Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published online January 1, 2016

Pedestrian Gap Acceptance Behavior in Street Designs with Elements of Shared Space

Abstract

Recent developments in the field of urban street design have seen the emergence of the concept of “shared space,” a term that refers to a range of streetscape treatments aiming at creating a better public realm by asserting the function of streets as places and designing more to a scale aimed at easier pedestrian movement and lower vehicle speeds. In light of this shift in focus toward the pedestrian, an examination was done on the aspect of pedestrian gap acceptance behavior and how this may have changed as a result of the implementation of street layouts with elements of shared space. With the use of video data from London’s Exhibition Road site during periods before and after its conversion from a conventional dual carriageway to a layout featuring a number of elements of shared space, the study looked at changes in key gap acceptance variables, such as waiting time, crossing time, crossing speed, and critical gap. The effects of several traffic- and pedestrian-specific attributes on gap acceptance were also investigated by means of binary logistic regression modeling. Results suggest that pedestrians felt more comfortable and confident in their interaction with vehicles post-redevelopment of the site because they not only tended to accept shorter gaps in traffic but also appeared to be more at ease when crossing. In particular, elderly people and pedestrians traveling with children seemed to benefit the most, no longer appearing to be any less comfortable when crossing the road than other pedestrians.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

1. Buchanan C., Cooper G. H. C., MacEwen A., Crompton D. H., Crow G., Michell G., Dallimore D., Hills P. J., and Burton D. Traffic in Towns, HMSO, London, 1963.
2. Hamilton-Baillie B. Urban Design: Why Don’t We Do It in the Road. Journal of Urban Technology, Vol. 11, 2004, pp. 43–62.
3. Hamilton-Baillie B., and Jones P. Improving Traffic Behaviour and Safety Through Urban Design. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Civil Engineering, Vol. 158, No. 5, 2005, pp. 39–47.
4. Hamilton-Baillie B. Towards Shared Space. Urban Design International, Vol. 13, 2008, pp. 130–138.
5. Hamilton-Baillie B. Shared Space: Reconciling People, Places, and Traffic. Built Environment, Vol. 34, 2008, pp. 161–181.
6. Local Transport Note 1/11—Shared Space. U.K. Department for Transport, London, 2011.
7. Manual for Streets. U.K. Department for Transport, London, 2007.
8. Manual for Streets 2—Wider Application of the Principles. Chartered Institute of Highways and Transportation, London, 2010.
9. LaPlante J. N., and McCann B. Complete Streets in the United States. Presented at 90th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2011.
10. Kaparias I., Bell M. G. H., Greensted J., Cheng S., Miri A., Taylor C., and Mount B. Development and Implementation of a Vehicle–Pedestrian Conflict Analysis Method: Adaptation of a Vehicle–Vehicle Technique. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2198, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010, pp. 75–82.
11. Kaparias I., Bell M. G. H., Dong W., Sastrawinata A., Singh A., Wang X., and Mount B. Analysis of Pedestrian–Vehicle Traffic Conflicts in Street Designs with Elements of Shared Space. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2393, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2013, pp. 21–30.
12. Kaparias I., Bell M. G. H., Biagioli T., Bellezza L., and Mount B. Behavioural Analysis of Interactions Between Pedestrians and Vehicles in Street Designs with Elements of Shared Space. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 30, 2015, pp. 115–127.
13. Kaparias I., Bell M. G. H., Miri A., Chan C., and Mount B. Analysing the Perceptions of Pedestrians and Drivers to Shared Space. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 15, 2012, pp. 297–310.
14. Findley D. J., Schroeder B. J., Cunningham C. M., and Brown T. Highway Engineering: Planning, Design, and Operations. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2015.
15. Highway Capacity Manual 2010. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010.
16. Greenshields B. D., Shapiro D., and Ericksen E. L. Traffic Performance at Urban Street Intersections. Technical Report 1. Bureau of Highway Traffic, Yale University, New Haven, Conn., 1946.
17. Raff M. S., and Hart J. W. A Volume Warrant for Urban Stop Signs. Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Control, Washington, D.C., 1950.
18. Brilon W., Koenig R., and Troutbeck R. J. Useful Estimation Procedures for Critical Gaps. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 33, 1999, pp. 161–186.
19. Daganzo C. F. Estimation of Gap Acceptance Parameters Within and Across the Population from Direct Roadside Observation. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 15, 1981, pp. 1–15.
20. DiPietro C. M., and King L. E. Pedestrian Gap-Acceptance. In Highway Research Record 308, HRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1970, pp. 80–91.
21. Himanen V., and Kulmala R. An Application of Logit Models in Analyzing the Behavior of Pedestrians and Car Drivers on Pedestrian Crossings. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 20, 1988, pp. 187–197.
22. Oxley J., Ihsen E., Fildes B. N., Charlton J. L., and Day R. H. Crossing Roads Safely: An Experimental Study of Age Differences in Gap Selection by Pedestrians. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 37, 2005, pp. 962–971.
23. Chandra S., Rastogi R., and Das V. R. Descriptive and Parametric Analysis of Pedestrian Gap Acceptance in Mixed Traffic Conditions. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 18, 2014, pp. 284–293.
24. Rastogi R., Chandra S., Vamsheedhar J., and Das V. R. Parametric Study of Pedestrian Speeds at Midblock Crossings. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, Vol. 137, 2011, pp. 381–389.
25. Moore R L. Pedestrian Choice and Judgment. Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 4, 1953, pp. 3–10.
26. Kadali B. R., and Vedagiri P. Marked Versus Unmarked Pedestrian Road Crossing Behaviour at Uncontrolled Midblock Crosswalk in Mixed Traffic Condition. Presented at 92nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2013.
27. Cherry C., Donlon B., Yan X., Moore S. E., and Xiong J. Illegal Mid-Block Pedestrian Crossings in China: Gap Acceptance, Conflict, and Crossing Path Analysis. International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2012, pp. 320–330.
28. Sun D., Ukkusuri S. V. S. K., Benekohal R. F., and Waller S. T. Modeling of Motorist–Pedestrian Interaction at Uncontrolled Mid-Block Crosswalks. Presented at 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2003.
29. Andrew H. W. Factors Influencing Pedestrian Cautiousness in Crossing Streets. Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 131, 1991, pp. 367–372.
30. Cohen J., Dearnaley E. J., and Hansel C. E. M. The Risk Taken in Crossing a Road. Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 6, 1955, pp. 120–128.
31. Brewer M. A., Fitzpatrick K., Whitacre J. A., and Lord D. Exploration of Pedestrian Gap-Acceptance Behavior at Selected Locations. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1982, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006, pp. 132–140.
32. Yannis G., Golias J., and Papadimitriou E. Modeling Crossing Behavior and Accident Risk of Pedestrians. Journal of Transportation Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 133, 2007, pp. 634–644.
33. Yannis G., Papadimitriou E., and Theofilatos A. Pedestrian Gap Acceptance for Mid-Block Street Crossing. Transportation Planning and Technology, Vol. 36, 2013, pp. 450–462.
34. Das S., Mansk C. F., and Manuszak M. D. Walk or Wait? An Empirical Analysis of Street Crossing Decisions. Journal of Applied Economics, Vol. 20, 2005, pp. 529–548.
35. Tiwari G., Bangdiwala S., Saraswat A., and Gaurav S. Survival Analysis: Pedestrian Risk Exposure at Signalized Intersections. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 10, 2007, pp. 77–89.
36. Clarkson J., Thorpe N., Goodman P., Bell M. C., and Galatioto F. Modelling the Interactions Between Pedestrians and Vehicles in Shared Spaces. Presented at 46th Annual Conference of the Universities Transport Study Group (UTSG) Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom, 2014.
37. Washington S. P., Karlaftis M. G., and Mannering F. L. Statistical and Econometric Methods for Transportation Data Analysis. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, Fla., 2010.

Cite article

Cite article

Cite article

OR

Download to reference manager

If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice

Share options

Share

Share this article

Share with email
EMAIL ARTICLE LINK
Share on social media

Share access to this article

Sharing links are not relevant where the article is open access and not available if you do not have a subscription.

For more information view the Sage Journals article sharing page.

Information, rights and permissions

Information

Published In

Article first published online: January 1, 2016
Issue published: January 2016

Rights and permissions

© 2016 National Academy of Sciences.
Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Ioannis Kaparias
Collaborative Transport Hub, School of Mathematics, Computer Science, and Engineering, City University London, Northampton Square, London EC1V 0HB, United Kingdom
Jignesh Hirani
Collaborative Transport Hub, School of Mathematics, Computer Science, and Engineering, City University London, Northampton Square, London EC1V 0HB, United Kingdom
Michael G. H. Bell
Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies, Business School, University of Sydney, Saint James Campus C13, 173-175 Phillip Street, Sydney, New South Wales 2000, Australia
Bill Mount
Center for Transport Studies, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London, Skempton Building, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2BU, United Kingdom

Notes

I. Kaparias, [email protected].

Metrics and citations

Metrics

Journals metrics

This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICS

Article usage*

Total views and downloads: 181

*Article usage tracking started in December 2016


Altmetric

See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores



Articles citing this one

Receive email alerts when this article is cited

Web of Science: 0

Crossref: 19

  1. Pedestrian behaviour in integrated street designs: A mesoscopic analys...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  2. Can we all coexist? An empirical analysis of drivers' and pedestrians'...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  3. Before-after safety analysis of a shared space implementation
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  4. Empirical investigation of shared space traffic: A comparison to conve...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  5. Public transport for smart cities: Recent innovations and future chall...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  6. Factors Affecting Neighborhood Walkability: A Pilot Empirical Study in...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  7. A Study on Pedestrians’ Satisfaction and Preferences for Green Pattern...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  8. Pedestrians’ perceived vulnerability and observed behaviours relating ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  9. Analysing the influence of a farmers’ market on spatial behaviour in s...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  10. To cross or not to cross? Review and meta-analysis of pedestrian gap a...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  11. Behaviour and perceptions of powered two-wheeler users in street desig...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  12. Contrasting Perspectives on the Comfort and Safety of Pedestrians Inte...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  13. Role of number of traffic lanes on pedestrian gap acceptance and risk ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  14. Pedestrian Spatial Violation Analyses for Urban Roadways
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  15. Vehicle and Pedestrian Level of Service in Street Designs with Element...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  16. Pedestrian Road Crossing at Uncontrolled Mid-Block Locations: Does the...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  17. Elderly Fitness-Oriented Urban Street Design: Case Study in Nanchang, ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  18. Shared Space and Pedestrian Safety: Empirical Evidence from Pedestrian...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  19. Assessing safety of shared space using cyclist-pedestrian interactions...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar

Figures and tables

Figures & Media

Tables

View Options

Get access

Access options

If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:


Alternatively, view purchase options below:

Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.

Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub