p-ISSN 2980-4868 | e-ISSN 2980-4841
https://ajesh.ph/index.php/gp
The Effectiveness of Pedestrian Crossing
Bridges for Urban Areas in Indonesia Based on Crossing Times and Pedestrian Perspective
Putri
Maharani Rifqi1, Aida Septiani Ayunindita2, Mira Lestira
Hariani3*
1,2,3Universitas Swadaya Gunung
Jati, Indonesia
Email: pmaharani415@gmail.com1, aidaseptianii25@gmail.com2, mira.hariani0103@ugj.ac.id3*
ABSTRACT:
The use of pedestrian bridges is often
ineffective as pedestrians tend to prefer crossing directly on the roadway,
even though heavy traffic conditions increase the risk of accidents. This
lowers the safety level of crossers and causes traffic problems. This study
aims to evaluate the efficient use of pedestrian bridges and determine public
perceptions of road crossing facilities. The research was conducted using
geometric assessment and road performance evaluation methods that refer to the
2023 Indonesian Road Capacity Guidelines. In addition, crossing times were
analyzed based on the traffic TCT distribution histogram, as well as pedestrian
perceptions of crossing facilities. The evaluation results show that the
effectiveness of road services falls into category A. Based on pedestrian
perceptions, 60% of respondents prefer to cross directly on the roadway, with
an average TCT of 1.2 m/sec. From the results of the CSI analysis, the level of
respondents' satisfaction with the condition of the pedestrian bridge is
71.373%. Based on the results of the study, the use of pedestrian bridges will
be effective in the next 15 years. Recommendations proposed to increase the
effectiveness of the use of pedestrian bridges and the level of pedestrian
safety is the use of guardrails.
Keywords: Effectiveness, LOS, Corporation, Projection, CSI, Recommendations.
INTRODUCTION
Pedestrians
are one of the elements that are part of traffic users
The high traffic flow makes it difficult for pedestrians to cross
the road, making using the pedestrian crossing bridge possible
One example is the
pedestrian bridge at Kuningan City Park, Kuningan Regency. This pedestrian
bridge is located in the center of Kuningan city, so the traffic is quite busy
and congested during peak hours. The purpose of this study was to determine the
level of effectiveness of the use of pedestrian bridges and pedestrian
perceptions related to facilities for road crossers. This is the basis for the
author to analyze the level of effectiveness of the use of pedestrian bridges
in urban areas. The benefits of this research are expected to contribute to the
government in providing recommendations for pedestrian facilities that are in
accordance with the needs of pedestrians. In addition, it provides
recommendations to pedestrians regarding safe and secure road crossings.
RESEARCH METHODS
Research Location
The research was conducted
in the Kuningan city park area on three roads, namely Jl. Dewi Sartika, Jl.
Veteran, and Jl. Aria Kamuning. According
to the Population and Civil Registration Office of Kuningan Regency, the
population is 1.2 million people in 2023. Veteran Street is a street that is
often crossed by the community every day because it is located in the center of
the city. The only vehicles that are allowed to pass are motorcycles, passenger
cars, Medium Vehicles, and Non-Motorized Vehicles. The division of
transportation modes refers to PKJI 2023. The methods used in this study are
surveys, questionnaires, and analysis. The steps are presented in Figure 2.
Figure 1.
Research Methodology Steps
Method Survey
Some of the
variables that must be surveyed are:
1.
Traffic Survey, which consists of vehicle volume and vehicle speed
2.
Pedestrian survey, which consists of the volume of road crossers and
the speed of road crossers.
3.
Side obstacle survey, carried out along 100 meters on Jalan Dewi
Sartika to Jalan Veteran survey the condition of pedestrian crossing bridges,
this survey refers to the Procedures for Planning Pedestrian Crossing Bridges
in Urban Areas No. 027/T/Bt/1995 and Provisions According to the Technical
Planning of Pedestrian Facilities No. 02/SE/M/2018
Traffic and pedestrian surveys are
conducted on Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays of the week.
The side obstacle survey was carried out for three days, namely Monday,
Wednesday, and Sunday the following week. The survey of the condition of the
pedestrian crossing bridge was carried out for one day on Tuesday of the same
week at the time of the side obstacle survey.
Method Combinations
The questionnaire
was carried out for a week after completing the survey. The questionnaire was
distributed to 100 respondents directly which was carried out around the
Kuningan City Park and the Syiarul Islam Mosque. According to Sugiyono (2014),
the calculation to determine the number of respondents is using the Slovin
formula. The question variables were obtained based on the concept of the
quality of pedestrian bridges according to O'Flaherty’s (1997) aspects of
security and safety, convenience and comfort, and facilities and completeness.
Here are the question variables for the questionnaire.
Table 1.
Question Variables
|
No |
Question Variables |
It |
Question Variables |
|
1 |
Guardrails |
10 |
Road Width |
|
2 |
Floor Selection |
11 |
No Jostling |
|
3 |
Roof Use |
12 |
No Garbage Piled Up/Scattered |
|
4 |
Damage To The Floor |
13 |
The
Existence Of Pathways For Disabilities |
|
5 |
Safe From
Crime |
14 |
The Existence Of Garbage Cans |
|
6 |
Whereabouts
Of The Security Guard |
15 |
Vegetation/Plant
Presence |
|
7 |
Distance From
The Activity Center |
16 |
Presence Of
Lighting |
|
8 |
Distance From The Intersection |
17 |
The
Existence Of CCTV |
|
9 |
Not
Disturbed By The Existence Of Street Vendors/Beggars |
|
|
Based on the
results of the validity test and reliability test on 100 respondents, the
results were valid. The validity test results were obtained at 0.1638 with a
significance value of 10%. Meanwhile, the results of the reliability test for
the satisfaction level of 0.955 and for the importance level of 0.958, which
means that the alpha value is in the range of 0.8 ≤ r < 1.0 is
declared consistent.
Analysis Methods
The analysis
carried out is as follows:
1.
Traffic performance, which consists of calculating road capacity,
degree of saturation, and Level of Service. The geometric analysis of roads
refers to the 2023 Indonesian Road Capacity Guidelines. And if the degree of
saturation has a value of <_ 0.85, then the road section is still considered
good, but if Dj > 0.85, an increase is added to the road section (limitation.
Regulation of the Minister of Public Works and Public Housing Number 5 of 2023
and MKJI'97). As for LOS, it is a road service level that has a constellation
of A-F (HCM1994)
2.
Customer Satisfaction Index, used to calculate the level of
satisfaction of respondents with the condition of the pedestrian crossing
bridge
3.
Projections are carried out on traffic and road crossers in the next 5
to 15 years. The variables calculated are vehicle growth, level of service,
vehicle speed up to the next 15 years. For road crossers, it is projected with
the growth of the population, the speed of road crossers and the time it takes
to cross. The speed of the road crosser and the time of departure are
calculated by looking at the TCT value from the TCT Distribution Histogram to
Traffic
4.
Recommendations, according to the Pedestrian Facility Planning
Guidelines, can be determined using a formula (level crossing) which can later
be seen from the results of calculations, what kind of crossing is needed at
the location.
The survey was conducted five days a
week: Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. Its purpose was to determine
the value of traffic and pedestrian performance.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Traffic
Performance Analysis
Geometric
Conditions of the Research Site
Table 2. Existing Traffic Conditions
|
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS |
||
|
It |
Description |
Information |
|
1. |
Road Type |
One-way |
|
2. |
Strip width,
m |
2 x 3.25 |
|
3. |
Cool
width, m |
2 m |
|
4. |
median |
none |
|
5. |
KHS |
Low |
|
6. |
City Size |
1.2
million people |
|
7. |
Types of
road alignments |
Flat |
Figure
2. Cross Road Cut
Based
on Table 2, the road's geometric condition is road type 2/1UD with a kereb
width of 2 meters.
Vehicle
Volume
The
following are the results of the vehicle volume survey:
Figure 3. Vehicle Volume
Based on Figure 3, the
highest volume of vehicles is on Monday from 07.00 to 08.00, with a total of
2196 vehicles/hour (948.75 junior high school/hour). One factor that affects
road density is the number of people who do activities in the morning, such as
going to work and school.
Vehicle
Speed
The
following are the results of the vehicle speed survey that has been carried
out:
Figure 4. Vehicle Speed
Based on Figure 4, the highest vehicle speed is on Sunday
at 11.00-12.00 with a speed of 24.068 km/h, and the lowest speed is on Monday
at 15.00-16.00 with a speed of 21.182 km/h.
Side
Obstacles
Table 3. Side Obstacles
|
Side
Obstacles |
|
|
Day |
Event Frequency Value |
|
Monday |
152,2 |
|
Wednesday |
195,5 |
|
Sunday |
253,3 |
Table
3 shows that the KHS value obtained in the region is included in the Low (R)
category.
1.
Capacity
Based on
PKJI 2023, road capacity can be determined by calculating the basic capacity
value, capacity correction factors due to lane differences, capacity correction
factors due to PA on undivided road types, correction factors due to KHS on
curved roads, and capacity correction factors for city size. Although there are
two segments of road capacity values that are calculated only one, because the
division of two segments is still in one lane. So that the value obtained from
the calculation results for road capacity is 3166.08 smp/h.
2.
Degree of Saturation and Level Of Service (LOS)
Vehicle volume and road capacity are parameters that affect the
value of saturation degree and level of service. The volume of vehicles used is
the volume of vehicles at peak hours on each survey day. The following is a
table of results from the degree of saturation and level of service.
Table 4. Degree of Saturation and LOS
|
Day |
Point |
Degree of Saturation |
THE |
|
Your |
1 |
0,2375 |
A |
|
2 |
0,2484 |
A |
|
|
Wednesday |
1 |
0,2585 |
A |
|
2 |
0,2813 |
A |
|
|
Friday |
1 |
0,2613 |
A |
|
1 |
0,2687 |
A |
|
|
Saturday |
1 |
0,2483 |
A |
|
2 |
0,2405 |
A |
|
|
Sunday |
1 |
0,2648 |
A |
|
2 |
0,2706 |
A |
Based
on Table 4, the highest saturation degree value is in segment two, namely
Wednesday at 0.2813. Meanwhile, the lowest saturation degree value was in
segment one, namely Monday at 0.2375. Thus, the value of the level of
service is included in category A, namely free flow, low volume, high
speed, and the driver can choose the desired speed (HCM 1994). When viewed from
the traffic conditions, the condition is included in the good category.
However, in terms of pedestrian safety, considering that the research location
is the center of activities in Kuningan City, pedestrian safety needs to be
considered. In the next 5 to 10 years, traffic performance will not be the same
as today. So that the level of safety will be lower.
Road
Crossing Performance Analysis
Existing
Condition of the People's Crossing Bridge
The
following are the results of a survey that has been conducted for one day at
the JPO in Taman Kota Kuningan.
Table 5. JPO Condition
|
JPO CONDITION |
||||
|
It |
What is observed |
Terms According
to |
Fulfills/Non-Fulfills |
Information |
|
Provisions according to the Planning
Procedures for Pedestrian Crossing Bridges in Urban Areas No. 027/T/Bt/1995 |
||||
|
1. |
Lower Height |
Highway : 4.6 m |
Meet |
It has met because the height is >
4.6 m |
|
2. |
JPO minimum width |
2 m |
Meet |
JPO road width 2 m |
|
3. |
Ramp Dimensions |
Strength min. 15cm ; I mean, maks. 21.5
cm |
Meet |
has met the requirements |
|
|
Displacement min.21.5 cm ; max. 30.5 cm |
|||
|
4. |
Laying of stairs and bridge heads |
|
|
The placement of stairs and bridge
heads is appropriate, because it does not interfere with / take the function
of the sidewalk |
|
Provisions According to the Technical
Planning of Pedestrian Facilities No. 02/SE/M/2018 |
||||
|
5. |
Fence |
Adequate fencing |
Meet |
|
|
6. |
Facilities for Disabilities |
Access Road in the middle for people
with disabilities |
Not Compliant |
There is no way for people with
disabilities |
|
7. |
Location and Buildings |
Suit pedestrian and aesthetic needs |
Not Compliant |
According to the questionnaire carried
out, the function of the JPO to cross is less effective. JPO is more
functional as a tourist attraction |
|
8. |
Sidewalk effectiveness |
Does not reduce the effective width of
the Sidewalk |
Meet |
The placement of the bridge head does
not reduce the effective width of the sidewalk |
Based on Table 5 which does not meet the provisions
of the technical planning of pedestrian facilities, namely the absence of
access for people with disabilities and the location of the building where one
of the access to enter or exit the pedestrian bridge is in the middle of the
city park which makes the pedestrian bridge path longer.
The volume
of Road Crossing
Table 6. The volume of Road Crossing
|
Volume of Road Crossing |
|||||
|
Point |
Monday |
Wednesday |
Friday |
Saturday |
Sunday |
|
1 |
119 |
108 |
206 |
146 |
204 |
|
2 |
57 |
56 |
156 |
54 |
86 |
|
Total |
176 |
164 |
362 |
200 |
290 |
Based
on Table 6, the highest number of crossers was on Friday, with 362 people, and
the lowest number of road crossers was on Wednesday as many as 164 people.
Speed of
Crossroads
Table 7. Average Skipper Sensitivity
|
Hari |
Point |
Penyebrang |
Road Width (m) |
Rata-rata |
|
|
Travel time (s) |
Speed (m/s) |
||||
|
Kamis |
1 |
10 People |
11 |
9,641 |
1,142 |
|
|
2 |
10 People |
10 |
8,733 |
1,148 |
|
Friday |
1 |
10 People |
11 |
9,438 |
1,167 |
|
|
2 |
10 People |
10 |
7,800 |
1,285 |
|
Saturday |
1 |
10 People |
11 |
8,905 |
1,237 |
|
|
2 |
10 People |
10 |
7,267 |
1,380 |
Higher
crossing speeds were on Saturday, with an average speed of 1.2 m/s. If you look at the
speed of pedestrians in the US and UK, the speed for pedestrians, based on the
results of previous studies, averaged 1.2 m/s
Future
Traffic Conditions
To
predict traffic conditions and road crossings is carried out by means of
projection using the multiple exponential method. The data used is vehicle
volume data for the past 5 years to determine traffic conditions in the coming
period and to determine road crossers using the one-piece crossing method which
refers to the pedestrian facility engineering planning guidelines. Traffic
conditions and road crossing conditions can be seen in table 8 and table 9.
Table 8. Traffic Conditions
|
Year |
Number of Vehicles |
Degree of Saturation |
THE |
A (km/jam) |
|
5 |
1497,42011 |
0,5 |
A |
54 |
|
6 |
1679,43707 |
0,5 |
A |
54 |
|
7 |
1884,54321 |
0,6 |
B |
52 |
|
8 |
2115,7693 |
0,7 |
B |
50 |
|
9 |
2376,5543 |
0,8 |
C |
47 |
|
10 |
2670,80133 |
0,8 |
D |
47 |
|
15 |
4821,8931 |
1,5 |
F |
33 |
Based
on the table 8 LOS values obtained in the 5th and 6th years produce the same
value meaning that the driver can still drive the vehicle at the speed he
wants, in the 7th and 8th years the speed has begun to be limited, but only a
little and the driver can still drive at the speed he wants, in the 9th year
the driver's speed can be controlled by traffic, In the 10th year the current has begun to be
unstable, the speed is low and varied, and the volume is close to capacity, and
in the 15th year the current has been hampered, the speed is low, there is
often congestion because the volume is above capacity.
Table 9. Projection of the Crosser
|
Year |
Crossing volume |
PV2 |
Recommendations |
K (PCU/km) |
TCT(s) |
|
|
5 |
383,6783736 |
860309348 |
8,6 x 10^8 |
Zebracross |
27,73 |
5 sd 15 |
|
6 |
388,1674106 |
1094829628 |
1,1 x 10^9 |
Zebracross |
31,10069 |
5 sd 18 |
|
7 |
392,7089693 |
1394707124 |
1,3 x 10^9 |
Pelician |
36,24122 |
5 sd 18 |
|
8 |
397,3036643 |
1778521798 |
1,7 x 10^9 |
Pelician |
42,31539 |
5 sd 18 |
|
9 |
401,9521171 |
2270229713 |
2,2 x 10^9 |
Pelician |
50,56499 |
5 sd 19 |
|
10 |
406,6549569 |
2900742901 |
2,9 x 10^9 |
Pelician |
56,82556 |
5 sd 19 |
|
15 |
431,0074931 |
10021205672 |
1 x 10^10 |
JPO / Pelican with Waiting stalls |
146,11797 |
5 sd 21 |
Based on table 9, the
procurement of JPO at this time with the aim of crossing the road is highly
discouraged and not needed, because after the projection is carried out the JPO
will be effective in the next 15 years. For the current condition, what is
needed is a zebra cross. However, to effectively use pedestrian bridges and
increase the level of security and safety of pedestrians, guardrails can be
made along the pedestrian bridge road, so that pedestrians cross by using
pedestrian pedestrian bridges. And for the TCT value, the difference is not so
far from each year, even in the next six to eight years the calculated TCT is
still the same, which is 5 - 18 s, the largest TCT value is in the next 15
years with a value of 5 - 21 s.
User Satisfaction with Pedestrian
Facilities
In measuring user satisfaction with
pedestrian facilities, the Customer Service Index method is used with variables
used based on Table 10. The results of the calculation of the Customer
Satisfaction Index (CSI) produced the following results:
Table 10. Exit CSI
|
Interests (MIS) |
Satisfaction (MSS) |
WF |
WS |
|
4,28 |
3,67 |
5,923056 |
21,73761 |
|
4,19 |
3,43 |
5,798505 |
19,88887 |
|
4,29 |
3,66 |
5,936895 |
21,72903 |
|
4,25 |
3,57 |
5,881539 |
20,99709 |
|
4,41 |
3,74 |
6,102962 |
22,82508 |
|
4,22 |
3,62 |
5,840022 |
21,14088 |
|
4,04 |
3,47 |
5,590922 |
19,4005 |
|
4,07 |
3,51 |
5,632438 |
19,76986 |
|
4,07 |
3,73 |
5,632438 |
21,009 |
|
4,21 |
3,67 |
5,826183 |
21,38209 |
|
4,21 |
3,73 |
5,826183 |
21,73166 |
|
4,41 |
3,63 |
6,102962 |
22,15375 |
|
4,3 |
3,09 |
5,950733 |
18,38777 |
|
4,34 |
3,46 |
6,006089 |
20,78107 |
|
4,08 |
3,37 |
5,646277 |
19,02795 |
|
4,44 |
3,72 |
6,144478 |
22,85746 |
|
4,45 |
3,58 |
6,158317 |
22,04678 |
|
72,26 |
60,65 |
356,8665 |
Based on the table above, the CSI values can
be calculated as follows:
then CSI,
= 71.373 %
Table 11. Index Value
|
Index Value (%) |
Kriteria Customer Satisfaction Index |
|
81,00 - 100,00 |
Highly satisfied |
|
66,00 - 80,99 |
Satisfied |
|
51,00 - 65,99 |
Quite satisfied |
|
35,00 - 50,00 |
Dissatisfied |
|
0,00 - 34,99 |
Dissatisfied |
The results of the analysis showed that the CSI
value based on questions was 71.373 percent. The results showed that
respondents were satisfied with the conditions of the JPO, such as security,
safety, comfort, cleanliness, and aesthetics. Although the pedestrian crossing
bridge in Taman Kota Kuningan is not yet effective enough as a pedestrian
bridge, the level of satisfaction of respondents with the security, safety,
comfort, cleanliness, and aesthetics of the condition of the pedestrian
crossing bridge was 71.373 percent, between 66.6 percent and 80.99 percent,
which shows that the respondents were satisfied with the condition of the
pedestrian crossing bridge.
Recommendations for Pedestrian Facilities
Recommendations for pedestrian facilities are based
on the results of calculations that refer to the Guidelines for Technical
Planning of Pedestrian Facilities. Here are the recommendations
Figure 5. Zebra Cross
Based on Figure 5, the calculation results show that zebra
crosses will be the facilities needed for pedestrians in the next six years
because, with a good LOS value, pedestrians can still cross using zebra
crosses.
Figure 6. Pelican Crossing
Based on Figure 6, the calculation results show that
pedestrian facilities using pelican crossing are needed in the next seven to 10
years because, judging from the LOS value, the traffic flow has begun to be
crowded, and road crossers have begun to have a little difficulty crossing.
Figure 7. Guardrail
Based on Figure 8, the recommendation to use a guardrail
is to maximize the use of pedestrian crossing bridges. With the existence of a
pedestrian guardrail, crossing must be done using a pedestrian bridge to make
it safer. And for the next 15 years, based on the results of the calculations,
the new pedestrian crossing bridge will be effective. Judging from the LOS
value, the traffic flow has begun to be hampered and congested, so based on the
Pedestrian Engineering Planning Guidelines, a pedestrian crossing bridge is
needed.
CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis, traffic conditions on Jl. Veteran show that
it is a one-way road with two lanes, has low side barriers, and a good level of
service (LOS) (category A), with the highest vehicle volume occurring on Monday
mornings and varying vehicle speeds. The JPO on this road meets the crossing
requirements but is ineffective and serves more as an aesthetic element as it
does not have access for people with disabilities and is more frequently used
on Fridays by pedestrians. The questionnaire showed that 60% of respondents
prefer to cross directly on the roadway, indicating the ineffectiveness of the
JPO. Based on the projected need for crossing facilities, zebra crossings are
recommended for now, with the addition of guardrails to encourage pedestrians
to use JPOs. JPOs are projected to be needed in the next 15 years when LOS
scores drop to category F, where traffic flow will be disrupted, vehicle
volumes exceed capacity, and congestion is common. This research contributes to
the understanding of the effectiveness of pedestrian crossing infrastructure,
especially in relation to road level of service and pedestrian perception. In
the future, this research can serve as a basis for developing predictive models
on the ideal timing of pedestrian crossing infrastructure installation,
including JPOs, in other urban areas with similar traffic characteristics. In
addition, further research could explore more inclusive and effective JPO
design solutions, such as the integration of accessibility for people with
disabilities, to improve pedestrian safety and comfort.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agarwal, S., &
Vikram, D. (2021). Impact of vehicular traffic stream on pedestrian crossing
behavior at an uncontrolled mid-block section. Transportation Research
Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2021.100298
Damsere-Derry, J.,
& Bofah, N. A. (2023). Road safety benefits and challenges associated with
pedestrian footbridge patronage along the Madina-Adenta highway. Urban,
Planning and Transport Research, 11(1).
https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2023.2193240
Dwi Setiawan, A.,
Zaki Yamani, A., Dwi Winati, F., Industrial Engineering and Design, F.,
Panjaitan No, J. DI, South, P., & Tengah, J. (2022). Consumer Satisfaction
Measurement Using Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI) and Importance Performance
Analysis (IPA) (Case Study of Ahul Saleh MSMEs). Journal of Applied
Industrial Technology and Management (JTMIT), 1(4), 286–295.
Grabušic, S.,
& Baric, D. (2023). Simulation of pedestrian and cyclist underpass to
reduce risky behaviour and traffic violations - a case study level crossing
Trnava in Croatia. Transportation Research Procedia, 74,
125–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2023.11.121
Hasan, R.,
Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., & Napiah, M. (2020). An intercept study of
footbridge users and non-users in Malaysia. Transportation Research Part F:
Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 73, 66–79.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.05.011
Kim, Y., Choi, B.,
Choi, M., Ahn, S., & Hwang, S. (2023). Enhancing pedestrian perceived
safety through walking environment modification considering traffic and
walking infrastructure. Frontiers in Public Health, 11.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1326468
Landa-Blanco, M.,
& Ávila, J. (2020). Factors related to the use of pedestrian bridges in
university students of Honduras. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic
Psychology and Behaviour, 71, 220–228.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.04.016
Onelcin, P., &
Alver, Y. (2015). Illegal crossing behavior of pedestrians at signalized
intersections: Factors affecting the gap acceptance. Transportation
Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 31, 124–132.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.007
Oviedo-Trespalacios,
O., & Scott-Parker, B. (2017). Footbridge usage in high-traffic flow
highways: The intersection of safety and security in pedestrian
decision-making. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology
and Behaviour, 49, 177–187.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2017.06.010
Ramadani, H. N., Rahmani, H., & Gazali, A. (2018). Study of efficiency pedestrian bridge crossing
in the road of Pangerang Antasari, Banjarmasin. MATEC Web of Conferences,
181. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201818106009
Räsänen, M.,
Lajunen, T., Alticafarbay, F., & Aydin, C. (2007). Pedestrian self-reports
of factors influencing the use of pedestrian bridges. Accident Analysis and
Prevention, 39(5), 969–973.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2007.01.004
Sarker, M. S.,
Carsten, O., Huang, Y., & Hajiseyedjavadi, F. (2023). Motivations of
pedestrians for safe use of highway crossing: an application of the behaviour
change model COM-B in Bangladesh. Traffic Safety Research, 4.
https://doi.org/10.55329/apul4688
Shaaban, K.,
Muley, D., & Mohammed, A. (2018). Analysis of illegal pedestrian crossing
behavior on a major divided arterial road. Transportation Research Part F:
Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 54, 124–137.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.01.012
Sinclair, M.,
& Zuidgeest, M. (2016). Investigations into pedestrian crossing choices on
Cape Town freeways. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and
Behaviour, 42, 479–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.07.006
Skandami, M. O., Anapali, I. S., & Basbas, S. (2021). Choosing footbridge or signalized crossing in an
urban area: What triggers pedestrians? Transactions on Transport Sciences,
11(3), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.5507/TOTS.2020.013
Stefanova, T.,
Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Freeman, J., Wullems, C., Rakotonirainy, A.,
Burkhardt, J. M., & Delhomme, P. (2018). Contextual factors explaining
risk-taking intentions at Australian level crossings. Safety Science, 110,
145–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.03.004
Webb, E. A., Bell,
S., Lacey, R. E., & Abell, J. G. (2017). Crossing the road in time:
Inequalities in older people’s walking speeds. Journal of Transport and
Health, 5, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2017.02.009
Wibowo, S. S.,
& Wicaksana, R. (2018). Pedestrian crossing model in urban street (Case
study on commercial area in Bandung). MATEC Web of Conferences, 181.
https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201818102004
Zafri, N. M.,
Sultana, R., Himal, M. R. H., & Tabassum, T. (2020). Factors influencing
pedestrians’ decision to cross the road by risky rolling gap crossing strategy
at intersections in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Accident Analysis and Prevention,
142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105564
|
Putri Maharani
Rifqi, Aida Septiani Ayunindita, Mira Lestira Hariani (2024) |
|
First publication right: Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health (AJESH) |
|
This article is licensed under: |