child friendly mobilityurbanmobilityindia.in/upload/conference/c025cd2e-3... · introduction •...
TRANSCRIPT
CHILD FRIENDLY MOBILITY
Presented by:Ms. Vijaya Rohini Kodati & Ms. Revathy Pradeep
Urban Transport PlannerInstitute of Urban Transport (India)
Structure of Presentation
• Introduction
• Objectives
• Literature Review
• Methodology
• Data Analysis
• Self-Assessment Checklist
Introduction
• Children below 18 years comprise two-fifths of the
total population.
• Out of total fatal accidents- 6% children are affected
• Urban Transport System is not completely
inclusiveness as child mobility issues are almost
neglected.
Need to give importance to CHILD MOBILITY
Child mobility needsare often neglected
Objectives
• To identify issues and
problems associated with
children’s mobility in cities
• To prepare guidelines in
form of Self-assessment
checklist with score card
SCHOOL AHEAD
KIDS CROSSING
Policy Review
–Encouraging integrated land use &
transport planning
–Encouraging greater use of public
transport and non-motorized transport
–Introducing Intelligent Transport
Systems for traffic management
–Addressing concerns of road safety and
trauma response
NUTP NTDPC
12th FYP NMSH
Least research area and need to be considered at Planning and DesignStage
National Urban Transport Policy, 2006
Major awareness campaign in Green Travel Habits and seek the support of the State
Government in its implementation. Particular emphasis is laid on bringing awareness amongst
children through inputs in their school curricula.
National Transport Development Policy Committee (NTDPC)
Reduce speed for improving pedestrian safety through traffic calming measures and wider
pedestrian paths especially in school zones. Security of children commuting in a systematic
manner.
12th Five Year Plan
No easy access to schools particulary to the girl students to facilitate the continuance of their
studies
National Road Safety Policy, 2010
• Road Traffic Safety Educationand Training
– Road safety knowledge &awareness amongst thepopulation through education,training and publicitycampaigns.
– Road safety education forschool children and collegegoing students
Udgam School for Children, Ahmedabad
Awareness & Enforcement
Smart Cities & AMRUT Mission
Both the missions provide for:
• Pedestrian walkways,
• Non-motorised transport
• Public transport facilities,
• Enhance amenity value of cities by
creating & upgrading green
spaces, parks and recreation
centres, especially for children.
Priority - Sustainable Urban Transport
Playground in vicinity of house Encourage Cycling Sidewalks encouraging walking
Priority given to cyclists atintersection
Low entry vehicles Playground in neighbourhood
Pathway in London, UK Child friendly signage: Italy Education Awareness in school
Best practices / case studies
City Selection City Typologyand Topography
City size andStructure
Demographics(Child Population)
School SelectionPhysicalbarrier’s
dividing the city
Type of School(Pvt or Govt)
Based on RoadHierarchy of
adjacent road
Primary DataCollection Road inventory User opinion Reconnaissance
survey
Secondary DataCollection
List of SchoolsPvt. & Govt.
Schools
Accident Dataof Children (<
18 years)
City Maps withSchool Location
Data Analysis Identification ofIssues
Self AssessmentChecklist
City Selection Criteria
CityTypology
andTopography
• Socio-economic,Administrative, Tourist
• Hilly / Plain terrain
City size andstructure
Small, medium and largecities
Demographics(child
population)
Child population below 18years, above / below
national average (41%)
Name of city State Type of cityPopulation 2011 (approx. in
millions)Percentage of child
population(0-18 years)
Agra Uttar Pradesh Tourist 1.58 43%Bhopal Madhya Pradesh Capital City 1.79 38%
Hapur Uttar PradeshIndustrial andcommercial city
0.26 44%
Shimla Himachal PradeshTourist, educationaland administrative
0.16 30%
City Selection Criteria
Name of city State Type of cityPopulation 2011 (approx. in
millions)Percentage of child
population(0-18 years)Agra Uttar Pradesh Tourist 1.58 43%Bhopal Madhya Pradesh Capital City 1.79 38%
Hapur Uttar PradeshIndustrial andcommercial city
0.26 44%
Shimla Himachal PradeshTourist,educational andadministrative
0.16 30%
Graph showingpopulation of child in
the age group0-18 years
Two cities each aboveand below national
average
School Selection Criteria
• The general roadnetwork and physicalbarriers of the city isstudied
• One each of Effluent &Informal Localities
Physicalbarriers
• Government• Private
Type of school• School near to Arterial
Road• School – interior location
Hierarchy ofadjacent road
Data Analysis
• An opinion survey, Road inventory & Recy survey was conducted in four cities: Hapur,
Shimla, Agra and Bhopal
• Over thousand children of varying ages were interviewed, We also interviewed more
than 50 teachers and principal
7%6% 4%
3%
13%
40%
16%
9%2%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Safety and Comfort Infrastructure Traffic Education
Perc
enta
ge(%
)
No
Yes
• Only 24% of children have attended traffic awareness programs conducted at schools• More 50% of children commute by cycle and walk but they don’t have adequate safety means onroad infrastructure.
• Schools adjacent toArterial roads areprone to higher levelsof pollution
• No safe access totransport modes
Physicalbarriers
• Lack of organisedschool transport
• Govt. school childrenare provided with buspasses, but thefrequency is low
Infrastructure• Absence of Footpaths,
safe crossings, roadmarkings & signages /signals
• Encroachment on thepath of schoolslocated in the interiors
Hierarchy ofadjacent road
Issues
Children are forced to use unsafe transport mode
Findings• Average trip length of private school children (5.8 km) is
higher than government school children (3 km)• Rate of girl child dropouts is increasing due to unsafe public
transport• No traffic management in the vicinity of the schools - before
/ after school hours• More than 75% schools does not have traffic awareness
programs• 82% of govt. schools are located in interiors without any safe
accessibility• The children in hill cities have to walk atleast 3 km to access
any transport modeSchools Located in the Interior wont be accessible in case of
emergency
• This checklist has been divided into twosections; which are for:– Urban Local Bodies– School
Self Assessment Checklist - Parameters
Safety &Comfort Infrastructure Mobility of
Children Inclusiveness Education
Safety and Comfort
ENVIRONMENTALEFFECTS
Air Pollution
NoisePollution
WALK
Gradecrossingsafety
Obstructions
Signages
CYCLING
Lighting
Signages
PUBLICTRANSPORT
Presence OfGuard Railsor hand rails
Overcrowded(peak hourcondition)
First aid box
Fireextinguisher
Infrastructure
NONMOTORISEDTRANSPORT
Footpath(width >1.8m)
Cycle Track(width >1.8m)
Cycle parkingat transitstations
SCHOOL BUS
Availability
Bus parkingspace
INTERMEDIATEPARA TRANSIT
Baggage space
Designatedparking spaces
size(2.3x3.5)
PUBLICTRANSPORT
Bus stops
Accessiblestops
WALKABILITY
Walking pathmodal conflict
Availability offootpath
Motoristbehaviour
Amenities
CYCLABILITY
Conflict withvehicles
Availability ofcycle tracks
Motoristbehaviour
Quality of ridingsurface
Availability ofcycle parking at
schools
USABILITY OFPUBLIC
TRANSPORT
Time Schedule
Stopping AtDesignated Stop
Sensitive towardssafety of children
Ventilation InBuses
EDUCATION
Traffic rulesawarenessprogram