SKYWARD: A TECHNO-BIOPHILIC SKYWALK INTER-CONNECTING

BUILDING OF CAPIZ STATE UNIVERSITY - MAIN CAMPUS

RIAMEA GRACE B. MACOCO

A Research Proposal presented to the Faculty of the

College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
Capiz State University – Main Campus

In partial fulfilment of the requirements in

Research Method in Architecture
2023-2024

September 2023
 Chapter I

Introduction

Although car free zones are popular in central business districts (CBD), there usually

remain some streets with high motor vehicle and pedestrian volumes. In order to facilitate safe

crossing places for pedestrians in these main streets and to promote environmentally friendly

mode of traffic, traffic calming or traffic signals in adequate distances would be needed.

However, using these devices is not possible in many cases as it may block the heavy motor

traffic flow. To solve this problem, pedestrian overpasses can be built for separating pedestrians

from motor vehicle traffic, e.g. as part of urban renewal project in downtown areas (ITE, 1998).

It is very likely, however, that pedestrians would not use bridges, because using a bridge

often increases the walking distance compared to level crossing. Already in 1953, Moore

(1953) studied the use of pedestrian bridges and underpasses in London and noted tentatively

that roughly 80% of pedestrians would use the safe path, if it takes the same time as across the

road. Later Moore and Older (1965) showed that no pedestrians used the bridge if the travel

time was 1.5 times or higher compared to the travel time at level crossing. Ribbens (1996)

determined a threshold on the basis of the concept of pedestrian delay: “grade separation

becomes a suitable alternative to a signal controlled crossing only when the cycle length of the

signalised crossing has to exceed 110 s (corresponding pedestrian delay of 50 s) to

accommodate the traffic flow”. In addition, it has been suggested that there has to be a self-

enforcing feature (topography, fences, etc.) that requires the pedestrian to use the bridge and

the bridge should ideally be on the normal path of pedestrian movements (Allos, 1983, FHWA,

2006). This all seems to suggest that safety is not the major concern when pedestrians choose

their route but rather the travel time and perceived easiness of bridge use. Planning pedestrian
environments requires assumptions about how pedestrians will respond to characteristics of the

environment as they choose their routes (Zacharias, 2001).

Sisiopiku and Akin (2003) found a limited number of studies on pedestrian perceptions and

attitudes towards facilities for pedestrians. Among these studies, there was only one study

(Tanaboriboon and Jing, 1994) that included some results on pedestrian bridges. The authors

noted that in Beijing pedestrians prefer signalised crossing to bridges and underpasses

(Tanaboriboon and Jing, 1994). In their study, Sisiopiku and Akin (2003) investigated many

crossing types but not pedestrian bridges. A study by Sharples and Fletcher (2001), not

mentioned in the previous review, dealt with pedestrian perceptions of different road crossing

facilities including bridges. The majority of respondents felt that: (a) convenience (easy to use

and no time delay), (b) the fact that the crossing was on their route and (c) safety were the

reasons for their use of the formal crossing points. These all were in broadly equal proportion.

It should be noted, however, that in Sharples and Fletcher (2001)'s study pedestrian bridge was

one of the nine crossing types and that the responses were collected mainly from those

pedestrians who used the bridge.

In order to improve the bridge use rate and, consequently, pedestrian safety, it is

important to know in detail, which factors influence bridge use/non-use by pedestrians. In the

present study, the use of pedestrian bridges was first observed in the CBD of Ankara in Turkey,

and then a survey among users and non-users was conducted in the same bridges. In countries

with rapid motorisation (e.g. Turkey), pedestrian casualties in urban areas are one of the major

safety problems

The design and construction of streets and highways in public rights-of-way must

consider pedestrians. The AASHTO Green Book states, "Pedestrians are a part of every

roadway environment and attention should be paid to their presence in rural as well as urban
arca Accessibility laws, implementing regulations, and standards require that, where pedestrian

facilities are newly provided or altered, they be accessible to and usable by people with

disabilities. Furthermore. Title of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) specifically

requires the construction of curb ramps along existing pedestrian routes. In addition, if

pedestrian use is understood, such as a neighbourhood walk-to-school requirement or a bus

stop along a roadway, agrgsible facilities should be available. Residents may also seek usability

improvements in facilities in order to travel locally. The Federal Highway Administration

(FIWA) has issued program guidance to help states and localities interpret the ADA and

provisions in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) legislation relating

to pedestrians and bicyclists. This program guidance calls upon every transportation agency to

make accommodation for bicycling and walking a routine part of their planning, design,

construction, operations, and maintenance activities. Pedestrians of all abilities should be

accommodated on pedestrian facilities, and sidewalks and pedestrian crossing features should

be considered from the beginning of project planning. In 2000, FHWA issued design guidance

mandated by TEA-21 which states that walking facilities will be incorporated into all

transportation projects unless "exceptional circumstances" exist. Exceptional circumstances

that might warrant the omission of pedestrian facilities in a new or reconstruction project

include the following: (1) Pedestrians are prohibited by law from using the roadway. In this

instance, an effort may be necessary to accommodate pedestrians elsewhere within the right-

of-way or within the same transportation corridor. (2) The cost of establishing walkways would

be excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use. Excessively disproportionate is

defined as exceeding 20 percent the cost of the larger transportation project.

References

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001457507000127

AASHTO. (2004). Guide for the planning, design, and operation of pedestrian facilities, 1st

Ed., U.S. DOT, Washington, DC.