Various signage schemes have been adopted across Victoria to provide wayfinding for active travel.

Transcription

1 MATTHEW HARRIDGE Director O Brien Traffic matt@obrientraffic.com AARON ROOZENBURG Senior Traffic Engineer O Brien Traffic aaron.r@obrientraffic.com THE VALUE OF WAYFINDING Various signage schemes have been adopted across Victoria to provide wayfinding for active travel. Before Glen Eira City Council decided to alter their existing bicycle wayfinding scheme, a study was commissioned to determine whether wayfinding signage actually increased cycling (and walking) participation and also report on best practice for bicycle wayfinding. A literature review was undertaken to determine local and international work on the following: - The effectiveness of wayfinding in terms of increasing active travel participation; - The benefits for cyclists (and pedestrians) provided by wayfinding signs; - The destinations that are most useful for prospective users to be signed; and - Best practice for wayfinding signage. The answers to these questions can help to inform whether installing new (or updating existing) wayfinding signage represents value for money and value for cyclists and pedestrians. 1. Introduction 1.1 Wayfinding Definition Wayfinding describes how a person orientates themselves and navigates through an area or space. It is about knowing: where you are; where you want to go to; and how you get there from where you are. (Department of Transport, 2011) 1.2 Study Scope Glen Eira City Council required a literature review to be undertaken to understand: What benefits are provided for cyclists (and pedestrians) by wayfinding signs;

2 Whether wayfinding signs increase cycling (and walking) participation; The destinations being signed that are most useful for prospective users; and Best practice for wayfinding signage. The answers to these questions were to inform whether updating the existing bicycle wayfinding signage would represent value for money and a good use of active travel funding. 2. The Benefits of Wayfinding Signs for Cyclists and Pedestrians The Roads and Transport Authority (RTA) of NSW (2005) state that the purpose of bicycle network signage is to provide guidance which will enable safe and efficient travel by bicycle for a diverse range of trips around cities, towns and areas of tourist interest. The RTA (2005) also state that the most important function of directional signposting is to help the users find their way around the system. They advise that directional signposting reinforces system connectivity and coherence and gives high visibility and recognition to the collection of through routes which make up any network. The Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads (DTMR) (2009) also highlight the importance of signing routes in complex urban street networks. They state that the benefits are: Signage can inform cyclists of routes which are often more direct and less heavily trafficked; and Bicycle network signage can help the community to become aware of the many route possibilities other than the prominently-signed main road network. DTMR (2009) also state that directional and wayfinding signage is a critical element of any transport system to help users find their way around the network and to make full use of the system s infrastructure. They go on to state that bicycle network signage, particularly directional signage, is a crucial aid for navigation and the safe operation of the system. The DTMR (2009) also advise that providing bicycle route directional signage benefits the community because it: Expands the usage of the bicycle network; Increases the visibility of routes both for cyclists and the wider community; and Guides local people and those from further afield to destinations along the bicycle network. In Victoria, VicRoads (2012) advises that directional signs for cyclists are important in helping users to find new routes to destinations.

3 3. The Influence of Wayfinding Signs on Active Travel Participation 3.1 Availability of Research There has been little research undertaken on the influence of wayfinding signage on cycling (and walking) participation. This is primarily due to the complex interactions of the various factors that influence cycling participation. However, the research in the following sections has been reviewed. 3.2 Lower Yarra Trail and Lower Maribyrnong Trail One piece of research often cited in international guidelines and research is that of Wigan, et. al. (1998). Wigan, et. al. examined demand patterns for two substantial off-road trails in Melbourne (the Lower Yarra Trail and Lower Maribyrnong Trail), using survey and modelling methods to establish the potential for higher levels of demand. The two trails were different in two major respects: the Yarra Trail was well promoted, well connected, and a destination in its own right, while although the Maribyrnong Trail had similar potential, linkages and promotional activity to market its assets had not yet been undertaken. The study highlighted the critical nature of marketing a connected series of off-road trails as a single unified route and an easily recognised destination area. One of the findings of the study was that although the maximum bicycle flows observed on both trails were similar, the well promoted trail had higher flows throughout a longer portion of the day and along more of its length. The uneven distribution of flows along the Lower Maribyrnong Trail was explainable by a physical check. At the time it was not signed consistently; sections were under major repair; and, in one case, very poorly linked through an unsigned link involving a steep hill. The study concluded that improved signing would yield reasonable increased cycling participation over a wide area of Melbourne. 3.3 Legible London The Legible London Wayfinding Study (2006) focused on increasing walking participation. Legible London uses consistent and clear signage to direct pedestrians around London. Examples of the signage are shown in Figure 1.

4 Harridge M., Roozenburg.A Figure 1 Examples of Legible London Wayfinding Signs Since the rollout of Legible London signage, Transport for London (TfL) has adapted the principles for maps at Cycle Hire stations. Maps now show local attractions within a 5 minute walk radius (including nearby bicycle hire stations) and a larger scale map showing the destinations within a 5 minute bicycle ride. A number of pilot projects were undertaken for Legible London. TfL notes the following results based on around 1000 user surveys, pedestrian counts, and a number of 'mystery shopper' and accompanied walks: 83 per cent of users agreed Legible London helped them to find their way; More than two-thirds felt satisfied that they could use Legible London to find the shortest route for their journey; More than three-quarters felt confident in exploring an area with Legible London;

5 The number of pedestrians getting lost on a journey fell by 65 per cent; and Those who have used the system indicated strongly that it will encourage them to walk more often, walk further, explore more and walk rather than use other means of transport. TfL also notes that the Bond Street area prototype evaluation showed that almost two-thirds of respondents said the new wayfinding system would encourage them to walk more. 3.4 Walk London The Walk London network is a network of walking routes around London that totals 628 km in length. The routes have been promoted since Part of the promotion includes wayfinding signage. Again, although the focus of this network is walking, it is considered that some of the evaluation may also relate to cycling. Between , the number of people walking along the network were measured. During this time, improvements to signage were made. The data indicates that the network has achieved an average growth of 9% each year. 4. Destinations that are Most Useful for Prospective Users One of the most important steps in developing a wayfinding strategy is the identification of destinations to be signed. The policies of various authorities in regards to what destinations should be signed vary significantly. In some cases the destinations are limited to key activity centres, while in others a wider variety of destinations are signed. For example, the RTA (2005) recommends that key centres should have priority in any signage system, but where space permits other important destinations for cyclists may also be indicated. The RTA note that the other destinations may be: University and educational institutions; Hospitals; Tourist attractions; Shopping centres; and Sporting and recreation centres. Transport for London (TfL) (2005) advise that the use of strategic destinations enables longer distance users to follow the route more easily, as the destinations are generally well known locations that will indicate the general direction of travel. When deciding on what key centres should be included for signage, the DTMR (2009) notes that focal point signage practice should be used for determining all key destination and decision points within a cycle network, to ensure the accurate and consistent signing of the network. The DTMR state that focal point signage practice is commonly used to determine all place names for the State Road Network and road networks in cities and towns. This involves producing a map of key centres to be

6 signed for use in implementing way finding signage. As bicycle networks are locally or regionally based, bicycle network focal point maps will usually be more fine-grained and urban-oriented and will often use additional or differing focal points to the road-based maps. TfL (2005) also note the importance of maintaining specific and consistent destinations across municipal boundaries. Where considering map based signs, it is important to note that a far wider range of destinations can be shown, and that these should not be limited to those identified in focal point signage maps. Brisbane City Council (2009) suggests showing the bicycle route, any on-road sections, path junctions and path exits. Suggested features in the surrounding area may include the following: Road network; Public transport stations; Parks, sporting or recreation grounds; Local centres; Major destinations such as shopping centres and employment nodes; Educational facilities; Police stations; Hospitals; Public libraries; Places of worship; Scout/ community halls; Public toilets; Bicycle parking; Waterways, water reservoirs; and Significant natural landmarks. The RTA (2005) recommends that when proposing signage, Council Officers should consult with their counterparts in neighbouring councils to ensure a consistent logical and usable set of destinations are selected for use.

7 5. Best Practice for Wayfinding Signage 5.1 Principles The RTA (2005) states that as useful as signs may be, placing them in the road environment does not necessarily communicate the intended message or have the required effect on road users, as people are limited by their physiology. They state that the brain cannot process large amounts of new information quickly, and that also there is growing evidence that too many signs competing for our attention can either distract us from the act of riding/driving or we can miss vital messages entirely. The RTA (2005) notes that in the modern traffic environment there are many directional signs provided for road users to guide them to their destinations. They state that this general road and highway directional signage is usually attuned to motorised traffic and does not adequately serve cyclists where a separate or parallel network is in existence. In order to avoid ambiguity and conflict the RTA recommends an independent signage system be adopted. 5.2 Identification of Existing Wayfinding Provision It is important to be aware of existing wayfinding systems within a particular network. An audit of the existing signage should be carried out with the design of the signs, destinations specified, and their location recorded. Intersections along designated cycle routes that are missing standard street signage should also be identified for signage to be installed to enable improved navigation for all road users. 5.3 Identification of Strategic Destinations As noted in Section 4, one of the most important steps in developing a wayfinding strategy is the identification of destinations to be signed. Section 4 provides the key destinations to consider as part of this process. 5.4 Selection of Routes to be Signed Once key destinations to be signed have been identified (using the method in Section 4), the routes to those destinations need to be signed. There is little guidance on this, however, it is noted that most municipalities have a designated cycle network. These networks generally consist of routes that municipalities encourage cyclists to use, and are prioritised for cycle infrastructure funding. TfL (2005) states that a route should be signed where it is easy to follow. It is also advised that it is acceptable to sign a specific locality (e.g. a Railway Station) even if the bicycle route does not go all the way there. In the event of alternate routes to key destinations, the most direct routes should be signed. If more than one route is possible from a departure point the most direct route should be the only one indicated on the signs. This may be varied if the alternative offers major advantages over the shorter route, but the extra distance should not amount to more than 10% of the shortest route.

8 5.5 Signage Design Signage Design Principles There are two general types of wayfinding signage for cyclists: maps and fingerboards. Fingerboards are the most common type, given their cost and effectiveness. The RTA (2005) states that fingerboard signs are the most effective wayfinding infrastructure due to the brevity of their messages. This is very important in the road environment when vehicles are travelling at speed and drivers and cyclists only have a limited time to take in the message and to respond to it in a practical way. However, where a finger board sign has the potential to create confusion and visual clutter, Brisbane City Council (2009) recommend considering map based signs, particularly when there are indirect routes to a number of identified locations. Map based you are here signs are most common on trails and in activity centres. However, the relative scale of the maps in these two situations differs significantly. This is because in activity centres the user is generally looking for a particular building (such as a library), while on a trail the user may be looking at the spatial relationship between key centres. Map signs also have the advantage that they are generally applicable to both pedestrians and cyclists. Both the RTA (2005), DTMR (2009) and others state that the key issues relating to bicycle network signage are conspicuity, legibility, coherence and function. Table 1 outlines recommendations in relation to each of the four key issues. These key recommendations are relevant for both fingerboard and map signs. Table 1 Signage Design Recommendations Conspicuity Signs should be sited so that cyclists have a clear view on approach and have time to respond. They should be mounted in locations which are consistent throughout the route. Signage should be kept clear of pedestrian and cyclist (or other road users ) travel paths and mounted at a consistent height so as to be easily seen by all users. Visual clutter and sign proliferation should be avoided by grouping similar signage on the same support or combining information onto a single sign. Signage should be sited so as not to create a hazard to bicycle route users, pedestrians or other road users. Legibility Signs must be easily read by all users of the system. Choice of typeface should be based on legibility and be able to be read at speed. Using a mixture of upper and lower case letters increases legibility particularly in low light conditions. The typeface size should be consistent.

9 A limited, easily recognisable and consistent palette of symbols and pictograms should be used throughout. Sign background and lettering colours should avoid combinations which are hard to read. Destinations should be designated by concise, easily understandable and unabbreviated terms. Words over 20 characters should be avoided. Night time and low light operation of the route should always be considered in the design and siting of signage. Coherence Signage should reflect the type of route (ie local route, or strategic). All listed destinations should be identified and used consistently throughout the network. Closest destinations should be listed to the top. A branch destination, if shown, should be shown towards the bottom of the sign. Distances are important to the users as a means of judging journey length, progress and arrival. Once a destination is stated it should be listed on each succeeding sign until it is reached (Rule of Continuity). Route signs should be consistently designed to reflect a consistent image or branding for the route. Bicycle network signage should take account of other transport network signage systems and avoid ambiguity and unnecessary sign clutter. Function All change in directions of the route should be clearly signed. Advance directional signage should also be provided for difficult or inconspicuous turns. Signage has to be sited consistently and in the most obvious and logical of places to meet user expectations. Signage should reflect the particular orientation of the traveller. Only one route to a destination should be displayed on a sign. Alternate or parallel routes must not be shown. Signage should be durable, non-fading, and easy to erect and maintain. Simplified mounting systems compatible with existing systems will offer ease of maintenance and replacement to the sign system owner/provider. Construction/fabrication methods to minimise damage from vandalism and extreme weather should be considered. Whilst the guidance in Table 1 is applicable to both fingerboard and map signs, there are specific issues for each type.

10 5.5.2 Finger Board Signs Previously, the Austroads Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice: Part 14 Bicycles (Austroads, 1999), now superseded, covered fingerboard signage and navigation of cycle networks. The guide recommended fingerboard signage at the following locations: At all junctions between paths specifying key destinations and distances to those destinations; At all junction between paths and roads specifying the name of the intersecting road, key destinations and distances to those destinations; Along paths between junctions to reassure cyclists that they are on the right path, at a maximum spacing of 3 kilometres; On the adjacent road system to guide cyclists to a path; On paths directing cyclists to important services such as toilets, water, and food stops; and Along roads where the bicycle route is not obvious through pavement marking. In relation to signing distances, the RTA (2005) states that indication of destination distances is important and can be either applied to fingerboard signs located at intersections or provided on destination reassurance boards. They also state that distances should be given in 0.1 increments of kilometres. The current Austroads guides (2009) no longer include a specific guide to bicycle facilities, and do not cover signage and navigation of cycle networks in detail. However, directional signs for roads are covered the Austroads Guide to Traffic Management: Part 10 Traffic Control and Communication Devices (2009). The procedure for determining direction signing requirements for intersections along a road route is generally applicable for cycle routes The design of finger board signs is outlined by VicRoads (2012). VicRoads recommends signs are provided in the following situations: To indicate where bicycle routes may differ from general traffic directions eg. Using local roads, contra-flows, no-through roads and off-road paths; To show the distance (in kilometres) to key destinations including activity centres, public transport stations, educational establishments, and significant recreational destinations; To highlight key turning points on a route; or To guide a cyclist from one designated bicycle route to another (including named off-road shared trails). VicRoads (2012) recommends that directional signs use blue text on a white background, and comprise of destination information followed by distance in kilometres, as shown in Figure 2.

11 Figure 2 Example of fingerboard sign in accordance with VicRoads (2012) Further requirements for the design of directional signs for cyclists are outlined in Australian Standard AS :2000. The design advice in the Standard is more detailed than that provided by VicRoads (2012) and outlines requirements in terms of typeface, font size and sign dimensions, and use of chevrons.. VicRoads (2002) also provides advice on directional signage, specific to shared paths, which is most applicable to trails Map Signs Map signs may be adjacent to a major road or at key junctions along trails. Brisbane City Council (2009) states that maps must be orientated north and preferably to match the user s view of the site (so that users can identify which map features relate those around them without having to know which way north is). However, this is contradicted by Transport for London (2001) Legible London Guidance, and others which suggest that maps should be orientated to match the user s view of site. Other guidance indicates that maps should: Be produced at an appropriate scale to ensure the bicycle route and surrounding features are easily identifiable; Indicate the direction of the facility or destination (e.g. CBD 4km) with text and an arrow where the destination exists outside the map area; Be placed at junctions which are surrounded by a high number of local trip attractors such as shopping centres, public transport stations, educational facilities and recreation centres. 6. Conclusion Based on the review undertaken, it is concluded that: Wayfinding signage increases the visibility of routes both for cyclists and the wider community, whilst also guiding local people (and those from further afield) through the cycle network; Although there is some evidence that wayfinding signage can increase the number of cyclists (and pedestrians) along a route, further research would be beneficial to provide further justification;

12 One of the most important steps in developing a wayfinding strategy is the identification of destinations to be signed. The highest priority when signing destinations are key activity centres; and The key issues relating to best practice for bicycle network signage are conspicuity, legibility, coherence and function. 7. References AIG for Central London Partnership (2006). Legible London A Wayfinding Study Austroads. (1999). Austroads Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice: Part 14 Bicycles. Sydney Austroads. (2009). Austroads Guide to Traffic Management: Part 10 Traffic Control and Communication Devices. Sydney. August Brisbane City Council. (2009). Bikeway Signage Manual: September 2009 Issue. and%20building/2.4%20common%20building%20projects/common_building_projects_bikeway_sig nage_manual_sept_2009_introduction_sect_a.pdf Department of Transport and Main Roads (DMTR). (2009). A guide to signing cycle networks. July ( 0information/Pdf_guide_to_signing_cycle_networks.pdf) Roads and Traffic Authority New South Wales (RTA). (2005). New South Wales Bicycle Guidelines. Version 1.2. July ( idelines%20on-line%20v1-2.pdf) Transport for London (TfL) (2005). London Cycle Network Design Standards. ( Transport for London (TfL). (2011). Legible London System Architecture. ( Transport for London (TfL). Legible London Pilot Evaluation Results ( ) Transport for London (TfL). Legible London and cyclists. ( ) VicRoads. (2002). Directional Signing for Off-road Paths. VicRoads Cycle Notes No. 11. July ( FA79BA1201D5/0/TR pdf) VicRoads. (2012). Bicycle Signs. Traffic Engineering Manual Vol 2, Chapter 12 Edition 3, Revision 1. November 2012.

13 0FBEE3A845F4/0/TEM2CH13.pdf Walk London (2011). Walk London Network: Performance Summary Wigan, M; Richardson, A. J; Brunton, P. (1998). Simplified Estimation of Demand for Nonmotorized Trails Using Geographic Information Systems. Transportation Research Record Paper No Presenter s Bio Matt is a Director at O'Brien Traffic. He has extensive traffic engineering experience including Municipal Traffic Engineering, bicycle facility design and road safety (and is a VicRoads accredited Senior Road Safety Auditor). Matt is also the Principal Transportation Engineer at Glen Eira City Council as part of O Brien Traffic s contract to provide Traffic Engineering Services to Council.