Bus Stop

BUS STOP
URBAN DESIGN
Nine Techniques for Enhancing Bus Stops and Neighbourhoods
and their Application in Metro Vancouver
Kevin Jingyi Zhang 2012

2 Bus Stop Urban Design
Bus Stop Urban Design
by
Kevin Jingyi Zhang
B. Environment Design, The University of British Columbia, 2009
A PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS (PLANNING)
in
THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES
School of Community and Regional Planning
We accept this project as conforming
to the required standard
.....................................................
.....................................................
.....................................................
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
October 2012
© Kevin Jingyi Zhang, 2012

www.kjzhang.com
Kevin Jingyi Zhang 2012 3
Acknowledgments
This research has been generously supported by the Pacific Institute for
Climate Solutions.
I would like to thank my supervisor, professor Maged Senbel, and my

second reader, Scot Hein of City of Vancouver, for their invaluable advice
throughout the entire process. I am grateful for the ongoing guidance and
research tools provided by Michelle Babiuk of TransLink and professor
Ronald Kellett of UBC.
In addition, I want to thank Frank Ducote, Gary Penway, and Alexander

Kurnicki of the City of North Vancouver, Raymond Fung and Hans
Breuer of West Vancouver, Courtney Miller of Richmond, Henry Wong
of Coquitlam, Eric Vance and Kristi Smith of Port Moody for providing
me with feedback on specific designs and data for analysis. Modular bus
shelter designs were iterated with insights and advice from Bita Vorell
and Marco Bonaventura of TransLink.
Lastly, I thank my family and my girlfriend for their unwavering support,

and the countless people I have talked to during my daily commute for
their ideas and inspirations.
Abstract
Bus Stop Urban Design (BSUD) seeks to improve the waiting environment at bus
stops through urban design techniques. Because bus stops are embedded into
the neighbourhood, improvements will not only benefit the riders, but also the
immediate urban realm. A more comfortable waiting environment leads to greater
rider satisfaction and shorter perceived wait times, leading to higher ridership.
A well designed public space may leads to greater walkability in the area and a
safer environment that is more conducive towards active transportation for local
residents.
The project identifies 7 major goals in designing a good bus stop: safety,
thermal comfort, acoustic comfort, wind protection, visual comfort, accessibility,
and integration. The goals are achieved by 9 techniques: lighting, seating
and surfaces, cover, amenities, information, vegetation, traffic management,
pedestrian infrastructure and bicycle infrastructure. These 9 techniques are
then applied to 9 bus stops in Metro Vancouver, ranging from major exchanges
to remote stops. Beyond testing the identified goals and techniques in existing
settings, the design section also demonstrates that with appropriate urban design
expertise, municipalities can quickly develop and visualize public space designs
with low costs and widely available technology.
King George Boulevard and 88th Avenue, Lonsdale Avenue and 15th Street, City of Imperial Street and Dow Avenue, Burnaby
Surrey North Vancouver
Cambie Street and 41st Avenue, Oak Street and 70th Avenue, Vancouver Cottonwood Avenue and Fairview Street,
Vancouver Coquitlam
Fraser Street and 45th Avenue, Vancouver Nanaimo Street and Grant Avenue, North West Marine Drive and Sasamat
Vancouver Street, Vancouver
CONTENTS
Acknowledgments3 3.0 BUS STOP URBAN DESIGN GOALS 22
Abstract4 3.1 Safety 26
1.0 INTRODUCTION 8 3.1.1 Risk of Accident 26
3.1.2 Risk of Crime 26

1.1 Project Summary 11
3.1.3 Individual Perceptions 27
1.2 Background and Rationale 11
3.2 Thermal Comfort 27
1.3 Focus on Design 12
3.3 Acoustic Comfort 28
1.4 Trends 13
3.4 Wind Protection 28
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW 14 3.5 Visual Comfort 29
2.1 Urban Realm and Transit Ridership 16 3.6 Accessibility 30
2.1.1 Proximity to Transit 16 3.7 Integration 30
2.1.2 Physical Environment Quality 16
2.2 Urban Realm and Active Transportation 17
2.2.1 General Effect 17
2.2.2 Demographic Differences 17
2.3 Physical Activity and Health 17
2.4 Commuter’s Value of Time 18
2.5 Hierarchy of Elements 19

2.6 Urban Space Design Concepts 19
2.6.1 Placemaking 19
photo: Andrea Maccioni
2.6.2 Shared Space 20
2.6.3 Style 20
2.7 Public Project Implementation 21
2.7.1 Collaboration 21
2.7.2 Financing 21
4.0 BUS STOP URBAN DESIGN TECHNIQUES 32 5.0 DESIGN APPLICATIONS 44
4.1 Lighting 36 5.1 Design Process 46
4.1.1 Lighting and Safety 36 5.2 Regional Bus Stop Analysis 47
4.1.2 Lighting and Character 36 5.2.1 Bus Stop Mapping 48
4.2 Seating and Surfaces 36 5.2.2 Bus Stop Selection 52

4.3 Cover 37 5.6 Lighting for Safety
King George Blvd. and 88th Ave, Surrey 54
4.4 Amenities 38
5.4 Seating the Public
4.5 Information 39 Lonsdale Ave. and 15th St, City of North Vancouver56
4.6 Vegetation 39 5.5 Complementary Cover
Imperial St. and Dow Ave, Burnaby 58
4.6.1 Microclimate 40
5.6 Amenities Abound
4.6.2 Community 40 Cambie St. and 41st Ave, Vancouver 60
4.7 Traffic Management 41 5.7 Informative Bus Stop
Oak St. and 70th Ave, Vancouver 62
4.8 Pedestrian Infrastructure 41
5.8 Versatile Vegetation
4.8.1 Measuring Walkability 41
Cottonwood Ave. and Fairview St, Coquitlam 64
4.8.2 Enhancing Quality 42
5.9 Parting with Traffic
4.8.3 Increasing connectivity 42 Fraser St. and 45th Ave, Vancouver 66
4.9 Bicycle Infrastructure 42 5.10 Walkable Block

Nanaimo St. and Grant Ave, Vancouver 68
4.9.1 Station Level Accommodations 42
5.11 Cycling Convenience
4.9.2 Increasing connectivity 43 NW Marine Dr. and Sasamat St, Vancouver 70
5.12 Modular Shelter Design 72
5.12.1 Components 72
5.12.2 Configurations 73
6.0 CONCLUSION 74
6.1 Summary 76
6.2 Recommendations and Further Studies 77
7.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 78
1.0 INTRODUCTION
photo: Philip Menke
Figure 1.1.1: Space occupied by 28 single Space occupied by 28 cyclists Space occupied by 28 bus riders
occupancy drivers
Source: Complete Streets for Canada
1.1 Project Summary

Bus Stop Urban Design (BSUD) aims to improve the waiting
environment of bus stops and their adjacent neighbourhoods through
the development and application of 9 design techniques. Topics of focus
include station amenities, non-vehicular access, and neighbourhood
integration. It is hoped that better walking and waiting environments will
lead to higher active transportation and transit mode shares, thereby
reducing transportation related greenhouse gases and improving overall
health.
This project contains five sections. First, the author reviews current
literature on issues relating to urban design, transit, and commuter
behaviour. Second, the research results give rise to a set of 7 goals for
urban design around bus stops. Third, the author identifies 9 design
techniques for achieving the goals. Fourth, the author demonstrates
each of the 9 techniques at a bus stop in Metro Vancouver. Fifth, the
author makes recommendations for further actions and research.
1.2 Background and Rationale

According to UN reports, the urban population now amounts to 50
percent of total global population and will rise to about 75 percent
by 2030 (United Nations, 2007). This poses dramatic transportation
challenges for the major cities of the world. In British Columbia, half of
household carbon emissions and one third of overall carbon emissions
result from transportation, which consists largely of private automobile
use (BC Ministry of Environment, 2008). Therefore, reducing car use can
play a pivotal role in transitioning into a low carbon emissions economy.
However, at the same time, we must improve transit service to ensure
that mobility is not limited when car use decreases.
1.3 Focus on Design

Regional transit ridership is affected by a variety of factors such as
regional geography, metropolitan economy, population characteristics,
and the built environment (Taylor, Miller, Iseki, & Fink, 2009). Further,
the effect of the built environment on ridership is often broken down
into 5 D’s: density of development, diversity of land uses, design of the
environment, destination accessibility, and distance to transit (Ewing &
Cervero, 2010). The third factor, design of the environment, is the focus
of this report. Studies show strong connections between the urban realm
and mode choice. A recent study commissioned by TransLink showed
that 45% of residents along Main Street in Vancouver are more likely to
choose transit after improvements to sidewalks and bus shelters were
made in 2005 (NRG Research Group, 2010). Because riders expend
a great deal of the time, energy and patience outside of buses while
waiting or transferring (Taylor, Iseki, Miller, & Smart, 2007), enhanced
passenger amenities are greatly valued by passengers (Jenks, 1998).
Alternatively, lack of adequate design leads to commuters feeling
undervalued and thereby view the waiting experience as an impediment
to choosing transit (Hess, 2012; Wardman, 2001).
Overall Goal Contributing Factors Components
Increase Transit Ridership Metropolitan Economy Density of Development
Built Environment Diversity of Land Uses
Population Characteristics Design of Environment
Regional Geography Destination Accessibility
Distance to Transit
Figure 1.3.1: Project Context
1.4 Trends
In most North American cities, transit mode share declined dramatically
after the 1930’s and have remained low since the 1970’s (Taylor et
al., 2009). Part of this phenomenon is caused by the domination of
automobile oriented design of cities after World War II (Lillebye, 1996).
Such principles made cities easy for driving, but hard for walking and
cycling, which are the primary feeder modes for transit. As a result,
many feel that the walk to and the wait at bus stops have become too
physically and emotionally demanding compared to travelling in a private
car (Wardman, Hine, & Stradling, 2001).
However, as the recognition of the environmental impacts of

transportation related GHGs have grown in recent years, many cities
have initiated traffic calming and pedestrian network enhancement
programs to restore the walking environment and make taking transit
easier (Ewing, 2008). Although the effects of these actions are slow to be
seen, most cities understand that such incremental transformations build
off one another, have long term benefits, and are worth investing in (Van
Dyck, Deforche, Cardon, & De Bourdeaudhuij, 2009). This report aims to
contribute to this transformation.
180
160
140
Annual Unlinked Transit Trips per Capita
120
Ferry
100
Trolley Bus
Light Rail
80
Heavy Rail
60 Bus
40
20
0
1917
1920
1923
1926
1929
1932
1935
1938
1941
1944
1947
1950
1953
1956
1959
1962
1965
1968
1971
1974
1977
1980
1983
1986
1989
1992
1995
1998
2001
2004
2007
2010
Figure 1.4.1: Annual Unlinked Transit Trips per Capita in the United States
Source: American Public Transportation Association Historical Ridership Report
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
photo: Rick van Hemert
2.1 Urban Realm and Transit Ridership

2.1.1 Proximity to Transit
There are many urban realm factors that affect bus ridership; many of
which relate to the trip that connects one’s home to the bus stop, which
is often by walking or cycling. Studies have shown that greatest predictor
of transit use is proximity (Cervero, 2002; Gutiérrez & García-Palomares,
2008). The closer one lives to a transit stop, the more likely one will
take transit (Hoehner, Brennan Ramirez, Elliott, Handy, & Brownson,
2005). The typical catchment for a bus stop is contained within a 400
metre radius around the stop and can be larger for faster forms of transit
(Gutiérrez, Cardozo, & García-Palomares, 2011).
2.1.2 Physical Environment Quality

More recent studies show that this catchment area is not static. The
quality of the walking and cycling environment around the stop can
greatly affect how far people are willing to travel to reach the bus stop
(Taylor & Fink, 2011). These findings make intuitive sense because
significant portions of transit trips, unlike private automobile trips, are
spent outside of the vehicle. As a result, walkabable environments can
encourage walking to transit (Martens, 2004), where as inadequate
outdoor environments can be a barrier to riding transit (Hess, 2012).
Walkable environments are often identified as areas that have more
pedestrian traffic, environmental and social safety, pleasing aesthetics,
natural features, pedestrian amenities, and land use diversity (Brown,
Werner, Amburgey, & Szalay, 2007). Less walk able environments are
often the result of auto-centric planning, using vehicular roads as the
organizing structure of a city (Lillebye, 1996). This effect of the physical
environment on people’s decisions to take transit varies on an individual
basis. While improvements in station surroundings have little effect on
dependent riders, they are an effective way of attracting infrequent or
choice riders (Reconnecting America, 2011). Therefore, providing high-
quality and comfortable service is key in improving the public image of
transit and increasing customer satisfaction (Jenks, 1998).
2.2 Urban Realm and Active

Transportation
2.2.1 General Effect
Active transportation refers to human-powered forms of travel, such
as walking, cycling, skating, and manual wheelchairs (Litman, 2003).
Because most transit trips start and end with walking trips, it is important
to determine how active transportation is affected by the physical
environment. In general, living in a highly walkable neighbourhood is
associated with more walking for transportation purposes (Van Dyck
et al., 2009). More specifically, traffic calming measures increase the
proportion of walking trips (Susilo, Williams, Lindsay, & Dair, 2012) In
addition, studies show that walkable environments can also induce
casual walking among local residents (Cao, Mokhtarian, & Handy, 2009;
Hoehner et al., 2005).
2.2.2 Demographic Differences

Improvements to pedestrian and cycling networks such as new routes
and lighting improvements to existing paths around a transit stop
can have positive effects for the entire neighbourhood. However the
magnitude of the effect varies with different segments of the population.
Urban realm improvements encourage more children to walk and bike to
school, if parents also have high levels of perceived safety (Gallimore,
Brown, & Werner, 2011). Increased accessibility of the outdoors mean
that older adults who previously found the urban environment to be a
barrier are also more likely to enjoy public spaces (Hess, 2012). Women
are also found to be more sensitive to the physical environment when
choosing travel modes as compared to men (Humpel, Owen, Iverson,
Leslie, & Bauman, 2004). Research also shows that those with less
positive attitudes towards walking and cycling are more affected by such
enhancements (Van Dyck et al., 2009).
2.3 Physical Activity and Health

Several studies provide evidence that as a person engages in more
low to moderate physical activity on a daily basis, the associated health
benefits become larger (Morris, Clayton, Everitt, Semmence, & Burgess,
1990; Paffenbarger, Hyde, Wing, & Hsieh, 1986; Sandvik et al., 1993).
Walking or biking to bus stops can easily fulfill this requirement due to
the trips’ short duration, regularity, and moderate level of effort (Hoehner
et al., 2005). In fact, brisk walking alone has been identified as protective
of physical health, independent of the benefits of more vigorous activity
(Saelens, Sallis, & Frank, 2003). Although the level of exertion may
be minor, the health impacts are significant. Studies observe the most
major increases in physical and mental health occur between individuals
that do not exercise and those that engage in some physical activity
for 16-48 minutes (Leon, Connett, Jacobs, & Rauramaa, 1987). The
marginal benefit of daily exercise beyond 48 minutes decreases (Leon
et al., 1987). However, If combined with other intense forms of exercise
on a weekly basis, active transportation can significantly improve overall
health of an individual (Rodriguez, Khattak, & Evenson, 2006). These
health benefits have been quantified to a savings of $400 to $4000 in
medical costs per person (Boarnet, Greenwald, & McMillan, 2008).
2.4 Commuter’s Value of Time

For urban realm improvements to be successful, one must understand
the transit user market (Buys & Miller, 2011). One of these factors is
the rider’s valuation of time. A commuter’s value of travel time is a
combination of the opportunity cost of the entire time spent travelling
and the cumulative disutility of walking, waiting, and travelling (Wardman,
2004). The disutility of walking stems mostly from the physical effort
required and any negative perceptions of the route (Wardman, 2004).
The disutility of waiting results from the uncertainty of arrival times and
the inability to use the waiting time productively. While the amount of
disutility of transit times vary from person to person (Taylor et al., 2009),
a review of past studies suggests that most riders value out-of-vehicle
travel time at 2 to 3 times the value of in-vehicle travel time (Daly &
Zachary, 1975; Davies & Rogers, 1973). This factor is found to be higher
for women (+26%) when compared to men, and for people over the
age of 50 (+23%) (Wardman, 2001). However, new research shows that
with the steady improvement of bus stop design such as having real-
time information displays and wireless internet connectivity, and with
advancement in mobile technology such as smart phones and laptops,
waiting time is only valued at 1.6 times more than riding time (Wardman,
2004).
2.5 Hierarchy of Elements

Often times, there is limited funding for public realm improvement
projects. Therefore, it is important to identify which elements to focus on
first. The performance of a public good should not be separated from its
costs (Fukahori & Kubota, 2003). A survey of transit user preferences in
Los Angeles found that commuters required the stations to be, in order
of importance: easy to get around, feel safe during day, easy to find,
well lit at night, clean, sheltered, have places to sit, and have food and
washrooms nearby (Taylor et al., 2007). A more recent survey of transit
riders in Ottawa found that factors that influence ridership are, in order of
importance: bus information, on-street service, station safety, customer
service, safety en-route, reduced fare, cleanliness, and general attitudes
towards transit (Taylor & Fink, 2011). One can see that accessibility and
safety top both lists. Another study from Japan looked the relationship
between the pedestrian-perceived value gained of an improvement and
the cost of installation (Fukahori & Kubota, 2003). The researchers found
that paving, lighting, and vegetation had the most perceived benefit per
dollar over their life spans.
2.6 Urban Space Design Concepts

2.6.1 Placemaking
Placemaking is a design and planning concept that capitalizes on the
local community’s assets, inspiration, and potential, ultimately creating
good public spaces that promote people’s health, happiness, and well
being (Project for Public Spaces, 2012). Placemaking stresses the value
of what already exists in the neighbourhood, ranging from shops and
services to community expertise. This strategy for designing urban
spaces is strongly influenced by residents (J. Jacobs, 1961). Results photo: Author
of such planning are usually more functional, contextual and inclusive
Figure 2.6.1: Street furniture and
(Project for Public Spaces, 2012). Some physical attributes of spaces vegetation help create a sense of place in
that characterize successful places include short blocks, human scaled a public open space.
amenities, and clever uses of vegetation (A. B. Jacobs, 1995; Whyte,
1980). These spaces tend to generate a greater sense of ownership
among the community rather than top-down designs implemented
without consultation.
2.6.2 Shared Space

Shared space is a design concept for public spaces that promotes
removing the separation between modes of transport in order to create
more pedestrian friendly environments (Hamilton-Baillie & Jones, 2005).
The idea of removing ground markings for traffic, which are painted
in the name of safety, seem counter intuitive at first, but the result is
more eye contact, slower speeds and heightened awareness. However,
photo: Author implementation of shared spaces in a region that has never had such
Figure 2.6.2: An example of shared space urban features may be a challenge. The success of such shared
between cars, pedestrians and trams. space zones is extremely dependent on people’s familiarity with these
areas (Kaparias, Bell, Miri, Chan, & Mount, 2012). Since the safety of
pedestrians in such zones is reliant on drivers’ heightened awareness, it
is important that adequate driver education exists before shared space
is implemented. The study also shows that the more familiar people are
with shared spaces, the more likely they will be in favour of such features
in their city. Therefore, the first shared spaces will require considerable
work from all parties involved. If there is initial success, subsequent
shared spaces may come much easier.
2.6.3 Style
Because public spaces such as bus stops affect the daily lives of
many, the styles of these elements are important (Lillebye, 1996). From
survey results, it is shown that most people prefer public spaces that
are backdrop-like, that blend in with the surroundings and do not seek
attention (Gjerde, 2011). The general public likes patterns of conformity
and order more than design professionals (Gjerde, 2011). These
preferences speak to the desire of people for a more integrated travel
experience that benefits from the latest advances in design but also has
photo: Steve Ellaway
a relatively conservative look that maintains its attractiveness over time
Figure 2.6.3: Many residents prefer bus (Fung, 2012; Thomsen, 2011). In addition, it is important to not be carried
stops that are stylistically similar to the
away by over urbanizing spaces, for there are many factors of lower
surrounding architecture.
density developments, such as long views, that are conducive towards
active transportation (Susilo et al., 2012). Other principles such as Crime
Prevention Trough Environmental Design (CPTED) are also popular in
the field of public space design (Alliance Against Crime, 2011; Saraiva &
Pinho, 2011), and will be discussed later in the report.
2.7 Public Project Implementation

2.7.1 Collaboration
While there is usually support for public space improvement projects as they
are often on city owned land (Giddings, Charlton, & Horne, 2011) and for
environmentally sustainable agendas (Susilo et al., 2012), there are still major
road blocks. Common difficulties of public space projects include issues of
public versus private realm, constrained roadway widths, aligning multiple
funding sources and stakeholders, and coordination of utilities, streetscaping
and infrastructure (Reconnecting America, 2011). Various design elements may
become points of contention. Therefore, it is recommended that the public be
involved at all stages of the process (Borst, Miedema, de Vries, Graham, & van
Dongen, 2008; J. Jacobs, 1961). Due diligence in this aspect will ensure there
is adequate support for the project and that the final design reflects the needs
of the neighbourhood and commuters alike (Chrisomallidou, Chrisomallidis, &
Theodosiou, 2004). Great designs are often the result of planners, architects,
and engineers coming together to realize an integrative urban vision (Kashef,
2008). Other non-design parties that are significant to the process include area
businesses, local employers, development professionals, local associations and
law enforcement personnel (Reconnecting America, 2011).
2.7.2 Financing
Financing is another important issue in the implementation of bus stop
improvements. While cost can vary widely depending on design, studies have
found that substantial cost savings can be achieved if stops are efficiently
designed (Hamilton-Baillie & Jones, 2005). The use of modular structures and
passive heating are techniques that can save capital and operational costs (see
5.12). If bus stop enhancements can generate significant pedestrian traffic and
are well integrated with adjacent businesses, area business associations may be
willing to contribute financially (Zacharias, Zhang, & Nakajima, 2011). In addition,
surveys show that if citizens perceive significant amenity improvements arising
from public projects, they are more likely to approve the required public spending
(Fukahori & Kubota, 2003). Therefore, it is important to employ creative and
reliable methods to communicate the benefits of such projects to the general
public (Jenks, 1998). Also, it is demonstrated in multiple cities that adjusting
parking prices is an efficient way of generating revenue to finance urban realm
improvements (Dueker, Strathman, & Bianco, 1998). Finally, because urban realm
projects usually add to the desirability of an area and increase surrounding land
values, amenities contributions can be negotiated with developers to finance bus
stop improvements (Garmendia, de Urena, Ribalaygua, Leal, & Coronado, 2008).
3.0 BUS STOP URBAN DESIGN
GOALS
photo: Author
The Bus Stop Urban Design Goals is a set of principles that should guide decisions when designing bus
stops. Each goal is supplemented with research and visual examples. The 7 goals are: safety, thermal comfort,
acoustic comfort, wind protection, visual comfort, accessibility, and integration.
photo: Darrell James photo: Henk Graalman photo: Simon Garnier
Safety Thermal Comfort Acoustic Comfort

CPTED measures and accessible Thermal condition is the most Traffic noise negatively affects
design reduce the risk for important factor determining both riders and adjacent residents.
crime and accidents. Natural comfort. Passive and active Elements should be arranged to
surveillance through design is controls can be used to maintain a best shield or absorb noise.
preferred. desired temperature range.
photo: Lies Baas photo: Ben Stadtneurotiker photo: Joel Davis
Wind Protection Visual Comfort Accessibility

Wind can have both mechanical Sufficient lighting should be The bus stop should be easily
and thermal impacts on the bus provided for safety and to conduct accessible by all segments of the
rider. Wind should be carefully productive activities at a bus stop. population, of all physical abilities,
mitigated as its cooling effects Excessive light such as glare and through all travel modes.
may be desired. should be minimized.
photo: Baza Rambler
Integration
Being nodes within
neighbourhoods, bus stops
should cater to the needs of their
surroundings and reflect the
identity of the community.
3.1 Safety
In a survey of bus riders and confirmed by many other studies, safety is
consistently ranked as one of the highest priorities at a bus stop (Taylor
et al., 2007). It is understandable that personal safety is the basis upon
which all other improvements can be made. Without an adequate level of
perceived safety, commuters will simply choose not to use the bus stop
(Nabors et al., 2007). Issues of safety may result from criminal activity or
physical hazards, such as high vehicular traffic or slippery surfaces. It is
important to note the differences between perceived risk and actual risk,
which may be correlated or inversely correlated depending on the type of
risk (Cho, Rodríguez, & Khattak, 2009).
3.1.1 Risk of Accident

Risk of accidents at a bus stop is usually associated with pedestrians
being in close proximity to heavy or fast vehicular traffic (Tan, Wang, Lu,
& Bian, 2007). To ensure the safety of commuters, adequate pedestrian
protection must be provided. Strategies that have proven effective are
more traffic lights, crosswalks and barriers between modes of travel
(Rodríguez, Brisson, & Estupiñán, 2009). Traffic calming techniques
that slow down vehicles are also beneficial. However, most traffic
calming programs in North America have not fundamentally shifted their
emphasis towards the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and the town
environment (Ewing, 2008). One particular take on traffic calming is the
concept of shared space, in which separations (curbs, lines) between
travel modes are removed, encouraging eye contact between all users
(Hamilton-Baillie & Jones, 2005). Studies show these areas have lower
accident rates because when there is higher perceived danger, people
will act more carefully, resulting in a safer environment (Kaparias et al.,
2012). This strategy is worth investigating, especially for locations with
multiple bus stops and high density residential.
3.1.2 Risk of Crime

Crime in public spaces occur mostly because there exist windows
of opportunity (Saraiva & Pinho, 2011). Therefore, reducing these
photo: SEATAC Municipal Code opportunities is the preferred method for reducing risk for crime around
Figure 3.1.1: Natural surveillance reduces bus stops. While increased surveillance by transit police and cameras
opportunities for crime without target are options, they may cause excessive target hardening and lead to a
hardening. fortress mentality (Saraiva & Pinho, 2011). Many have pointed out that
measures to keep out “undesirables” cause more detriment to a public
space than the original problem (J. Jacobs, 1961). Crime prevention
through environmental design (CPTED) is a popular school of thought
that focuses on natural surveillance (Susilo et al., 2012). Natural
surveillance refers to creating a safer environment through means that
also make the space more welcoming. Strategies for bus stops include
making the space easily observable from the surrounding, avoiding
hiding spaces, ensuring sufficient lighting at all times, and maintaining
station upkeep (Nikolopoulou, Kleissl, Linden, & Lykoudis, 2011; Saraiva
& Pinho, 2011).
3.1.3 Individual Perceptions

Individuals will evaluate the risk of an area based on their own attributes
such as age, gender, and familiarity with the area. Studies show that
commuters who are older, female, or new to the area have lower
thresholds for what is considered a safe environment (Leslie et al.,
2005). Residents of a bus stop’s catchment area and those who walk
around the bus stop area for exercise have lower levels of perceived
risk of traffic accidents and crime (Humpel et al., 2004; Owen, Humpel,
Leslie, Bauman, & Sallis, 2004). Such findings are beneficial in refining
the amount of CPTED measures required to ensure a safe environment
for commuters.
3.2 Thermal Comfort

Surveys of bus stop users show that overall comfort is determined
primarily by the thermal environment (Nikolopoulou et al., 2011). In areas
of extreme heat or extreme cold, it is important that the designer develop
a level of “radiant” sensitivity (Scudo, Dessi, & Rogora, 2004). At the bus
stop level, the microclimate is determined both by regional factors such
as solar gains, local factors like the urban heat island effect, and site
factors like surface temperatures (Kleerekoper, van Esch, & Salcedo,
2011; Scudo et al., 2004). As a result, it is important to consider the
ventilation of the site, albedo of materials used as they affect the overall
thermal environment (Asaeda & Thanh, 1996).
Ambient temperature is found to be one of the strongest factors for both

men and women choosing to walk when other modes are available
(Owen et al., 2004). A temperature of 24 degrees Celsius is most photo: Kevin Dooley
desired by those waiting outdoors (Chun & Tamura, 2005). While 24 Figure 3.2.1: Shade and shelter are both
degrees is ideal, people are found to be more accepting of variations in important for thermal comfort.
outdoor environments. In general, comfort range for commuters is +/- 3
degrees Celsius in the winter, and +/- 10 degrees Celsius during other
seasons (bin Saleh & Pitts, 2004). Another major factor in determining
the comfort level of a stop is past experience. People’s perceptions of
what is comfortable is often set by their past experience in that location
(Chun & Tamura, 2005). Even when thermal conditions are not ideal,
people will engage in adaptive behaviours up to a certain point, such as
drinking cool fluids or adjusting clothing (Katzschner, Bosch, & Roettgen,
2004). While thermal comfort is of primary concern at a bus stop, there is
no need for narrow range HVAC systems in most circumstances due to
these adaptive behaviours (Chun & Tamura, 2005).
3.3 Acoustic Comfort

While important to the overall comfort of the commuter, the acoustic
environment is often least discussed (Kang, Yang, & Zhang, 2004).
Sound in urban spaces can be categorized into keynotes and sound
marks, more commonly referred to as background and foreground
sounds respectively (Schafer, 1976). Background sounds can consist
of traffic and other urban noises, while foreground sounds usually relay
information, such as crosswalk rings and announcements. In public
spaces, people will be accepting of noise levels between 40-70 dB, up to
a maximum of 73 dB (Giddings et al., 2011; Yang & Kang, 2005). As with
temperature, people can tolerate variations depending on the situation.
Pleasant sounds like birds songs, live music and the sound of water can
create acoustic comfort even when noise levels are high (Kang et al.,
2004). It is also found that acoustic comfort interacts significantly with
other factors. For example, if a bus stop is particularly visually pleasing,
this can equate to a 10 dB reduction in noise (Kang et al., 2004). Finally,
it is important to note differences in audience. Commuters may have
different cultural and personal preferences to sound and music (Yang
& Kang, 2003). Also, residents who live close to bus stations are likely
to have much lower tolerances for noise as they are not in an outside
environment.
3.4 Wind Protection

The effects of wind can be divided into two main categories, mechanical
and thermal (Penwarden & Wise, 1975). Wind under 5 m/s can be
considered a light breeze and pleasant. Above 5m/s, mechanical
and thermal effects can both be felt. At wind speed of 10m/s, walking
becomes unpleasant (Giddings et al., 2011; Penwarden & Wise, 1975).
Wind is a difficult factor to design for as it is welcomed in some situations

and unwanted in others. Wind environment is also difficult to foresee
and control because it is influenced by a number of global, regional and
local factors (Gaardsted Esbensen Consulting Engineers Ltd., 2004).
Similar to thermal conditions, data from meteorological stations cannot
adequately represent the microclimatic conditions of sites as small as
a bus station (Nikolopoulou, 2004). Such locations’ wind environment
is determined by its orientation to access streets, size of the urban
space, height of its surrounding buildings, and objects in the area that
acts as windbreaks (Gaardsted Esbensen Consulting Engineers Ltd.,
2004). Therefore, the best solution is to provide a variety of spaces
so that people may choose the type of environment that best suits
them. Generally, it is ideal to keep both wind speed and turbulence to a
minimum in public spaces.
3.5 Visual Comfort

Visual comfort can be broken down into three factors: adequate lighting
for desired activities, lack of glare or other uncomfortable visual stimuli,
and points of interest for the commuter to focus on. While people are
highly adaptive when it comes to the amount of lighting provided, they
almost always welcome more light, especially sunshine (Compagnon
& Goyette-Pernot, 2004). Studies also show that most visual attention
is directed towards the open part of the site or towards some type
of activity. This seems to be in line with other urban design theories photo: Author
that state people feel most comfortable being on the edges of urban
Figure 3.5.1: People like waiting in areas
spaces, looking inward on the action (Gehl, 1987). Another important where extreme sunlight is mitigated,
measurement is the maximum distance between users that allows for reducing glare.
face recognition, which is 24 metres. To ensure a comfortable visual
environment during the day, the sun should reach between 20-80%
of the site at all times (Compagnon & Goyette-Pernot, 2004). It is also
shown that visual comfort interacts widely with other factors. Most
notably, visually stimulating objects and activities in a location can
compensate for many unwanted attributes, such as extended wait times
and high levels of noise (Kang et al., 2004). Therefore, creating a visually
comfortable and interesting environment is extremely beneficial, as it can
both draw people to and keep people at a public space.
3.6 Accessibility
Accessibility refers to the access of the bus stop by all segments of the
population and through all modes. It is found that better connections
between the neighborhood and the surroundings encourage individuals
to walk or cycle more (Susilo et al., 2012). Assuming basic accessibility
is met, such as minimum widths needed for pedestrian comfort (Tan
et al., 2007), this section discusses possible avenues of improvement
of access to expand a bus stop’s area of influence (Reconnecting
America, 2011). In particular, the specific needs of the elderly and
families must be accommodated at station access points and loading
points (TransLink, 2011). With growing popularity of active transportation,
it is important to ensure that there is sufficient pedestrian and cycling
network connectivity around the bus stop to serve these modes (Cole,
Burke, Leslie, Donald, & Owen, 2010). Cycling infrastructure is especially
important in and around suburban stops, as the distances travelled to
bus stops are usually greater. As a result, commuters are more likely
photo: Author to cycle (2km to 5km) to transit if the option exists (Martens, 2004).
Figure 3.6.1: Special attention should Public education of the cycling network is also extremely important as
be paid to ensure stops are comfortably commuters’ tendency to cycle is associated with perceived access to bike
accessible for wheelchairs and strollers. lanes. Unfortunately, many people are simply not aware of their existence
(Larsen & El-Geneidy, 2011).
3.7 Integration
Like any urban open space, bus stops can benefit greatly by being
integrated with its surroundings in multiple facets (Gjerde, 2011). With
cooperation from the municipality, transit agency, and adjacent land
owners, it is possible to create bus stops that not only serves commuters,
but also seamlessly connects with neighbouring activities (Wardman et
al., 2001; Zacharias et al., 2011). The orientation of and amenities at the
stop should be compatible with the surrounding establishments, whether
it’s providing extra surfaces for stops near grocery stores or appropriately
sized seats for stops near elementary schools. Designers should also
be aware that the use of the bus stop may vary between seasons.
Therefore it is important that amenities underused by commuters can be
repurposed by local users (Chrisomallidou et al., 2004).
Integration is not only for the benefit of the neighbours. Studies show
that being close to shops, catering establishments, and businesses
contributed to the attractiveness of a bus stop (Borst et al., 2008).
In some cases, where a newer neighbourhood grows from a major
transit station, the station acts as the default “gateway” for the area
(Garmendia et al., 2008). Therefore, the need for the transit node to
present a positive image of the rest of the neighbourhood is even more
important (Taylor et al., 2007). With guaranteed foot traffic, there exist
opportunities to integrate the stop with local businesses or populate the
stop with community amenities that turn the location into a convenient
place of gathering for neighbours. Ideally, the station would feel like a
part of the locality and embody the community’s spirit (Cole et al., 2010).
Studies show that the most successful spaces are those are that are
defined by the buildings around it, rather than simply artifacts in space,
despite however many design resources are dedicated to it (Giddings et
al., 2011). Integration with the stop’s surrounding land uses means that
people can easily cross the boundaries of the site and that there exists
cohesion of the programming. It is this convenience that attracts higher
densities of movement (Ozbil, Peponis, & Keeping, 2011). Businesses
also benefit from such arrangements as guaranteed traffic from a busy
bus stop provides them with great exposure (Cole et al., 2010).
photo: Author
Figure 3.7.1: Eugensplatz station is well integrated with the adjacent park. The stairs leading to the platform double as seating around
the open space. Table tennis tables provide transit riders with entertainment while they wait.
4.0 BUS STOP URBAN DESIGN
TECHNIQUES
photo: Thomas Ackroyd
The Bus Stop Urban Design Techniques are a set of parameters for the design of many aspects of a bus
stop in hope of achieving the goals set out in the previous section. Each goal is supplemented with research
and precedents. The 9 techniques address: lighting, seating, cover, amenities, information, vegetation, traffic
management, pedestrian infrastructure, and bicycle infrastructure.
photo: Bartek Kuzia photo: Glenn Waters photo: Ekaterina Nosenko
Lighting Seating and Surfaces Cover

Even, white light with minimal Adequate seating with a variety Cover provides primary weather
shadows provides the best of microclimatic conditions protection from precipitation and
environment for activities and is important for comfort and excessive solar exposure. Where
enhances safety. Pedestrian scale allows riders to adapt to their possible, cover may be achieved
lighting adds to the character of preferences. Special paving can by adjacent awnings or vegetation.
the location. denote pedestrian priority.
photo: Marc Caterina photo: Oran Viriyincy photo: Author
Amenities Information Vegetation

Amenities such as public art, Transit information provided at Vegetation can manage the
drinking fountains, and waste bins a stop can greatly reduce rider microclimate of a stop by providing
not only improve the experience of anxiety in waiting. Extra space shade, cover, and wind blocks. It
the bus user, but they also benefit may be dedicated to displaying can also be used to enhance the
the immediate neighbourhood. community information if the stop aesthetics of the location.
is in a high traffic area.
photo: Glenn Waters photo: Lourdes Gasol photo: Baza Rambler
Traffic Management Pedestrian Infrastructure Bicycle Infrastructure

Traffic management techniques The pedestrian network around a Many residents would bike to bus
focus on reducing vehicular stop is an extension of the transit stops if it were more convenient.
speeds around bus stops and line. Therefore, it is important To encourage such behaviour,
making biking and walking in the to have high quality walking adequate bike paths and bike
area safer and more pleasant. environments to attract new riders. parking must be provided.
4.1 Lighting
4.1.1 Lighting and Safety
Lighting at a bus stop is important for safety, access, and character.
Studies show that commuters who identified safety as their primary
concern also named lighting to be the most effective solution (Hess,
2012). As most public crimes are triggered by windows of opportunity
(Saraiva & Pinho, 2011), it is important to keep areas around stops
adequately lit at night as well as during other times of the day. Even
lighting throughout the stop, rather than spot-lighting, provides an
ambient environment with lower contrast shadows. This condition is
desired as commuters feel safer in areas that have visual and spatial
permeability because all activity at the site can be easily observed (J.
Jacobs, 1961; Saraiva & Pinho, 2011).
4.1.2 Lighting and Character

In terms of character, pedestrian scale lighting does a better job of
creating a comfortable environment for the commuter and is more likely
to fit with the surroundings than standard street lights. Pedestrian scale
lighting refers to lights that are lower, smaller and usually more visually
interesting (Hamilton-Baillie & Jones, 2005). Lower lights that are less
intense and spaced closer together offer more even and comfortable
lighting for pedestrians (A. B. Jacobs, 1995). A survey in Japan identified
that lighting spaced at 30 metre intervals had the most pedestrian benefit
to cost ratio (Fukahori & Kubota, 2003). The lights may be integrated
with the bus shelter, be integrated with other pieces of furniture at the
stop, or be stand-alone. Choosing lighting styles that complement the
architectural style of adjacent developments can enhance the visual
coherence and attractiveness of the setting (Kostic & Djokic, 2009). Such
improvements can be beneficial, as studies show a correlation between
a commuter’s subjective measures of a stop and their frequency of use
of the stop (Carr, Dunsiger, & Marcus, 2010).
4.2 Seating and Surfaces

Seating is one of the most fundamental components of a bus stop. The
amount of seating should match the average number of commuters
photo: Author
simultaneously occupying the stop, given that it does not impede access
Figure 4.2.1: Seating can be shaped to (Tan et al., 2007). Being able to sit while waiting for the bus and being
better fit the terrain and pedestrian traffic able to put down any heavy belongings significantly reduces the stress
flow.
experienced by the commuter (Buys & Miller, 2011). As a result, the

disutility of waiting at the stop can be reduced, making transit a more
pleasant experience (Wardman, 2004). This chain effect can ultimately
lead to an increased catchment area and ridership as studies show that
people are willing to walk farther to stations if they know the waiting
environment is comfortable (Jiang, Zegras, & Mehndiratta, 2012).
photo: Author
Because materials of the urban environment play an important roles
Figure 4.2.2: Seating can be built into
in modifying the microclimate and thermal comfort conditions, it is
adjacent buildings, reducing the space
important to consider the albedo, reflectivity, and other thermal attributes required.
of the seats in order to avoid unnecessary heat gain or glare (Asaeda &
Thanh, 1996). However, having seating does not guarantee a successful
bus stop. Many well-used stops have a variety of seating options.
This diversity gives the commuter more freedom of choice and will
better serve people of different physical attributes, social habits, and in
different weather conditions (Schmidt, Nemeth, & Botsford, 2011). It is
not required that all seating for a bus stop be provided and maintained
by one entity. With cooperation between designers and developers,
between commuters and neighbours, the best case scenario would
be seating that is seamlessly integrated with, or created from the
surrounding urban landscape. When this is the case, it beneficial to have
the seating on the peripheyl of the site, as it is the preferred configuration
by most people (Gehl, 1987). Such seats should also be able to serve
non-commuters during non-rush hours and be sufficiently shielded from
vehicular traffic.
4.3 Cover
Cover refers to anything that offers weather protection at a bus stop,
which includes precipitation, wind, and excessive solar exposure
(Nikolopoulou et al., 2011). Weather protection is a prime contributor
to commuter comfort (Humpel et al., 2004). Surveys show ideal
temperatures to be around 24 degrees Celsius, acceptable range
for wind is between 3 and 5.5m/s, and acceptable range for noise is
between 40 and 70 decibels (Chun & Tamura, 2005; Giddings et al.,
2011). With clever design and the right materials, it may be possible to
achieve all year comfort passively.
There are many ways of achieving weather protection at a bus stop,

with sheltering being the primary component. While it is often cheaper
to standardize shelters across the city, shelters should ideally be
fitted to the microclimate of the site (Schmidt et al., 2011). Possible
techniques range from wrap-around designs, which offer the most

protection, to open designs, which encourage natural ventilation.
The albedo, reflectivity, and other thermal attributes should also be
considered in order to avoid unnecessary heat gain or glare (Asaeda
& Thanh, 1996). If the bus stop is located near tall buildings, it is
important to have structures such as awnings or verandas that buffer
the downwash (Gaardsted Esbensen Consulting Engineers Ltd., 2004).
Fences can also serve as wind block in open areas. Studies show
that fences with 35% to 40% opening provide the best wind buffer
while maintaining visual permeability and not generating too much
turbulence elsewhere (Nikolopoulou, 2004). Orientation of the shelter is
also a key consideration given the solar and prevailing wind directions
(Chrisomallidou et al., 2004). In all instances where insulation is desired,
it is important to make sure design features do not inadvertently cause
leaks. Wherever possible, the design of the stop should strive to take
advantage of the physical forms adjacent to it, such as large awnings of
businesses to minimize costs (Steemers, Ramos, & Sinou, 2004). The
end goal is to create a diversity of microclimates at the stop so that even
if the conditions are not ideal, people will have to opportunity to choose
different environments or engage in adaptive behaviour (Schmidt et al.,
2011).
4.4 Amenities
Amenities refer to objects at the bus stop that enhance the experience
of waiting but are not absolutely necessary. Examples of amenities
include waste bins, newspaper boxes, public art, and public phones
(York Regional Transit, 2009). Other design-oriented amenities such a
signs, lights, and canopies contribute to the sense of place in a public
space (A. B. Jacobs, 1995). Aside from their intended uses, they also
act as objects that attract the visual attention of the commuters, thereby
reducing the boredom that may result from long wait times (Compagnon
& Goyette-Pernot, 2004). When deciding on amenities, it is important
to take into account adjacent land uses and programming. Well used
amenities are ones that suit the needs of the neighbourhood. Stops
beside daycares may include playful public art; stops beside grocery
stores may include extra shelves for people to rest their goods while
waiting for the bus. Because the effect of these amenities can extend to
roughly 15 meters beyond the station, one should consider the possibility
that non-commuters may also use these amenities (Learnihan, Van Niel,
Giles-Corti, & Knuiman, 2011). Design and placement of these amenities
should not cause any obstructions, thereby lowering the level of service
for pedestrians and cyclists (Tan et al., 2007). Large amenities, such
as community bulletin boards not only provide relevant information, but
they also provide shading, wind protection, and acoustic separation
(Chrisomallidou et al., 2004; Kang et al., 2004). Therefore, it is important
to consider microclimatic conditions of the site when placing amenities
so as to extract maximum benefit from the investment.
4.5 Information
Information plays an important role in the performance of a bus stop.
Ideally, schedule information will be presented both in real time and
in static form (Wardman et al., 2001). While arrival information is best
suited for digital display, transit maps are best presented in print form,
especially for those without smart devices. A variety of media ensure
that the information is accessible to everyone. If the bus stop becomes a
natural place of gathering for the immediate neighbourhood, community
information should also be incorporated into the station displays
where possible. Community organizations would benefit from the
assured pedestrian traffic flow to generate exposure for their messages
(Zacharias et al., 2011). Other information that is less common but would
be valuable are pedestrian, cycling, and green infrastructure maps
for the specific neighbourhood (Kelly, Tight, Hodgson, & Page, 2010).
Contextual variations such as this have been shown the increase the
sense of ownership of a public space (Ercoskun & Karaaslan, 2011). For
stops in less densely populated areas, it is sometimes beneficial to have
way-finding signs that direct the commuter towards the stop. By labelling
the remaining distance to the stop, such signage are helpful to seniors
who many plan their stop choice based on the walking time required
(Hess, 2012).
4.6 Vegetation
Vegetation has long been avoided at bus stops because they were
seen as something that creates safety hazard, blocks sight lines and
limits circulation space (Eck & McGee, 2008). However, with careful
design and plant selection, vegetation and related natural features, such
as flowing water, are being reintroduced to the public spaces around
photo: Author
transit for their aesthetic and functional values (Kleerekoper et al., 2011).
Studies show that vegetation can make a positive contribution to almost Figure 4.6.1: Vegetation can function well
to provide cover and denote space.
every comfort aspect of a bus station. Vegetation also contributes to the
visual attractiveness of a bus stop. Using a visual preferences survey,

Ewing found that almost all commuters prefer trees along the path
leading to the stop over treeless paths (Ewing, 2001). Planting can also
be used to define pedestrian spaces and create a sense of security
and it shields pedestrians from heavy traffic, physically, visually, and
acoustically. In fact, surveys show that the presence of vegetation is
found to affect 65% of the population in their decisions to cross streets
(Sisiopiku & Akin, 2003).
4.6.1 Microclimate
With an average albedo of 0.2 to 0.25, vegetation also mitigates the
local microclimate by reducing air temperatures, shading, and providing
wind protection (Dimoudi & Nikolopoulou, 2003). Studies show that
trees and hedges can reduce the surrounding air temperature by 1 to
3 degrees Celsius due to reduced solar gains (-20% to -60%), reduced
convective heat gain, and the addition of moisture to the air (Dimoudi &
Nikolopoulou, 2003; Kleerekoper et al., 2011). Unlike fixed, solid objects,
photo: Author vegetation is also excellent for wind breaking as they slow down wind
Figure 4.6.1: Microclimates in public areas
without creating much turbulence or greater wind speed elsewhere
can be mitigated by plants and water (Gaardsted Esbensen Consulting Engineers Ltd., 2004). Studies show
features. that on average, vegetation can reduce wind speeds by around 20%
(Dimoudi & Nikolopoulou, 2003). Placement of plants must be carefully
considered because both their thermal and wind blocking effects can be
felt for up to 4-5 times the height of the plant belt away from vegetation
(Houlberg, 1979). Vegetation has also been proven effective in noise
mitigation in public spaces as they are able to block sound waves without
causing multiple reflections (Yang & Kang, 2003). It is important to note
that microclimatic effect of vegetation ultimately depends on its type
and growth; mature trees have foliage temperatures below ambient air
temperature, while the opposite is true for young trees (Scudo et al.,
2004). Deciduous trees work well in fairer climates as it provides shading
in the summer and permits solar exposure in the winter; evergreens
provide shading and wind breaks all year round (Chrisomallidou et al.,
2004). Insufficient foliage may result in little or even opposite effects
(Scudo et al., 2004).
4.6.2 Community
Because of the pedestrian exposure bus stops are guaranteed to
receive, it is a great location to test and demonstrate new ecology-based
systems (Ercoskun & Karaaslan, 2011). Bio-swales and green walls
are excellent candidates for such locations and serve as didactic tools
while contributing to the overall function of the stop. In some cities in
the Netherlands, community interaction is taken further as neighbours
volunteer to take care of the vegetation (Kleerekoper et al., 2011). On a
larger scale, it is important for the site vegetation to be integrated with
neighbourhood green infrastructure if opportunities exist (Walmsley,
1995).
4.7 Traffic Management

There are many traffic management techniques that can be used to
the make the area surrounding bus stops safer for commuters. Most
of these strategies focus on reducing the speed of vehicles that are in
close proximity to pedestrians to around 30 kph (Hamilton-Baillie, 2004;
Hamilton-Baillie & Jones, 2005; Kaparias et al., 2012). When traffic is
slowed to such speeds, risk of fatal accidents is significantly lowered
and pedestrians no longer feel the need to hide at the margins of the
street (Gallimore et al., 2011; Rosén & Sander, 2009). Traffic calming
elements such as chokers, raised crosswalks, bicycle bypasses are photo: Peter Dewit
already popular in many major European cities (Ewing, 2008). More
Figure 4.7.1: Traffic calming features can
options are available in many engineering publications (Cho et al., 2009). be designed to be extra seating during
Where traffic cannot be slowed down, physical separation and crossing busy hours.
lights greatly increase the comfort of pedestrians (Tan et al., 2007).
Trees and shrubs lower than 6 meters are recommended because they
not only provide visual and acoustic separation, but they also add to
the attractiveness and contribute to the thermal comfort of the setting
(Fukahori & Kubota, 2003).
4.8 Pedestrian Infrastructure

4.8.1 Measuring Walkability
Several indices and audits have been developed to measure the
walkability of an environment. They look at elements such as the street
wall, sidewalk width, amenities, and many more. Three well known
publications are the Irvine-Minnesota Physical Environment Audit (Brown
et al., 2007), the Scottish Walkability Assessment Tool (Millington et al.,
2009), and the Illustrated Field Manual for Measuring Urban Design
Qualities (Clemente, Ewing, Handy, & Brownson, 2010).
4.8.2 Enhancing Quality

Elements of a good walking environment include wide sidewalks, shaded
corridors, sufficient lighting, interesting streets, land use diversity, natural
features, and other pedestrians (Brown et al., 2007; Cao, Mokhtarian, &
Handy, 2008; Jiang et al., 2012; Saraiva & Pinho, 2011). When pedestrian
paths are in close proximity with other modes, it is important to denote
their presence clearly to drivers through separation, paving materials,
or other design methods (Kaparias et al., 2012). As a further measure,
traffic calming techniques should be employed where pedestrian flows
are high (Susilo et al., 2012). Such actions will increase the comfort and
confidence of commuters. Focusing on the pedestrian path itself, studies
show that pedestrian comfort increments with sidewalk width gradually
(Tan et al., 2007). Well maintained walking surfaces are also a key
determining factor for those with greater difficulty walking (Borst et al.,
2008). Therefore, it is crucial to provide a sufficient level of service for the
expected pedestrian flow (Mori & Tsukaguchi, 1987).
4.8.3 Increasing connectivity

Walking time is consistently valued at around 1.5 to 2 times higher than
photo: Author
the time spent in vehicle. Therefore, to promote walking to bus stops, the
Figure 4.8.2: Decorative paving adds walking path must be comfortable and perceptually short. It is shown
visual interest and spatial demarcation to that neighbourhoods with greater density of intersections correlates
a space. with higher walking rates (Ewing & Cervero, 2010). This is because
pedestrians are given a greater range of choice of routes and have more
direct paths to their destinations. Therefore, strategies for increasing
connectivity of the pedestrian network include placing cross walks to
break up long blocks, connecting sidewalks with the local trails, and
formalizing shortcuts so that the shortest route can also be comfortable
and safe (Learnihan et al., 2011).
4.9 Bicycle Infrastructure

4.9.1 Station Level Accommodations
Cycling is substantially faster than walking and more flexible than
photo: Author
driving in regard to travelling to a bus stop (Martens, 2004). Many transit
Figure 4.9.1: Bicycle parking should be agencies around the world have already implemented bike parking in
placed in the most convenient places, not various forms, ranging from individual bike racks to purpose-built bike
hidden away.
storage buildings. A survey of bicycle parking programs in North America
showed that most transit agencies have experienced dramatic increases
in the use of bike parking, ranging from increase of 50% to 80% from
2000 to 2005 (Transportation Research Board, 2005). We can see that

the demand for such facilities is increasing steadily.
Bicycle parking should be provided to match the minimum expected

ridership. Ideally, the design of the parking system would be able to
accommodate expansions in the future. When possible, it is beneficial
to include other professionals such as industrial designers, artists
and engineers to ensure that parking facilities not only function well
but also adds to the visual intrigue of the environment (Kashef, 2008).
Bicycle parking can also be integrated with and used as a traffic calming
feature (Ewing, 2008). With multiple modes accessing the bus stop, it is
important that bicycle traffic and parking are compatible with pedestrian
flow and other amenities (Transportation Research Board, 2005).
4.9.2 Increasing connectivity

Analysis should be conducted layering the existing bicycle network photo: Author
with the transit network to find where vital connections can be made
Figure 4.9.2: Connectivity across the most
and where new routes should be established. The latter step will benefit
difficult terrain can be achieved through
greatly from on-site observation and interviews with local riders. By certain methods.
providing adequate bicycle parking at bus stops and ensuring cycling
connectivity around stops, transit agencies can significantly strengthen
the economic performance of transit lines by increasing the catchment
area and alleviating the stress involved in accessing transit (Martens,
2004).
5.0 DESIGN APPLICATIONS
photo: Author
5.1 Design Process

In addition to developing and applying techniques to bus stops, this
project also demonstrates a process that can be applied to many
other urban design tasks. This process shows that with appropriate
urban design expertise, site analysis, design, and visualization can be
accomplished with minimal costs and widely available technology. All the
tools used this process are either already available to municipalities or
are free to acquire.
The process is as follows:
1. Map bus stops, density, municipal zoning, parks and streetlight data
with ArcMap
2. Select sites that cover a wide range of bus stop types and locations
3. Construct existing plans with satellite photos and site photos
4. Analyze the pedestrian flows, shadows and visibility* of each stop
5. Gather ideas from fellow bus riders and literature review
6. Model and render bus stop designs with SketchUp
7. Review and revise designs with municipal planners and urban

designers
8. Combine final designs with relevant information for publication
* Visibility diagrams are constructed using UCI Depth Map, This program
calculates the total viewable distance in all directions from every point
on the site. Each point is given a colour from the spectrum based on
their total viewable distance. Once every point is calculated, the pixels of
colour are combined into one image, mapping which locations on the site
can see more of its surroundings and which locations can see less.
5.2 Regional Bus Stop Analysis

For the purposes of this urban design project, bus stops in Metro Vancouver
are placed into 5 urban form categories based on their adjacent zoning.
Each category has its own needs and opportunities. The following are
descriptions of the categories.
Cat. 1: Stops In Highly Developed Areas

Few of these locations exist, mostly in city centre areas. Due to the
abundance of activities nearby, the design of the stop can benefit both
transit riders and nearby merchants and pedestrians. Because these stops
are usually adjacent to major development sites, it is possible to work with
the developers to come up with a bus stop that is integrated right from the
design stage, giving the best possible result.
Cat. 2: Stops By Businesses Or Community Amenities

Such locations are scattered throughout the region, each a node within their
respective neighbourhoods. Opportunities exist for these stops to contribute
to neighbourhood identity. Consultation with neighbouring businesses is key
to providing complementary amenities that enhance the overall space.
Cat. 3: Stops In Medium Density Residential Neighbourhoods

These stops are numerous in the region. Ridership is often high at these
stops. Therefore it is important to cater to the needs of the riders. Due to
the high vehicular and pedestrian traffic in such areas and their relative
importance as nodes of activity, the design can either be ad-supported or
funded by the city.
Cat. 4: Stops In Single Family Residential Neighbourhoods

These stops are extremely common, so it is important to have an easily
replicable design. Because wait times are often long, rider comfort and
safety are crucial. Here, the emphasis is on providing the basic needs such
as seating, cover, lighting, and access.
Cat. 5: Stops Adjacent To Parks Or Open Spaces

These stops are also fairly numerous in the region. Because the stops
are often on city owned land, the designs of these stops can be less
conventional, take up more space, and serve as amenities or markers in
the park. Due to the low traffic in such areas, it is unlikely for ad-supported
stops to be feasible. However, if the stops are well designed and benefit the
park goers, it is possible for funding to come from parks and other related
departments.
5.2.1 Bus Stop Mapping

As Category 1 stops are very rare and subject to many factors, they are not mapped. Category 2, 3, 4, and 5
bus stops are mapped using ArcMap and GIS data provided by municipalities.
0 5km 10km
Figure 5.2.1: Cat. 2: Stops By Businesses Or Community Amenities

Note: Data for Richmond and Burnaby unavailable at time of study.
0 5km 10km
Figure 5.2.2: Cat. 3: Stops In Medium Density Residential Neighbourhoods

0 5km 10km
Figure 5.2.3: Cat. 4: Stops In Single Family Residential Neighbourhoods

0 5km 10km
Figure 5.2.4: Cat. 5: Stops Adjacent To Parks Or Open Spaces

0 5km 10km
Figure 5.2.5: Bus Stops and Residential Density

Bus stops are coloured corresponding to the residential density of their respective neighbourhoods. Souce: 2006 Canadian Census
0 5km 10km
Figure 5.2.6: Bus Stops and Lighting

Bus stops that are more than 25m away from street lights are identified. Note: Data for Richmond and Burnaby unavailable at time of study.
Neighbourhood Walkability
0 5km 10km High Medium Low
Figure 5.2.7: Bus Stops and Walkability

Bus stops are overlaid over a walkability map of Metro Vancouver. Source: UBC Active Transportation Collaboratory
0 5km 10km
Figure 5.2.8: Bus Stops Sized by Projected Daily Boardings

Bus stops are mapped based on daily boardings, ranging from 10 to 11,000 Source: TransLink
Urban BSUD
Form Technique
5.2.2 Bus Stop Selection 1 King George Blvd. 5 Lighting

and 88th Ave,
Nine stops in Metro Vancouver Surrey
are chosen to illustrate each of
the BSUD techniques. In addition
to showcasing the techniques, 2 Lonsdale Ave. 2 Seating and
the stops need to exhibit a wide and 15th St, Surfaces
range of environmental factors. City of North
To accomplish this, I checked the Vancouver
candidate stops with the analysis
depicted in Figures 5.2.1 to 5.2.8. 3 Imperial St. and 3 Cover
This assured that the stops are Dow Ave Burnaby
adjacent to a wide range of
developments, reside in many
different density neighbourhoods,
4 Cambie St. 1 Amenities
have multiple lighting conditions,
and 41st Ave,
and have different levels of
Vancouver
walkability and bus ridership.
This multitude of selection
criteria ensures that the final Oak St. and 70th
5 3 Information
9 stops selected represent the Ave, Vancouver
overall network well. Other minor
factors also affected the selection
process, such as the desire to
cover multiple municipalities in 6 Cottonwood Ave 4 Vegetation
Metro Vancouver and limitations and Fairview St,
caused by lack of data in some Coquitlam
locations.
7 Fraser St. 2 Traffic

and 45th Ave, Management
Vancouver
8 Nanaimo St. 4 Pedestrian

and Grant Ave, Infrastructure
Vancouver
9 NW Marine Dr. 5 Bicycle

and Sasamat St, Infrastructure
Vancouver
9 8
6
4 7 3
5
1
0 5km 10km
Figure 5.2.9: Map of Selected Stops

5.6 Lighting for Safety

King George Blvd. and 88th Ave, Surrey
• Main BSUD Technique: Lighting
• Urban Form Category: 5
• Population Density: Low (1154 ppl/km2)
• Lighting Condition: Bad
• Walkability: Low
• Ridership: Low
Design Intent
This design demonstrates the BSUD technique of using lighting to
improve the safety at remote bus stops. This stop is located in the Green
Timbers neighbourhood in Surrey, adjacent to Bear Creek Park. This
park is home to the Surrey Art Gallery and many sports facilities. New
Figure 5.3.1: Satellite View refracted, white light illuminates the stop with fewer shadows. More
importantly, an open design allows for the surrounding to be lit as well,
giving the bus rider more awareness of the environment (see 5.12).
King George Boulevard
88th Avenue
Total Distance Viewable at Each Point

Stop am noon pm am noon pm am noon pm
0 15m 30m
Mar 20 Jun 20 Dec 20 Low Medium High
Figure 5.3.2: Pedestrian Flow Figure 5.3.3: Shadow Study Figure 5.3.4: Visibility Diagram
Very few pedestrians travel on This site receives most of its solar Visibility is extremely high at all
this block except for those waiting exposure in the afternoon due to parts of the bus stop because
for the bus and local residents large trees to the east. the site is not bound by any
walking to the park. developments.
2 1
Figure 5.3.5: Design Perspective
1 Refractive lighting from ceiling 3 Structure easy to install and maintain

2 Cover provided for transit users
Figure 5.3.6: Existing Condition/Issues Figure 5.3.7: Nighttime Lighting

There is no cover or lighting Refracted white light illuminates
available to the bus stop. This both the stop and the surrounding
creates issues of safety and area evenly, providing a greater
accessibility. It is also located on a sense of safety and increased
very narrow site that is extremely passive surveillance.
close to heavy traffic.
5.4 Seating the Public

Lonsdale Ave. and 15th St, City of North Vancouver
• Main BSUD Technique: Seating and Surfaces
• Population Density: High (15736 ppl/km2)
• Lighting Condition: Good
• Walkability: Medium
• Ridership: High
Design Intent
This design demonstrates the BSUD technique of providing seating that
serves both bus riders and local pedestrians. This stop is at one of the
major intersections in the Central Lonsdale neighbourhood. It is close
to city hall, city library, grocery stores, and many small businesses. As
Figure 5.4.1: Satellite View a result, many people at this active street corner can benefit from the
added covered seating that is carefully designed to integrate with the
surrounding urban form.
Lonsdale Avenue
15th Street

0 20m 40m
The majority of pedestrian flow is The bus stops is on the brightest Visibility on the site is quite good
along Lonsdale Avenue. Most of corner of the intersection, giving due to the wide spaces and lack
the pedestrians on this corner are it opportunity to become a warm of vegetation.
there waiting for the bus. and comfortable outdoor space.
1 5
7 3
8
6
2
4
1 Extra awning match existing building 4 Bollards and vegetation create separation from
traffic as well as shielding from noise and wind
2 Distinctive paving denote public space and create
visual separation from street 5 Natural cover provided by trees and existing
building overhang
3 Large public seating for transit customers,
pedestrians, and business patrons 6 Bicycle parking with ramped entrance from road
7 Community information board for events and
notices
8 Pedestrian scale lighting evenly illuminates area
Figure 5.4.6: Existing Condition/Issues

This stop is adjacent to high
volume streets. There is also a
medium slope along the site.
5.5 Complementary Cover

Imperial St. and Dow Ave, Burnaby
• Main BSUD Technique: Cover
• Lighting Condition: Medium
• Ridership: Low
Design Intent
This design demonstrates the BSUD technique of providing cover that
is visually integrated with the surroundings. This stop is located in the
Maywood neighbourhood of Burnaby, on a pedestrian corridor that
connects the residential area to the south with the Metrotown core to
Figure 5.5.1: Satellite View the north. Cover is provided by strategically planted trees and subtly
designed canopies (see 5.12). While both are new additions, they
reinforce the visual continuity of the street.
Imperial Street
Dow Avenue

0 10m 20m
Two main groups of pedestrians The bus stops is on the brightest Visibility is excellent on the site
using this area are people waiting corner of the intersection, giving with far vistas in every direction
for the bus and people walking it opportunity to become a warm except north.
through to get to Metrotown. and comfortable outdoor space.
2
1
1 Bollards and vegetation create separation from 3 Cover provided by shelter and trees that also
traffic and slow down vehicles enhance the surrounding landscape (see 5.12)
2 Simple seating integrated with existing stone wall

This stop is cut off from the south
by fast traffic on Imperial street.
It also lacks cover and visual
interest in its vicinity.
5.6 Amenities Abound

Cambie St. and 41st Ave, Vancouver
• Main BSUD Technique: Amenities
• Population Density: Medium (4448ppl/km2)
• Ridership: High
Design Intent
This design demonstrates the BSUD technique of providing amenities
that serve both bus riders and the surrounding community. This
plaza outside the Oakridge Shopping Centre is a major transfer node
between the Canada Line Skytrain and the 41, 43, and 15 buses. It is
Figure 5.6.1: Satellite View also an important public open space that will serve the transit-oriented
development that will be built in the future. These transportation and
development conditions create ample demand for amenities such as
public seating, fountains, food carts, and flexible open spaces.
41st Street
Cambie Street

0 20m 40m
Pedestrian paths between bus The brightest part the site can be The plaza has good visibility the
stop, SkyTrain stop, and mall found in the middle, conveniently to the surroundings at all points.
entrance all cross at the existing not in a pedestrian pathway and However, this plaza lacks a sense
triangular sign in the northeast on a south facing slope. of enclosure.
corner of the plaza.
1
4
2
9
8
3
6 5
7
1 Awnings extended to cover new storefronts 6 Fountains and other amenities serve both bus
stop and public space
2 Distinctive paving denote public space
3 Bollards create separation from traffic
8 Covered sidewalk provide weather protection and
4 Natural cover provided by trees and existing frame public space
building overhang
9 New seating oriented for solar exposure and
5 Bicycle parking with ramped entrance from road pedestrian flow
The plaza is bound by two major

arterial roads that make crossing
difficult and creates noise and
pollution. In addition, there is
limited cover and sometimes high
winds.

5.7 Informative Bus Stop

Oak St. and 70th Ave, Vancouver
• Main BSUD Technique: Information
• Ridership: High
Design Intent
This design demonstrates the BSUD technique of providing transit and
community information at a bus stop. This stop is in the heart of the
Marpole neighbourhood. Because it is in an apartment neighbourhood,
there is relatively higher ridership. Due to the narrowness of the site, the
Figure 5.7.1: Satellite View shelter is configured to allow for leaning seats and maximum pedestrian
flow (see 5.12). This setup also allows for the stop to have ample posting
area to promote community events to those passing by.
Oak Street
70th Avenue

0 10m 20m
Pedestrian flow is highly This stop is relatively dark Visibility is medium as this stop.
constricted on this block of Oak compared to the other stops with The sense of enclosure is fairly
street as the sidewalks are narrow large trees shading both sun and strong with taller buildings that are
and extremely close to high speed streetlights. also closer.
traffic.
6
4
3 2
5
1
1 Pedestrian scale lighting evenly illuminates area 4 Modular stop configured with leaning-seats
and ample room for transit and community
2 Bollards and vegetation create separation from information (see 5.12)
traffic and slow down vehicles
5 Benches serve both riders and residents
3 Vegetation improves aesthetics while keeping in
style with neighbouring property 6 Cover placed with awareness of shading already
provided by trees
This stop lacks cover and is

extremely close to heavy traffic.
Safety is a primary concern here.
There is also very little space to
work with.
5.8 Versatile Vegetation

Cottonwood Ave. and Fairview St, Coquitlam
• Main BSUD Technique: Vegetation
• Ridership: Low
Design Intent
This design demonstrates the BSUD technique of using vegetation
strategically at a bus stop. This stop is located in the Cariboo
neighbourhood of Coquitlam, which is mainly single family residential.
It is close to parks and an elementary school. Bioswales installed
Figure 5.8.1: Satellite View here make the waiting environment more comfortable while filtering
run-off from the street. It also helps educate the public on issues of
environmental protection through landscape design.
Co
t ton
wo
odA
Fairview Street
ve
nue

0 10m 20m
Very few pedestrians walk on this This stop is often shaded due to This site has high visibility as it is
side of the street as there is no the large amount and size of trees at the corner of a T-intersection.
sidewalk. adjacent to the stop. The high exposure can be
taken advantage of to display
sustainable landscape systems.
2
4
3
1
1 Sidewalk increases accessibility 3 Bioswale built with didactic signage

2 Cover for passengers (see 5.12) 4 Bench seating framed by existing trees

Although in a well maintained
area, there is no cover, lighting, or
sidewalk available to the bus stop.
This creates issues of safety and
accessibility.
5.9 Parting with Traffic

Fraser St. and 45th Ave, Vancouver
• Main BSUD Technique: Traffic Management
• Walkability: High
• Ridership: Medium
Design Intent
This design demonstrates the BSUD technique of managing traffic
adjacent to bus stops and civic buildings. This bus stop serves the #8
bus along Fraser Street in the heart of the Sunset neighbourhood in
Vancouver. It is located adjacent to the South Hill Library which receives
Figure 5.9.1: Satellite View much pedestrian traffic. Bollards, planters, trees, and lighting not only
enhance the public space in front of the library, but they also provide
physical, visual, and acoustic separation from traffic in a subtle manner.
Fraser Street
45th Avenue

0 15m 30m
Pedestrians follow paths typical of Most of the shadows cast on the This site has medium visibility,
an intersection, with the exception bus stop is from the adjacent with views only in north and south
of the extra foot traffic in front of buildings. directions. Therefore, this can be
the library, which may require an area where the visual focus is
extra space. situated within the design.
4
5 1
6
3
7 2
1 Play area for kids with seating for parents around 4 Natural cover provided by trees and existing
building overhang
2 Distinctive paving denotes public space
5 Bicycle parking with ramped entrance from road
3 Bollards and vegetation create separation
from traffic as well as shielding from noise 6 Drinking fountains and other amenities serve both
and wind bus stop and public space

This location experiences high
volumes of traffic and related
noise.
5.10 Walkable Block

Nanaimo St. and Grant Ave, Vancouver
• Main BSUD Technique: Pedestrian Infrastructure
• Population Density: Medium (3958ppl/km2)
• Lighting Condition: Medium
• Walkability: Good
• Ridership: Medium
Design Intent
This design demonstrates the BSUD technique of improving the bus
stop while increasing the general walkability of the block. This stop is
located in the Renfrew neighbourhood. It is close to small shops, single
family houses and on a school route. Extra seating, improved paving, low
Figure 5.10.1: Satellite View vegetation, and pedestrian scale lighting make waiting for the bus at this
stop and walking through this block much more pleasant.
Nanaimo Street
Grant Avenue

0 10m 20m
Pedestrians on this block are Due to small trees, this site Visibility is high at all points within
usually local residents and receives ample amount of sun at this stop.
children on the way to and from all times of the year.
school.
6
7
3
5
4 2
1
1 Bicycle parking provided 4 Modular stop configured with benches and

leaning seats allow for easy access from sidewalk
2 Extra paving increases accessibility (see 5.12)
3 Sound blocking panels minimize noise 5 Extra benches serve both riders and residents
experienced by neighbours
6 Cover provided for riders
7 Transit information panels

This stop currently has no cover
and is extremely close to fast
traffic. The street is also difficult to
cross.
5.11 Cycling Convenience

NW Marine Dr. and Sasamat St, Vancouver
• Main BSUD Technique: Bicycle Infrastructure
• Walkability: Low
• Ridership: Low
Design Intent
This design demonstrates the BSUD technique of providing bicycle
amenities that add to the overall cycling infrastructure of the
neighbourhood. This stop is along Locarno Beach, situated between
single family residential houses and a park. While many people bike to
Figure 5.11.1: Satellite View the park, there are limited bike racks. Therefore, this stop can act as a
gateway to the park and a hub for bicycle parking.
Northwest Marine Drive

Sasamat Street

0 10m 20m
Pedestrian flow at this intersection Being in a wide open area, this This bus stop has extremely high
is similar to others. However, most stop receives ample amount of visibility as it is next to an open
of the pedestrians are travelling sunlight. park by a beach. It is important
for recreational purposes and that the new design maintains
often in groups. these views for the riders.
2
6 4 3
1 5
1 Paved bus stop for better accessibility 4 Extra seating and water fountain
2 Cover provided for transit users 5 Beach signage
3 Views to the ocean preserved 6 Bicycle parking provided for park goers

There is no cover, lighting, or
sidewalk available to the bus stop.
This creates issues of safety and
accessibility.
5.12 Modular Shelter Design

This design for bus shelters allows the shelter to adapt to the unique
constraints of each site. A kit of parts easily assembles into different
configurations, allowing for easy customization, maintenance, and
replacement.
5.12.1 Components
Roof
Roofs can be made of a variety of materials, ensuring there is sufficient
light penetration while not over heating the area below. Photovoltaics can
be embedded to make the stop self sufficient with the help of a battery.
The roof can also act as an illuminating device if LEDs are embedded or
if the underside is reflective. Upward lighting reflected off of the ceiling
can provide much more even lighting with reduced shadows. Roofs shall
be extended enough beyond the designated waiting area to ensure
coverage given a rain shadow of 20 degrees. Rain baffles may be used
to minimize overhang and decrease susceptibility to damage from strong
winds.
Main Structure
The main structure consists of posts set 1.5 metres apart. This grid
structure allows the frame to be flexible enough to fit various the
constraints of each site. Add-ons such as seats and bike racks are
attached to the frame. The height for each add-on varies depending on
which notch of the post it is latched on to.
Add-ons
A kit of parts can be built to fit the main structure. Add-ons include
benches, bike racks, information panels and others. These component
should reflect a continuous design language. Add-ons can be configured
to fit the specific needs of the bus stop. Fold-up seats (similar to those
on buses) allow a stop to have maximum flexibility when accommodating
wheelchairs. Add-ons should be concentrated at one end of the bus
stop to ensure that the remaining space has maximum flexibility in
accommodating those standing.
Surface
Tactile surfaces should placed on the perimeter of the bus stop to ensure
cane detection and audible detection by those with visual impairments.
This is especially important for designs that include cantilevered
components as those may be obstructive if not identified early.
5.12.2 Configurations
With a single post and chair, Double chairs with half backs are Leaning seats are used in
this basic design is meant to be good for stops where riders often locations where the space is
placed at stops that currently have large bags. extremely narrow. The information
have nothing except a bus pole. panel also creates separation from
The bench is offset to one side to traffic.
make room for a wheelchair.
Medium sized, double post Bike racks can be attached. Back Triple post designs can be
design can accommodate more panels can either be transparent configured in many ways, tailored
passengers waiting at a stop. to provide more visibility, or to the specific needs of the
display information such as route intersection.
maps or community events.
6.0 CONCLUSION
photo: Steve Ellaway
6.1 Summary
The bus stop, like many public spaces, can be a complex knot of social,
economic and cultural activities in the local community (Avdelidi, 2004).
This projected attempted to categorize and improve such spaces through
a rigorous process. It identified seven goals for urban design around
bus stops and nine techniques through a literature review for achieving
those goals. Nine stops were selected for design application after careful
analysis of the bus network. Then, the techniques were applied to nine
stops in Metro Vancouver. Throughout the process, I found that many
stops in addition to the nine selected are in need of improvements; most
of them requiring upgrades in the cover, seating, and lighting categories.
There are also many stops in rapidly developing urban core areas that
can undergo changes similar to those at Oakridge Centre.
All the improvements displayed in this project aimed to not only make
the wait at a bus stop more comfortable for the rider, but also to make
this space a valued asset in the community. Extra seating makes waiting
more comfortable and also serves as park signage. Pedestrian scaled
lighting makes riders feel safer and also increases the general walkability
of the neighbourhood. Bicycle parking increases modal connectivity and
also adds to the cycling infrastructure of the area. As a result, this project
shows that municipalities and transit organizations can work together to
turn transit zones into coveted spaces rather than zones of lower value
(Zacharias et al., 2011).
6.2 Recommendations and Further

Studies
It is recommended for communities that are looking to invest in bus
stop enhancements to work in collaboration with other community
improvement initiatives as this project shows that many synergies exist.
Changes that improve the waiting area at a bus stop generally also make
the block more walkable. By integrating bus stop improvement programs
with other planning goals, one can reach a more informed and effective
outcome. Further research should look at how to implement a more
publicly involved design process. Such input would add valuable insight
and sense of ownership to the project. Additional research should focus
on the implementation strategies for these designs as they vary between
different municipalities and funding mechanisms. Such work would help
bring the interventions to fruition. Finally, further research can look at
how these principles can be scaled up to larger and less numerous
transit stations, such as light rail, subways, and heavy rail.
7.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alliance Against Crime. (2011). Designing Out Crime: Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. L. (2008).
A Designers’ Guide. London. No Particular Place to Go: An Empirical
Analysis of Travel for the Sake of Travel.
Asaeda, T., & Thanh, V. (1996). Heat storage Environment and Behavior, 41(2), 233–257.
of pavements and its effect on the lower doi:10.1177/0013916507310318
atmosphere. Atmospheric Environment, 3(3).
Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. L. (2009).
Avdelidi, K. (2004). Social Considerations at the The relationship between the built environment
Design of Open Spaces. In M. Nikolopoulou and nonwork travel : A case study of Northern
(Ed.), Designing Open Spaces in the Urban California. Transportation Research Part A: Policy
Environment: a Bioclimatic Approach. Centre for and Practice, 43(5), 548–559. doi:10.1016/j.
Renewable Energy Sources. tra.2009.02.001
BC Ministry of Environment. (2008). British Columbia Carr, L. J., Dunsiger, S. I., & Marcus, B. H.
Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report. (2010). Walk scoreTM as a global estimate of
Boarnet, M. G., Greenwald, M. J., & McMillan, T. neighborhood walkability. American journal of
E. (2008). Walking, Urban Design, and Health: preventive medicine, 39(5), 460–3. doi:10.1016/j.
Toward a Cost-Benefit Analysis Framework. amepre.2010.07.007
Journal of Planning Education and Research, Cervero, R. (2002). Built environments and
27(3), 341–358. doi:10.1177/0739456X07311073 mode choice: toward a normative framework.
Borst, H. C., Miedema, H. M. E., de Vries, S. I., Transportation Research, 7(4), 265–284.
Graham, J. M. A., & van Dongen, J. E. F. (2008). doi:10.1016/S1361-9209(01)00024-4
Relationships between street characteristics and Cho, G., Rodríguez, D. A., & Khattak, A. J. (2009).
perceived attractiveness for walking reported The role of the built environment in explaining
by elderly people. Journal of Environmental relationships between perceived and actual
Psychology, 28(4), 353–361. doi:10.1016/j. pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Accident Analysis
jenvp.2008.02.010 and Prevention, 41(4), 692–702. doi:10.1016/j.
Brown, B. B., Werner, C. M., Amburgey, J. aap.2009.03.008
W., & Szalay, C. (2007). Walkable Route Chrisomallidou, N., Chrisomallidis, M., & Theodosiou,
Perceptions and Physical Features: Converging T. (2004). Design Principles and Applications. In
Evidence for En Route Walking Experiences. M. Nikolopoulou (Ed.), Designing Open Spaces in
Environment and Behavior, 39(34), 34–61. the Urban Environment: a Bioclimatic Approach.
doi:10.1177/0013916506295569 Centre for Renewable Energy Sources.
Buys, L., & Miller, E. (2011). Conceptualising Chun, C., & Tamura, A. (2005). Thermal comfort
convenience: Transportation practices and in urban transitional spaces. Building and
perceptions of inner-urban high density residents Environment, 40(5), 633–639. doi:10.1016/j.
in Brisbane, Australia. Transport Policy, 18(1), buildenv.2004.08.001
289–297. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.08.012
Clemente, O., Ewing, R., Handy, S. L., & Brownson, Ewing, R. (2001). Using a Visual Preference
R. C. (2010). Measuring Urban Design Qualities: Survey in Transit Design. Public Works
an Illustrated Field Manual. Robert Wood Johnson Management & Policy (Vol. 5, pp. 270–280).
Foundation. doi:10.1177/1087724X0154002
Cole, R., Burke, M., Leslie, E., Donald, M., & Owen, Ewing, R. (2008). Traffic calming in the United
N. (2010). Perceptions of representatives of States: are we following Europe’s lead? Urban
public, private, and community sector institutions Design International, 13(2), 90–104. doi:10.1057/
of the barriers and enablers for physically active udi.2008.20
transport. Transport Policy, 17(6), 496–504.
doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.05.003 Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. (2010). Travel and the Built
Environment: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of the
Compagnon, R., & Goyette-Pernot, J. (2004). Visual American Planning Association, 76(3), 265–294.
Comfort in Urban Spaces. In M. Nikolopoulou doi:10.1080/01944361003766766
(Ed.), Designing Open Spaces in the Urban
Environment: a Bioclimatic Approach. Centre for Fukahori, K., & Kubota, Y. (2003). The role of design
Renewable Energy Sources. elements on the cost-effectiveness of streetscape
improvement. Landscape and Urban Planning,
Daly, A., & Zachary, S. (1975). Commuters Values of 63, 75–91.
Time.
Fung, W. M. (2012). Infill as catalyst for vivid urban
Davies, A. L., & Rogers, K. G. (1973). Modal Choice fabric formation – A study on increasing
and the Value of Time. walk-ability in Hong Kong. URBAN DESIGN
International, 17(1), 18–32. doi:10.1057/
Dimoudi, A., & Nikolopoulou, M. (2003). Vegetation udi.2011.24
in the urban environment : microclimatic analysis
and benefits, 35, 69–76. Gaardsted Esbensen Consulting Engineers Ltd.
(2004). Considerations of the Wind in Urban
Dueker, K. J., Strathman, J. G., & Bianco, M. J. Spaces. In M. Nikolopoulou (Ed.), Designing
(1998). Strategies to Attract Auto Users to Public Open Spaces in the Urban Environment: a
Transportation. Bioclimatic Approach. Centre for Renewable
Eck, W., & McGee, H. W. (2008). Vegetation Control Energy Sources.
For Safety. Gallimore, J. M., Brown, B. B., & Werner, C. M.
Ercoskun, O. Y., & Karaaslan, S. (2011). Next- (2011). Walking routes to school in new urban
generation urban design guides for sustainability and suburban neighborhoods: An environmental
of small towns: A case study on Gudul, Turkey. walkability analysis of blocks and routes. Journal
URBAN DESIGN International, 16(2), 105–124. of Environmental Psychology, 31(2), 184–191.
doi:10.1057/udi.2011.3 doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.01.001
Garmendia, M., de Urena, J. M., Ribalaygua, Hess, D. B. (2012). Walking to the bus: perceived
C., Leal, J., & Coronado, J. M. (2008). Urban versus actual walking distance to bus stops for
Residential Development in Isolated Small Cities older adults. Transportation, 39(2), 247–266.
That Are Partially Integrated in Metropolitan doi:10.1007/s11116-011-9341-1
Areas By High Speed Train. European Urban
and Regional Studies, 15(3), 249–264. Hoehner, C. M., Brennan Ramirez, L. K., Elliott, M. B.,
doi:10.1177/0969776408090415 Handy, S. L., & Brownson, R. C. (2005). Perceived
and objective environmental measures and
Gehl, J. (1987). Life between Buildings; Using Public physical activity among urban adults. American
Space. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. journal of preventive medicine, 28(2), 105–16.
doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.023
Giddings, B., Charlton, J., & Horne, M. (2011).
Public squares in European city centres. Houlberg, C. (1979). An introduction to wind
URBAN DESIGN International, 16(3), 202–212. environment part II: Wind and Shelter in Built-up
doi:10.1057/udi.2011.6 Aareas with commented stock of bibliography for
BSA. Copenhagen.
Gjerde, M. (2011). Visual evaluation of urban
streetscapes: How do public preferences Humpel, N., Owen, N., Iverson, D., Leslie, E., &
reconcile with those held by experts? URBAN Bauman, A. E. (2004). Perceived environment
DESIGN International, 16(3), 153–161. attributes, residential location, and walking
doi:10.1057/udi.2011.10 for particular purposes. American Journal
of Preventive Medicine, 26(2), 119–125.
Gutiérrez, J., Cardozo, O. D., & García-Palomares, doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2003.10.005
J. C. (2011). Transit ridership forecasting at
station level: an approach based on distance- Jacobs, A. B. (1995). Great Streets. Cambridge: MIT
decay weighted regression. Journal of Transport Press.
Geography, 19(6), 1081–1092. doi:10.1016/j.
jtrangeo.2011.05.004 Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great
American Cities. New York: Random House.
Gutiérrez, J., & García-Palomares, J. C. (2008).
Distance-measure impacts on the calculation of Jenks, C. W. (1998). Continuing Examination of
transport service areas using GIS. Environment Successful Transit Ridership Initiatives.
and Planning B: Planning and Design, 35(3), Jiang, Y., Zegras, C. P., & Mehndiratta, S. (2012).
480–503. doi:10.1068/b33043 Walk the line: station context, corridor type and
Hamilton-Baillie, B. (2004). Urban Design: Why Don’t bus rapid transit walk access in Jinan, China.
We Do It in the Road? Modifying Traffic Behavior Journal of Transport Geography, 20(1), 1–14.
through Legible Urban Design. Journal of Urban doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.09.007
Technology, 11(June 2012), 43–61.
Hamilton-Baillie, B., & Jones, P. (2005). Improving

traffic behaviour and safety through urban design.
Proceedings of the ICE - Civil Engineering,
158(5), 39–47. doi:10.1680/cien.2005.158.5.39
Kang, J., Yang, W., & Zhang, M. (2004). Sound Larsen, J., & El-Geneidy, A. (2011). A travel behavior
Environment and Acoustic Comfort in Urban analysis of urban cycling facilities in Montréal,
Spaces. In M. Nikolopoulou (Ed.), Designing Canada. Transportation Research Part D:
Open Spaces in the Urban Environment: a Transport and Environment, 16(2), 172–177.
Bioclimatic Approach. Centre for Renewable doi:10.1016/j.trd.2010.07.011
Energy Sources.
Learnihan, V., Van Niel, K. P., Giles-Corti, B., &
Kaparias, I., Bell, M. G. H., Miri, A., Chan, C., & Knuiman, M. (2011). Effect of Scale on the
Mount, B. (2012). Analysing the perceptions Links between Walking and Urban Design.
of pedestrians and drivers to shared space. Geographical Research, 49(2), 183–191.
Transportation Research Part F: Traffic doi:10.1111/j.1745-5871.2011.00689.x
Psychology and Behaviour, 15(3), 297–310.
doi:10.1016/j.trf.2012.02.001 Leon, A. S., Connett, J., Jacobs, D. R., & Rauramaa,
R. (1987). Leisure-time physical activity levels and
Kashef, M. (2008). Architects and planners risk of coronary heart disease and death: The
approaches to urban form and design in Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. American
the Toronto region: A comparative analysis. Medical Association, 258(17), 2388–95.
Geoforum, 39(1), 414–437. doi:10.1016/j.
geoforum.2007.09.002 Leslie, E., Saelens, B. E., Frank, L. D., Owen, N.,
Bauman, A. E., Coffee, N., & Hugo, G. (2005).
Katzschner, L., Bosch, U., & Roettgen, M. (2004). Residents’ perceptions of walkability attributes in
Thermal Comfort Mapping and Zoning. In M. objectively different neighbourhoods: a pilot study.
Nikolopoulou (Ed.), Designing Open Spaces in Health & place, 11(3), 227–36. doi:10.1016/j.
the Urban Environment: a Bioclimatic Approach. healthplace.2004.05.005
Centre for Renewable Energy Sources.
Lillebye, E. (1996). Architectural and functional
Kelly, C. E., Tight, M. R., Hodgson, F. C., & Page, relationships in street planning: an historical view.
M. W. (2010). A comparison of three methods Landscape and Urban Planning, 35(2-3), 85–105.
for assessing the walkability of the pedestrian doi:10.1016/0169-2046(96)00307-6
environment. Journal of Transport Geography, 44,
1–9. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.08.001 Litman, T. (2003). Integrating public health objectives
in transportation decision-making. American
Kleerekoper, L., van Esch, M., & Salcedo, T. B. (2011). journal of health promotion : AJHP, 18(1), 103–8.
How to make a city climate-proof, addressing Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
the urban heat island effect. Resources, pubmed/13677968
Conservation and Recycling, 1–9. doi:10.1016/j.
resconrec.2011.06.004 Martens, K. (2004). The bicycle as a feedering mode:
experiences from three European countries.
Kostic, M., & Djokic, L. (2009). Recommendations Transportation Research Part D: Transport and
for energy efficient and visually acceptable street Environment, 9(4), 281–294. doi:10.1016/j.
lighting. Energy, 34(10), 1565–1572. doi:10.1016/j. trd.2004.02.005
energy.2009.06.056
Millington, C., Thompson, C. W., Rowe, D., Aspinall, Ozbil, A., Peponis, J., & Keeping, M. (2011).
P., Fitzsimons, C., Nelson, N., & Mutrie, N. Understanding the link between street
(2009). Development of the Scottish Walkability connectivity, land use and pedestrian flows.
Assessment Tool (SWAT). Health & place, 15(2), URBAN DESIGN International, 16(2), 125–141.
474–81. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2008.09.007 doi:10.1057/udi.2011.2
Mori, M., & Tsukaguchi, H. (1987). A new method Paffenbarger, R. S., Hyde, R. T., Wing, A. L., & Hsieh,
for evaluation of level of service in pedestrian C. C. (1986). Physical activity, all-cause mortality,
facilities. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and longevity of college alumni. New England
and Practice, 21(3), 223–234. doi:10.1016/0191- Journal of Medicine, 314, 605–13.
2607(87)90016-1
Penwarden, A. D., & Wise, A. F. E. (1975). Wind
Morris, J. N., Clayton, D. G., Everitt, M. G., environment around buildings. London.
Semmence, A. M., & Burgess, E. H. (1990).
Exercise in leisure time: Coronary attack and Project for Public Spaces. (2012). What is
death rates. British Heart Journal, 63, 325–34. Placemaking ?
NRG Research Group. (2010). Main Street Area Reconnecting America. (2011). Sustainable Urban
Residents Survey. Design & Transit.
Nabors, D., Gibbs, M., Sandt, L., Rocchi, S., Wilson, Rodriguez, D. A., Khattak, A., & Evenson, K.
E., & Lipinski, M. (2007). Pedestrian Road Safety (2006). Can new urbanism encourage physical
Audit Guidelines and Prompt Lists. activity? Physical activity in a new urbanist and
conventional suburban neighborhoods. Journal of
Nikolopoulou, M. (Ed.). (2004). Designing Open the American Planning Association, 72(1), 43–54.
Spaces in the Urban Environment: a Bioclimatic
Approach. Centre for Renewable Energy Sources. Rodríguez, D. A., Brisson, E. M., & Estupiñán, N.
(2009). The relationship between segment-level
Nikolopoulou, M., Kleissl, J., Linden, P. F., & built environment attributes and pedestrian activity
Lykoudis, S. (2011). Pedestrians’ perception of around Bogota’s BRT stations. Transportation
environmental stimuli through field surveys: focus Research Part D: Transport and Environment,
on particulate pollution. Science of the Total 14(7), 470–478. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2009.06.001
Environment, 409(13), 2493–502. doi:10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2011.02.002 Rosén, E., & Sander, U. (2009). Pedestrian fatality
risk as a function of car impact speed. Accident;
Owen, N., Humpel, N., Leslie, E., Bauman, A. E., & analysis and prevention, 41(3), 536–42.
Sallis, J. F. (2004). Understanding environmental doi:10.1016/j.aap.2009.02.002
influences on walking. American Journal of
Preventive Medicine, 27(1), 67–76. doi:10.1016/j. Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., & Frank, L. D. (2003).
amepre.2004.03.006 Environmental Correlates of Walking and Cycling:
Findings From the Transportation, Urban Design,
and Planning Literatures. Annals of Behavioral
Medicine, 25(2), 80–91. Retrieved from http://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12704009
Sandvik, L., Erikssen, J., Thaulow, E., Erikssen, G., Susilo, Y. O., Williams, K., Lindsay, M., & Dair, C.
Mundal, R., & Rodahl, K. (1993). Physical fitness (2012). The influence of individuals’ environmental
as a predictor of mortality among healthy, middle- attitudes and urban design features on their travel
aged Norwegian men. New England Journal of patterns in sustainable neighborhoods in the
Medicine, (328), 533–37. UK. Transportation Research Part D: Transport
and Environment, 17(3), 190–200. doi:10.1016/j.
Saraiva, M., & Pinho, P. (2011). A comprehensive trd.2011.11.007
and accessible approach to crime prevention
in the planning and design of public spaces. Tan, D., Wang, W., Lu, J., & Bian, Y. (2007). Research
URBAN DESIGN International, 16(3), 213–226. on Methods of Assessing Pedestrian Level of
doi:10.1057/udi.2011.7 Service for Sidewalk. Journal of Transportation
Systems Engineering and Information Technology,
Schafer, R. M. (1976). The Tuning of the World. 7(5), 5–10.
Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.
Taylor, B. D., & Fink, C. N. Y. (2011). The Factors
Schmidt, S., Nemeth, J., & Botsford, E. (2011). The Influencing Transit Ridership : A Review and
evolution of privately owned public spaces in New Analysis of the Ridership Literature.
York City. URBAN DESIGN International, 16(4),
270–284. doi:10.1057/udi.2011.12 Taylor, B. D., Iseki, H., Miller, M. A., & Smart, M.
(2007). Thinking Outside the Bus: Understanding
Scudo, G., Dessi, V., & Rogora, A. (2004). Evaluation User Perceptions of Waiting and Transferring in
of Radiant Conditions in Urban Spaces. In M. Order to Increase Transit Use. Los Angeles.
Nikolopoulou (Ed.), Designing Open Spaces in
the Urban Environment: a Bioclimatic Approach. Taylor, B. D., Miller, D., Iseki, H., & Fink, C. N. Y.
Centre for Renewable Energy Sources. (2009). Nature and/or nurture? Analyzing the
determinants of transit ridership across US
Sisiopiku, V. P., & Akin, D. (2003). Pedestrian urbanized areas. Transportation Research Part A:
behaviors at and perceptions towards various Policy and Practice, 43(1), 60–77. doi:10.1016/j.
pedestrian facilities: an examination based on tra.2008.06.007
observation and survey data. Transportation
Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Thomsen, J. (2011). Reflections on the opportunities
Behaviour, 6(4), 249–274. doi:10.1016/j. of urban planning to promote non-vehicular
trf.2003.06.001 transportation in a sustainable settlement in
Norway. URBAN DESIGN International, 16(3),
Steemers, K. A., Ramos, M. C., & Sinou, M. 162–170. doi:10.1057/udi.2011.8
(2004). Urban Morphology. In M. Nikolopoulou
(Ed.), Designing Open Spaces in the Urban TransLink. (2011). Transit Passenger Facility Design
Environment: a Bioclimatic Approach. Centre for Guidelines. October.
Renewable Energy Sources.
Transportation Research Board. (2005). Integration
of Bicycles and Transit: A Synthesis of Transit
Practice.
United Nations. (2007). World Population Prospects: Wardman, M., Hine, J., & Stradling, S. (2001).
the 2004 Revision. New York. Interchange and Travel Choice Volume 1 (Vol. 1).
Van Dyck, D., Deforche, B., Cardon, G., & De Whyte, W. H. (1980). The Social Life Of Small Urban
Bourdeaudhuij, I. (2009). Neighbourhood Spaces. New York: Project for Public Spaces Inc.
walkability and its particular importance for
adults with a preference for passive transport. Yang, W., & Kang, J. (2003). A cross-cultural study
Health & place, 15(2), 496–504. doi:10.1016/j. of soundscape in urban open public spaces.
healthplace.2008.08.010 Stockholm: Tenth International Congress on
Sound and Vibration.
Walmsley, A. (1995). Greenways and the making of
urban form. Landscape and Urban Planning, 33, Yang, W., & Kang, J. (2005). Acoustic comfort
81–127. evaluation in urban open public spaces. Applied
Acoustics, 66(2), 211–229. doi:10.1016/j.
Wardman, M. (2001). A Review Of British Evidence apacoust.2004.07.011
On Time And Service Quality Valuations.
Transportation Research Part E: Logistics York Regional Transit. (2009). Co-ordinated Street
and Transportation Review, 37(2-3), 107–128. Furniture Urban Design Guidelines. York.
doi:10.1016/S1366-5545(00)00012-0 Zacharias, J., Zhang, T., & Nakajima, N. (2011). Tokyo
Wardman, M. (2004). Public transport values of time. Station City: The railway station as urban place.
Transport Policy, 11(4), 363–377. doi:10.1016/j. URBAN DESIGN International, 16(4), 242–251.
tranpol.2004.05.001 doi:10.1057/udi.2011.15

Bus Stop

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bus Stop

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BUS STOP

Kevin Jingyi Zhang 2012

Bus Stop Urban Design

Kevin Jingyi Zhang

B. Environment Design, The University of British Columbia, 2009

A PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF ARTS (PLANNING)

THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES

School of Community and Regional Planning

We accept this project as conforming

to the required standard

THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

© Kevin Jingyi Zhang, 2012

I would like to thank my supervisor, professor Maged Senbel, and my

In addition, I want to thank Frank Ducote, Gary Penway, and Alexander

Lastly, I thank my family and my girlfriend for their unwavering support,

Abstract4 3.1 Safety 26

1.0 INTRODUCTION 8 3.1.1 Risk of Accident 26

3.1.2 Risk of Crime 26

2.1 Urban Realm and Transit Ridership 16 3.6 Accessibility 30

2.1.1 Proximity to Transit 16 3.7 Integration 30

2.1.2 Physical Environment Quality 16

2.2 Urban Realm and Active Transportation 17

2.2.1 General Effect 17

2.2.2 Demographic Differences 17

2.3 Physical Activity and Health 17

2.4 Commuter’s Value of Time 18

2.5 Hierarchy of Elements 19

2.6.2 Shared Space 20

2.7 Public Project Implementation 21

4.0 BUS STOP URBAN DESIGN TECHNIQUES 32 5.0 DESIGN APPLICATIONS 44

4.1 Lighting 36 5.1 Design Process 46

4.1.1 Lighting and Safety 36 5.2 Regional Bus Stop Analysis 47

4.1.2 Lighting and Character 36 5.2.1 Bus Stop Mapping 48

4.2 Seating and Surfaces 36 5.2.2 Bus Stop Selection 52

4.9 Bicycle Infrastructure 42 5.10 Walkable Block

5.12 Modular Shelter Design 72

6.2 Recommendations and Further Studies 77

1.1 Project Summary

1.2 Background and Rationale

1.3 Focus on Design

Overall Goal Contributing Factors Components

Increase Transit Ridership Metropolitan Economy Density of Development

Built Environment Diversity of Land Uses

Population Characteristics Design of Environment

Regional Geography Destination Accessibility

However, as the recognition of the environmental impacts of

2.1 Urban Realm and Transit Ridership

2.1.2 Physical Environment Quality

2.2 Urban Realm and Active

2.2.2 Demographic Differences

2.3 Physical Activity and Health

2.4 Commuter’s Value of Time

2.5 Hierarchy of Elements

2.6 Urban Space Design Concepts

2.6.2 Shared Space

2.7 Public Project Implementation

photo: Darrell James photo: Henk Graalman photo: Simon Garnier

Safety Thermal Comfort Acoustic Comfort

photo: Lies Baas photo: Ben Stadtneurotiker photo: Joel Davis

Wind Protection Visual Comfort Accessibility

photo: Baza Rambler

Abstract4 3.1 Safety 26

1.0 INTRODUCTION 8 3.1.1 Risk of Accident 26

3.1.2 Risk of Crime 26

2.1 Urban Realm and Transit Ridership 16 3.6 Accessibility 30

2.1.1 Proximity to Transit 16 3.7 Integration 30

2.1.2 Physical Environment Quality 16

2.2 Urban Realm and Active Transportation 17

2.2.1 General Effect 17

2.2.2 Demographic Differences 17

2.3 Physical Activity and Health 17

2.4 Commuter’s Value of Time 18

2.5 Hierarchy of Elements 19

2.6.2 Shared Space 20

2.7 Public Project Implementation 21

4.0 BUS STOP URBAN DESIGN TECHNIQUES 32 5.0 DESIGN APPLICATIONS 44

4.1 Lighting 36 5.1 Design Process 46

4.1.1 Lighting and Safety 36 5.2 Regional Bus Stop Analysis 47

4.1.2 Lighting and Character 36 5.2.1 Bus Stop Mapping 48

4.2 Seating and Surfaces 36 5.2.2 Bus Stop Selection 52

4.9 Bicycle Infrastructure 42 5.10 Walkable Block

5.12 Modular Shelter Design 72

6.2 Recommendations and Further Studies 77