carriageway) , Stream speed of greater than 65 kph

      City Development Plans

    • The trend is towards building few pedestrian overpasses and improving few kilometers of footpath. Majority of the emphasis is on the public transport and increase in road space.

    Policies institutions and guidelines survey results 4
    Policies, Institutions and Guidelines Survey Results (4)

    Dedicated Institutions

    • Lack of dedicated institutional responsibility and legal and financial resources in support of pedestrian needs

    • Multiple agencies but who owns the footpaths?

    • Political support is barrier in promoting improvement of pedestrian facilities considering the significant number of pedestrians and public transport commuters

    Policies institutions and guidelines survey results 5
    Policies, Institutions and Guidelines Survey Results (5)

    Allocation of Resources

    • Most cities do not allocate sufficient resources for pedestrian facility improvement or these are not relevant to pedestrian needs

    • Bangladesh (Dhaka)

      • 0.24% of the municipal budget to pedestrian facilities for next 20 years

    • India (Bangalore)

      • 0.6% of total budget for next 20 years

      • Future vision/target – Pedestrian trip mode share to be 20% after 20 years

      • Ratio of investment on footpaths and on "skywalks" = 25 to 75% - Bangalore Pedestrian Policy, BMLTA (2009)

    Effective media strategy
    Effective Media Strategy

    Over 40 news articles, with potential readership of 4.4 million

    Walkabilityasia org home page
    Walkabilityasia.org - Home Page

    Over 4000 hits in 90 days !

    Walkabilityasia org facebook page
    Walkabilityasia.org - Facebook page

    Over 140 ‘likes’ and growing

    Boon or bane
    Boon or bane?

    Using the same money required for constructing 1 km metro, one can, on average, construct 350 km of new quality sidewalks !!

    Is it lack of resources?

    No space ?

    No demand?

    Lack of expertise?

    Times of India - 16 Apr 2010


    Shakti Sustainable Energy Foundation

    • Lanzhou, China: Shan Huang from CAI-Asia China Office, and Prof. YongpingBai and his students at the Northwest Normal University in Lanzhou, China

    • Karachi, Pakistan: ArifPervaiz from Karachi and his students, Aatika Khan, Kanwal Fatima, SadiaMehmood, Al AminNathani, OwaisHasan, ObedaMehmood, and RidaKamran

    • Jakarta, Indonesia: DollarisSuhadi, Mariana Sam and Anthony Octaviano from Swisscontact Indonesia

    • Kota, India: HarjinderParwana and Vipul Sharma from CAI-Asia India Office

    • Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia: Prof. SereeterLodoysamba and his students at the National University of Mongolia

    • Cebu and Manila, Philippines: Ernesto Abaya from the College of Engineering and the National Center for Transportation Studies of the University of the Philippines,, and Paul Villarete, Delight Baratbate and other staff of the Cebu City Government Planning Office

    • Ha Noi and Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam: PhanQuynhNhu from Vietnam Clean Air Partnership (CAI-Asia Country Network) , and Khuat Viet Hung and Nguyen ThanhHoa from the Institute of Transport Planning and Management, University of Transport and Communication

    • Chennai – RajCherubal, Shreya and Chris Kost (ITDP), Prof MadhavBadami (Mcgill University), Prof SudhirChellaRajan, Manjari,Preshant,Gayathri and OviyaGovindan(IIT Madras)

    • Bhubaneshwar – Vipul Sharma (IUCN), PiyushRanjanRaut (City Managers Association Orrisa), ChoudhuryRudraCharanMohanty (UNCRD)

    • Pune – Ashok Sreenivas, Robert Obenaus, kittykanchan and RanjitGadgil (Parisar), NitinWarrier (ITDP)

    • Bangalore – Bharat Kumar ( Vijaya College)

    • Special thanks to Fredkorpset Norway for co-funding the conduct of walkability surveys under the Blue Skies Exchange Program in partnership with CAI-Asia Center and:

    • Hong Kong SAR, PRC: Prof Wing-tat Hung from Hong Kong Polytechnic University, host to SampathAravindaRanasinghe and AnjilaManandhar

    • Kathmandu, Nepal: Gopal Joshi from Clean Air Network Nepal and Clean Energy Nepal, host to CharinaCabrido

    • Colombo, Sri Lanka:ThusithaSugathapala from Clean Air Sri Lanka host to Joy Bailey

    • Davao, Philippines: CAI-Asia Center, host to Vu Tat Dat

    • Holly Krambeck, and Jitu Shah

    • CAI Asia Center Collegues

    • Sustran, CAI Asia COP members

    For more information www cleanairinitiative org
    For more information: www.cleanairinitiative.org


    Unit 3505 Robinsons-Equitable Tower

    ADB Avenue, Pasig City

    Metro Manila 1605


    CAI-Asia China Office

    CAI-Asia India Office

    CAI-Asia Center


    901A Reignwood Building,

    No. 8 YongAnDongLi

    Jianguomenwai Avenue Beijing



    Building no.4, 1st floor,

    Near Thygaraj Stadium

    Lodhi Colony , New Delhi


    CAI-Asia Country Networks

    China . India . Indonesia . Nepal . Pakistan . Philippines . Sri Lanka . Vietnam

    Donors in 2012

    231 CAI-Asia Partnership Members

    CAI-Asia Center Members

    Asian Development Bank  Cities Development Initiative for Asia  ClimateWorks Foundation  DHL/IKEA/UPSEnergy Foundation Fredskorpset Norway Fu Tak Iam Foundation German International Cooperation (GIZ) Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) Institute for Transport Policy Studies Institute for Transportation and Development Policy International Union for Conservation of Nature  MAHA Rockefeller Brothers Fund  United Nations Environment Program Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles (UNEP PCFV) Veolia World Bank

    • 45 Cities

    • 19 Environment ministries

    • 13 Other Government agencies

    • 17 Development agencies & foundations

    • 67 NGOs

    • 37 Academic and research institutes

    • 33 Private sector companies