Safe places for pedestrians: using cognitive work analysis to consider the relationships between the engineering and urban design of footpaths.

Footpaths provide an integral component of our urban environments and have the potential to act as safe places for people and the focus for community life. Despite this, the approach to designing footpaths that are safe while providing this sense of place often occurs in silos. There is often very little consideration given to how designing for sense of place impacts safety and vice versa. The aim of this study was to use a systems analysis and design framework to develop a design template for an 'ideal' footpath system that embodies both safety and sense of place. This was achieved through using the first phase of the Cognitive Work Analysis framework, Work Domain Analysis, to specify a model of footpaths as safe places for pedestrians. This model was subsequently used to assess two existing footpath environments to determine the extent to which they meet the design requirements specified. The findings show instances where the existing footpaths both meet and fail to meet the design requirements specified. Through utilising a systems approach for footpaths, this paper has provided a novel design template that can inform new footpath design efforts or be used to evaluate the extent to which existing footpaths achieve their safety and sense of place requirements.

[1]  Ann M. Bisantz,et al.  Integrating cognitive analyses in a large-scale system design process , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[2]  N J Stevens,et al.  A leading practice framework for sustainable urban transport corridors , 2013 .

[3]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  Cognitive Work Analysis: Coping with Complexity , 2008 .

[4]  Gökçen Firdevs Yücel,et al.  Street Furniture and Amenities: Designing the User-Oriented Urban Landscape , 2013 .

[5]  James M Daisa ITE Committee Report Summary. Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable Communities: An ITE Proposed Recommended Practice , 2006 .

[6]  Penelope M. Sanderson,et al.  Designing Teams for First-of-a-Kind, Complex Systems Using the Initial Phases of Cognitive Work Analysis: Case Study , 2003, Hum. Factors.

[7]  Susan L Handy,et al.  Measuring the Unmeasurable: Urban Design Qualities Related to Walkability , 2009 .

[8]  Kevin Lynch,et al.  The Image of the City , 1960 .

[9]  Daniel A. Rodriguez,et al.  The development and testing of an audit for the pedestrian environment , 2007 .

[10]  Ipweaq Complete Streets: Guidelines for Urban Street Design , 2010 .

[11]  J. Jacobs “The Uses of Sidewalks: Safety” , 2015, The City Reader.

[12]  Marcus Watson,et al.  Designing for Attention With Sound: Challenges and Extensions to Ecological Interface Design , 2007, Hum. Factors.

[13]  Robert Cervero,et al.  The Active Living Research program: six years of grantmaking. , 2009, American journal of preventive medicine.

[14]  Randall Guensler,et al.  Measuring Walkability: Development of an Automated Sidewalk Quality Assessment Tool , 2013 .

[15]  Daniel Arnold Kueper,et al.  Smart Transportation Guidebook: Planning and Designing Highways and Streets That Support Sustainable and Livable Communities , 2008 .

[16]  Neville A Stanton,et al.  Using cognitive work analysis and the strategies analysis diagram to understand variability in road user behaviour at intersections , 2013, Ergonomics.

[17]  Penelope M. Sanderson,et al.  Evaluating Design Proposals for Complex Systems with Work Domain Analysis , 2001, Hum. Factors.

[18]  Neville A Stanton,et al.  A new approach for designing cognitive artefacts to support disaster management , 2010, Ergonomics.

[19]  K. J. Vicente,et al.  Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy Computer-Based Work , 1999 .

[20]  Ulf Ahlstrom,et al.  Work domain analysis for air traffic controller weather displays. , 2005, Journal of safety research.