Policy contribution
Contribution to objectives and alleviation
of problems
Appropriate contexts
Adverse side effects
Contribution to objectives and alleviation of problems
As mentioned earlier the impacts on several dimensions may be the opposite
for pedestrians and car drivers. And again, it is important to remember
that not all pedestrians cross the roads at pedestrian crossings.
Positive safety effects for pedestrians of traffic
signals presupposes separate phases. For cars also mixed phases will reduce
accidents, cf. table.
| Objective |
Marked ordinary crossings |
Traffic signal controlled crossings
|
| 
|
 /
|
/ |
| 
|
|
|
| 
|
|
|
| 
|
|
|
| 
|
|
/ |
| 
|
|
|
| 
|
|
|
 | = Weakest
possible positive contribution, |  | = strongest
possible positive contribution |
 | = Weakest
possible negative contribution |  | = strongest
possible negative contribution |
 | =
No contribution |
| Contribution
to alleviation of key problems |
| Problem |
Marked ordinary crossings |
Traffic signal controlled crossings |
| Congestion-related delay
|
/ |
/ |
| Congestion-related unreliability |
/ |
/ |
| Community severance |
|
|
| Visual intrusion |
|
|
| Lack of amenity |
|
|
| Global warming |
|
|
| Local air pollution |
|
|
| Noise |
|
|
| Reduction of green space |
|
|
| Damage to environmentally sensitive
sites |
|
|
| Poor accessibility for those without
a car and those with mobility impairments |
|
|
| Disproportionate disadvantaging of particular
social or geographic groups |
|
|
| Number, severity and risk of accidents
|
|
/ |
| Suppression of the potential for economic
activity in the area |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| = Weakest
possible positive contribution, | | = strongest
possible positive contribution |
| = Weakest
possible negative contribution | | = strongest
possible negative contribution |
| =
No contribution |
Appropriate contexts
Effective pedestrian crossing facilities will be appropriate
in all areas where pedestrian traffic is in conflict with or not separated
from car traffic, but the need will increase with the amount of traffic
and when the barrier effect of a street is very large.
The need for pedestrian crossing facilities will be
greater where many of the pedestrians are children, i.e. in crossings
nearby schools etc.
| Appropriate area-types |
| Area type |
Suitability |
|
| City centre |
|
|
| Dense inner suburb |
|
|
| Medium density outer suburb |
|
|
| Less dense outer suburb |
|
|
| District centre |
|
|
| Corridor |
|
|
| Small town |
|
|
| Tourist town |
|
|
| = Least suitable
area type | | = Most suitable
area type |
Adverse side effects
Taking the pedestrian perspective, increased risk of accidents at marked
crossings and longer waiting times at signal controlled crossing are
clearly adverse side-effects. For the cars longer waiting times at marked
crossings will be an adverse impact.
|
