See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261238392

The utilization rates of pedestrian bridges in Malaysia

Conference Paper · April 2013

DOI: 10.1109/BEIAC.2013.6560210

CITATIONS READS
17 2,225

3 authors:

Rizati Hamidun Siti Zaharah Ishak

Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research Universiti Teknologi MARA
29 PUBLICATIONS   89 CITATIONS    65 PUBLICATIONS   99 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Intan Endut
Universiti Teknologi MARA
68 PUBLICATIONS   595 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Vulnerable road user View project

Risk management for construction project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rizati Hamidun on 03 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 2013 IEEE Business Engineering and Industrial Applications Colloquium (BEIAC)
The Utilization Rates of Pedestrian Bridges in Malaysia
H. Rizati, Siti Zaharah Ishak, Intan Rohani Endut
Malaysia Institute of Transport (MITRANS)
Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM)
40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
Abstract- Pedestrian bridge is part of grade-separated crossing
that offer free flowing movement of vehicles and pedestrians.
This facility is one of the safety approaches to overcome accident
by minimizing conflicts and separate traffic flow between
pedestrians and vehicles. Even though the pedestrian bridge may
seem to offer greater protection; excessive added travel distance
will discourage pedestrians who want to take a direct route. The
stated inconvenience creates a situation whereby pedestrians are
at risk when they attempt to cross the road using neither
sidewalks nor crosswalks. Pedestrians often avoid using these
facilities due to substantial differences in elevation and implying
many steps to climb. This study applied linear regression analysis
to analyse the factors of low utilization rates of pedestrian
bridges in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Data on the pedestrian
behaviour were obtained using video recordings at 16 study
locations representing school, amenities, residential and business
areas. The information related to the pedestrian perceptions was
obtained through the questionnaire survey. Findings indicate
that the utilization rates at school and residential are high as
compared to the business and amenity areas. Several factors such
as fence installation, directional flow, existing of median, vehicle
volume and the distance of this facility that have found
significant affecting the utilization of the crossing bridges. The
distance of this facility from interested place or to save time was
the most influential factors for pedestrian to decide on utilizing
the crossing bridge. Signalized crossing is chosen as the most
favourable type of crossing facility by a majority of the
respondents.
Keywords-pedestrian bridge; utilization rates; crossing choice;
behaviour survey; preferences
I. INTRODUCTION
Pedestrian crossing bridges are costly and its installation
should always be subjected to rigorous economic evaluation.
Therefore it must offer obvious advantages over an at-grade
crossing. Many pedestrian crossing bridges in Malaysia are
poorly utilized and not cost effective. The construction cost of
a pedestrian crossing bridge normally ranges from RM300, 000
to RM1, 000,000 depending on the design and site conditions.
Providing a costly pedestrian facility without considering the
effectiveness of the treatment is a waste and should be avoided.
Special attention should be given when many provided
crossing facilities do not operate as intended, it can possibly
give an adverse effect on the safety. Therefore, measures have
to be introduced to prevent and discourage any pedestrian
978-1-4673-5968-9/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE
from crossing illegally. Many pedestrians are unwilling to use
this facility because of the inconvenient crossing points or
improper design of this facility. In some country, barriers will
be installed to discourage pedestrian from crossing the road. In
some limited cases, escalators and ramps have been provided
in addition to the normal staircases.
In addition, there is no specific warrant for pedestrian
bridge crossing that suit the Malaysian condition except only
the general guides to avoid low utilization. The basic guideline
on pedestrian facilities can be referred to Nota Teknik Jalan
18/97 published by Jabatan Kerja Raya (JKR). This technical
note has been adopted from AUSTROADS (Australia) Guide
to Traffic Engineering Practice, Part 13-Pedestrian (1995), as
an interim guideline until any necessary changes are pointed
out. The provision of pedestrian facilities at a particular site
needs to take account on several factors such as the number
and characteristic of pedestrian, the functional classification of
road, vehicular traffic condition, the road condition and the
character of the locality.
A. Factors Affect Pedestrian Crossing Choice
Existing literature indicated that the pedestrian crossing
choice could be influenced by several factors. Location and
condition of the pedestrian facilities give an impact on
pedestrian crossing behaviour and their perceptions of the
facilities [1]. Properly designed and placed pedestrian
facilities encourage users to cross at a certain location.
A study has shown that the most influential factor cited by
pedestrian in making a decision to cross at a designated
crossing location is the distance of the crosswalk to the desired
destination of pedestrian [1]. The shortest or fastest routes to
reach the target destination is normally preferred by walking
pedestrian [2]. The convenience of crossing facility is also
become the motivation for pedestrian to utilize the equipped
crossing aid [3]. Providing the crossing facility without
considering the preference of pedestrian might create a
situation where the pedestrian is likely to cross elsewhere.
Thus, inappropriate locations of pedestrian facilities tend to
jeopardize the pedestrian safety.
Different characteristics of road section may influence the
pedestrian crossing choice, thus give an impact to the
utilization rate of crossing facility. Pedestrian tend to utilize
crossing facility which is located on major road compared to
minor road due to the high volume and density [4]. The
646
presents of vegetation and barriers on the road section, shelter
and coloured paving at median are also influenced pedestrian
crossing decision [1]. The design of signal timing and
configuration of the centre refuge island also influenced
pedestrian compliance rate and behaviour at crossing [5].
The pedestrian crossing behaviour towards utilizing
pedestrian facilities are also affected by the regional
distribution, city scale and economics levels and culture
characteristics [4]. Pedestrian who frequently visit CBD are
less likely to utilize grade separated crossing facility [6].
B. Safety concern on Pedestrian Crossing Behaviour
Pedestrian safety remains as a concern in improving road
safety hence there a large number of pedestrian injuries and
deaths when involved in a traffic crash. The characteristics
and behaviour of pedestrian as vulnerable road users are the
major factors in pedestrian fatality and injuries [7]. Pedestrian
behaviour such as crossing against the traffic signal or not in a
crosswalk is associated with greater injury risk [8]. The risky
behaviour adopts by pedestrian is also associated with the
characteristics of different gender. Men are more likely to be
involved in crashes because of their greater risk taking
behaviour. These behaviours include non-compliance with
traffic laws, walking after dark, alcohol or drug use and
tolerance for crossing with narrow gaps [8]. A desire to keep
moving or a need to hurry was the foremost reason behind the
lack of compliance with pedestrian signals [1].
Considerable research has been undertaken to address the
problem of pedestrian safety relate to the crossing behaviour.
Among them, study by Hamed [9] focus on developing model
to estimate pedestrian waiting time at crossing facility which
will reflect the lack of acceptable and safe gaps while crossing
a road section. The factors influenced pedestrian behaviour on
waiting at crossing facility were identified: gender, age,
crossing frequency, number of people in the group attempting
to cross, access to a private vehicle, home location in relation
to pedestrian crossing and pedestrian past involvement in
traffic accidents. A pedestrian crossing behaviour model
developed by Yannis, et al. [10] to assess the accident risk
along pedestrian trip using nested logit model and linear
regression model, demonstrated that the risk at particular
crossing location is depends on the crossing decisions made by
pedestrian along their trip. The assignment of fault in
pedestrian vehicle crashes was explored by Ulfarsson, et al.
[11] concluded that pedestrian are found at fault in 59% of the
pedestrian-motor vehicle crashes. The behaviour of pedestrian
associated with pedestrian crossing such as jaywalking,
pedestrian dash into the road and intoxicated pedestrian
become precipitating factors to cause an accident.
Realising the effect of pedestrian behaviour to their safety
while making a decision to cross road section without utilizing
provided facility, this study is intended to explore the reason
of not using the pedestrian bridge in urban areas. The
preference crossing aid is going to be identified as an
alternative treatment in reducing vehicle-pedestrian conflict.
Study on pedestrian behaviour and perception towards the
pedestrian crossing bridge in our country is essential, in order
to create a desirable environment for users to enjoy walking as
647
a safe travel mode. Findings are expected to be useful for
engineers and planners in deciding to provide an expensive
crossing infrastructure in the future.
II. METHOD
A. Study Sites
The selection of sites for an evaluation of the pedestrian
behaviour towards the pedestrian bridge was classified into
four categories includes school area, amenity area, residential
area, and business area. A total of 16 pedestrian crossing
bridges were observed representing four types of areas named
before.
Four sites were selected to measure the utilization rate of
this facility at the school area either for primary or secondary
school children. It is included the bridge at Raja Abdullah
Road, Tun Sambathan Road, Pudu Road and Ampang Road.
The observations of the pedestrian bridges utilization in
residential areas were carried out at four sites namely Hang
Tuah Road, Cheras Road (DBKL Flat), Bangsar Road, and
Cheras Road (Taman Midah).
Pedestrian bridges located in front of Puduraya Complex,
Pudu Road, Tun Razak Road, Kuching Road and Sultan Ismail
Road has been observed to evaluate the utilization rates of this
crossing facility for amenity areas. All of these bridges are
located near to LRT stations and it is believed to
accommodate pedestrians to reach their desired location at the
opposite position. Four sites selected to represent pedestrian
bridges located in the business area are namely Raja Laut
Road, Chow Kit Road, TAR Road and Cheng Lock Road.
Popular shopping malls in Kuala Lumpur such as SOGO,
Maju Junction and Kotaraya are positioned near to these
bridges.
B. Data Collection
Pedestrian behaviour data are used to analyse the
utilization rates of pedestrian crossing bridges and its
influential factors at the study facilities. The utilization rate is
defined as the percent of pedestrian utilize the crossing bridge
while crossed the road section. Collecting data on pedestrian
behaviour was conducted using video recording. The video
data method always used for the observations of pedestrian
behaviour because of the several advantages over the manual
method. Video survey normally offers a permanent and
continuous record of events at low running cost. The number
of pedestrian who are willing to use the pedestrian crossing
bridge compared to the total crossing pedestrian in an hour
observation will be obtained directly.
Pedestrian volume is one of the important data for this
study. The observation of pedestrian volume in each site
location is only concern about the people who are crossing the
road within 50m from the pedestrian bridge (both sides) as
shown in Fig. 1. This approach has come to reason that all
pedestrian movements that were either on the carriageway or
on the central reservation within a 50m stretch of road were
defined as pedestrian activity and recorded. The real
pedestrian volume for each site tends to be higher from the
pedestrian volume data for this study. Pedestrian who are
walking on the sidewalk or waiting for the bus without make
crossing and who are cross a road at a distance more than 50
metres were not counted as samples for this study.
50 m study area 50 m study area
III. RESULTS
A. Pedestrian Bridges Utilization Rates
The utilization rates of pedestrian bridges at four different
types of locations that representing the school area, amenity
area, residential area and business area were summarized as in
Fig. 2. A total of 10,810 pedestrians were observed in this
study.

Pedestrian

Figure 1. Sketch Diagram for Pedestrian Behaviour Survey

The characteristic of the site is crucial in pedestrian

behaviour survey. Vehicle volume is believed to be one of the
influential factors contribute on utilization rate. The
observation of vehicle volume for each site only considers for
1 way direction. Road environment including the existence of
median, the width of the road, the number of lanes, directional
flow, and distance of traffic signal or intersection might give
an effect to the utilization rate. The physical design of the
bridge such as provision of step/ramp, channelled by fence
and roof installation is also considered as the potential
variables to the utilization rate. Pedestrian behavior were
observed and recorded during the morning peak (7.30-8.30
am), the noon peak (12.30-1.30 pm) and the evening peak
period (5.00-6.00 pm). A total of 3 hours observation in a day
was carried out for different samples of location.
C. Pedestrian Perception Survey
Developing pedestrian perception survey as an efficient
survey instrument should consider the selection an appropriate
study group and distribution of a clear definition and
reasonable length of the question. This set of questions was
distributed to pedestrian on the street and to pedestrian who
are working in Kuala Lumpur. The selection of the study
group is expected ranging from several of pedestrian profile
with a mix of socioeconomic characteristic. The question
contained in the questionnaire covered the following areas of
interest:
Figure 2. The Utilization Rates of Pedestrian Bridges at Various Locations –
Behaviour Survey
In school area which was consists of four sample sites
show the utilization rates range from 70% to 88%. The
percentages of pedestrian bridge utilization in amenity area
were ranging from 45% to 100%, while the residential area
gives higher percentage that range from 83% to 97%. The
utilization of pedestrian bridges in business area gives the
smallest percentage which ranges from 5% to 66%.
B. Contributing Factors on Pedestrian Bridge Utilization
A multiple linear regression analysis is carried out to
analyse the contributing factors to the utilization rates of
pedestrian bridges. Results showed that five out of eight
variables that have been analysed were significant in its
association with the pedestrian bridge utilization as
summarized in Table 1.
TABLE I. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS ON PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE UTILIZATION –
BEHAVIOR SURVEY

a) respondent characteristics (age, gender, occupation, Variable Definition Coefficient p- value

frequency of use, walking ability, purpose and status of Constant 1 13.930 p = 0.047
crossing) Fence installation 1,0 18.372 p = 0.000
b) user perception and factors that affect pedestrian crossing Directional Flow 1,0 32.804 p = 0.000
Existing of Median 1,0 -23.314 p = 0.002
choices (effective location, reason of not using, group Vehicle volume v/h 9.169x10-3 p = 0.009
user, design criteria, type of facility and treatment) Traffic light distance m 0.122 p = 0.000
Total sample: N = 96
The pre-test survey was conducted to identify any unclear R = 0.790
questions. It could also reveal unanticipated problems with the R2 = 0.623
question wording, wrong spelling and unclear instructions. Multiple Linear regression; method: stepwise; with no missing data

The time required for completing the questionnaire is taken The final linear regression model retained five significant
into account and it should not longer than five minutes. variables at the 95% significance level (R2 = 0.623). These
variables are fence installation, directional flow, existing of
median, vehicle volume and the distance of this facility to

648
traffic light. Three variables were excluded including the The majority of the respondents (76.3%) replied that the
number of traffic lanes, length to cross and installation of roof. strategic location of this facility will influence their decision to
use the pedestrian bridge. A 65.1% respondents agree with the
Table II shows that most of respondents are willing to installation of escalator will influence the decision of using the
walk less than 50m to reach the pedestrian bridge before pedestrian bridge and 30.6% agree with fence installation.
crossing a road (50%), while some of them (30%) are willing
to walk until 100m to reach the pedestrian bridge before made The respondents were asked about the effective location in
crossing. Only 6% of the total respondents are willing to walk providing pedestrian bridge, and the results are summarized in
more than 150m, and the respondents that falls in this group Table V. School area was rated as an effective location by
are normally young people. 84.7% of the respondents, meanwhile only 18.3% voted that
business area as an effective location to provide pedestrian
TABLE II. CONSIDERABLE WALKING DISTANCE TO PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE– bridge. Amenity area was rated as an effective location in
SURVEY RESPONDENTS providing pedestrian bridge by 65.9% of the respondents, and
31.4% of respondents voted for residential area.
Distance from pedestrian bridge Frequency Percentage
TABLE V. THE EFFECTIVE LOCATION TO PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE –
0 – 50 m 144 50.2 SURVEY RESPONDENTS
50 m – 100 m 86 30.0
100m – 150 m 40 13.9
> 150 m 17 5.9 Strategic location to provide a Agree (%) Disagree (%)
Total 287 100 bridge
School area 84.7 15.3
Table III describes the main reason of not using the Amenity area 65.9 34.1
pedestrian bridge given by the respondents. A 54.4% of Residential area 31.4 68.6
respondents replied that the distance of this facility from Business area 18.1 81.9
interest place or to save time is the most priority concern,
while 22.3% respondents said that exhausted of climbing is Respondents were asked about their favourable crossing
the main reason of why people are not using the pedestrian facility types in the questionnaire. Only four types of crossing
bridge. The remaining 16.7% said the road is safe to cross and facility are stated and commonly used in Malaysia. Result as
6.6% said the inconvenient environment or crime make they in Table VI shows that the signalized crossing are the
refused to use pedestrian bridge. It shows that most of the favourable crossing facility voted by 76.3% of the
respondents concern about the time saving with associated respondents. Followed by the combined zebra and signalized
with the distance of this facility from the interest place. crossing voted as the favourable crossing facility by 66.5% of
the respondents. A 39% of respondents voted the zebra
TABLE III. THE REASON FOR NOT USING PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE– SURVEY crossing as the favourable crossing facility and only 18.2%
RESPONDENTS voted for pedestrian bridge. This is also reflected that
pedestrian bridge was an unfavourable crossing facility among
Condition Frequency Percentage
others (81.8 % of the total respondents).
The road is safe to cross 46 16.7
The facility located far away or to save 156 54.4 TABLE VI. THE FAVOURABLE TYPE OF CROSSING FACILITY – SURVEY
RESPONDENTS
time
That exhausted of climbing 64 22.3 Favourable crossing types Agree (%) Disagree (%)
Inconvenient environment or crime 19 6.6 Pedestrian bridge 18.2 81.8
Zebra crossing 39.0 61.0
Total 287 100 Signalised crossing 76.3 23.7
Zebra + signalised crossing 66.5 33.5

C. Pedestrian preferences
The questions about treatments that influence the users’ IV. CONCLUSION
decision to use the pedestrian bridge were asked. Table IV
summarizes the responses obtained. Four choices of This study analysed the rate of utilization of pedestrian
treatments suggested including barrier or fence installation, bridges in Kuala Lumpur. The pedestrian bridge utilizations
escalator installation, strategic location and enforcement. are varying with the locality characteristic that associated with
several factors and pedestrian perception towards this facility.
TABLE IV. TYPE OF TREATMENT THAT INFLUENCE PEOPLE TO USE PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE – SURVEY RESPONDENTS Information was obtained through surveying users and
observing pedestrian movement at total of 16 study sites. The
Influential treatment Agree (%) Disagree (%) following conclusions are drawn based upon the results;
Fence installation 30.6 69.4
Installation of escalator 65.1 34.9 1. The pedestrian bridge is the best facility for school
Strategic location 76.3 23.7 area and residential area with certain site condition.
Enforcement/fined 27.9 72.1
2. Placing a pedestrian bridge in the business area and
amenity area might give low utilization rates to this
facility unless it is fully channelized.

649
 3. High vehicle volume with two directional flows is the
influential factor that should be considered in making
decisions to provide pedestrian bridge.
4. The installation of fences and existence of median
significantly affects the bridge utilization.
5. Pedestrian bridge will give low utilization if it is
placed near to the traffic light.
6. The main reason given by pedestrian when not using
the pedestrian bridge to cross a road is the distance of
this facility from interest place or to save time.
Selecting a strategic location (less than 50m from
high pedestrian movement activity) for this facility
with respect to locality characteristic may give high
utilization.
7. Pedestrian preferred the signalized crossing
compared to the pedestrian bridge as a crossing
facility.
The result obtained indicate that the pedestrian bridges
utilization rates are affected by fence installation, directional
flow, existing of median , vehicle volume and the distance of
this facility to traffic light. Placing the pedestrian bridge at
sites with high vehicle volume, have two way directional flow,
apart from traffic light, provided with fence and no median at
the site will give high utilization to this facility. The low
utilization of this type of facility can be an indicator that
pedestrian prefer at level crossing facility such as signalized
crossing as compared to grade separated crossing. It is
recommended that safety analysis be performed to examine
the current operations of signalised crossing as it becomes the
favourable crossing aid to the pedestrian in our country.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank Dr. Md Yunus Ab Wahab for
his valuable help and encouragement.
650
View publication stats
REFERENCES
[1] V. P. Sisiopiku and D. Akin, "Pedestrian behaviors at and perceptions
towards various pedestrian facilities: an examination based on
observation and survey data," Transportation Research, vol. Part F, pp.
249–274, 2003.
[2] Z. Qi and H. Baoming, "Simulation model of pedestrian interactive
behaviour," Physica A, pp. 636-646, 2011.
[3] J. M. Sharples and J. P. Fletcher, "Pedestrian perceptions of road
crossing facilities," Transport Research Laboratory, 2001.
[4] F. Shumin, D. Ning, and Z. Ying, "Research on the Utilizing Features of
Pedestrian Crossing Facilities," presented at the 2010 WASE
International Conference on Information Engineering, Harbin, China,
2010.
[5] Y. Li and G. Fernie, "Pedestrian behavior and safety on a two-stage
crossing with a center refuge island and the effect of winter weather on
pedestrian compliance rate," Accident Analysis and Prevention, pp.
1156–1163, 2010.
[6] M. Rasanen, T. Lajunen, F. Alticafarbay, and C. Aydin, "Pedestrian self-
reports of factors influencing the use of pedestrian bridges," Accident
Analysis and Prevention, pp. 969–973, 2007.
[7] C. Lee and M. Abdel-Aty, "Comprehensive analysis of vehicle–
pedestrian crashes at intersections in Florida," Accident Analysis and
Prevention, pp. 775-786, 2005.
[8] K. J. Clifton, C. V. Burnier, and G. Akar, "Severity of injury resulting
from pedestrian–vehicle crashes: What can we learn from examining the
built environment?," Transportation Research, vol. Part D, pp. 425–436,
2009.
[9] M. M. Hamed, "Analysis of pedestrian behaviour at pedestrian
crossing," Safety Science, vol. 38, pp. 63-82, 2001.
[10] G. Yannis, J. Golias, and E. Papadimitriou, "Modeling Crossing
Behavior and Accident Risk of Pedestrians," Journal of Transportation
Engineering, vol. 133, pp. 634–644, 2007.
[11] G. F. Ulfarssona, S. Kimb, and K. M. Boothc, "Analyzing fault in
pedestrian–motor vehicle crashes in North Carolina," Accident Analysis
and Prevention, pp. 1805–1813, 2010.