Streetscapes form a part of our daily lives, serving as gateways not only for vehicles, but pedestrians connecting to their neighbourhood centres.  Their designs play an important role in our experience of the city, but are not limited to aesthetics alone. More importantly the sense of safety, the level of accessibility, and the separation of pedestrians from vehicles are all functional design challenges which must be addressed to achieve quality street outcomes.

Having recently prepared a series of local centre street upgrades, I found myself critiquing the existing street clutter and questioning its purpose. Where a key entrance and vista into Epping’s East Town Centre should be, a collection of black RMS pedestrian fences instead frame the street corners, vaguely attempting to ensure safety.

As I mentioned, a sense of safety, accessibility and separation between pedestrians and vehicles is integral to good street design, and at first glance, the RMS pedestrian fence appears to achieve this. But lets review each of these elements in detail:

Separation of pedestrian and vehicle

Providing a comfortable distance between fast moving vehicles and the walkway creates a sense of security, but creating a physical barrier between the two is not always essential to achieve separation. 

Instead, a sense of distance can be formed through the inclusion of a wide footpath, planted verge, or even through a buffer of parked cars. These alternative methods resolve the issues of pedestrian and vehicle separation, but also provide additional benefits; more space for pedestrians, green amenity and on-street parking respectively. Another benefit is their provision of improved accessibility.

Accessibility

The streetscape is not designed for cars alone - it is the pedestrians who create liveliness, interact with businesses, and gather within these spaces. Pedestrian movement should be designed and allowed for, rather than segregated to the sidelines. 

The intent of the pedestrian fence is to guide pedestrians to a designated crossing point where it is most safe. Fences however are generally perceived as a boundary between private and public land, and are typically used to block access. 

By creating a physical boundary between car and pedestrian, we continue the car-centric focus of our streets, rather than embrace the pedestrian, who engages with the local shops and builds a sense of community.

Before looking to restrict the pedestrian’s movement, consider if traffic can be altered instead. Revising traffic light crossings or providing mid-block crossings to meet pedestrian desire lines, or widening the existing footpaths can all help to promote pedestrian accessibility. Further to this, changing a suitable street to a shared zone can also improve the pedestrian accessibility by changing the dynamic from a vehicle dominant, to a pedestrian first environment.

Safety

It is often misunderstood why the pedestrian fence is used. The use of a pedestrian fence is not intended to prevent vehicles entering the footpath, but to prevent pedestrians entering the carriageway. The RMS (now TfNSW) technical direction acknowledges this, explaining that the 

“Pedestrian fencing is not a road safety barrier” designed to deflect an errant vehicle. The fence should instead be used “to direct pedestrians to safe crossing areas, preventing them from inadvertently accessing areas of the road” outside of designated crossings.” 

With this in mind, the safety implications of the fence are quite different. While these are suitable along collector roads with little pedestrian use, destinations such as local streets and town centres gain no true benefits. Where a local streets is deemed unsafe, the solution lies in restricting the cars, not the pedestrian. Speed mitigation, scramble crossings and ensuring clear lines of site are the first step to creating safer streets. 

Summary

While pedestrian fences may provide a perceived sense of security by the public, the reality is that their use is to control and limit pedestrian movement to dedicated spaces, and ensure the car remains the dominant user of the street. This is not unlike the concept of J-walking established by automakers, which I will discuss in more detail in a later blog. 

Alternatives to fencing can not only provide genuine protection from errant vehicles but can also provide additional benefits of creating character for the street, providing shade and comfort to pedestrians. Alternatives include:

• Trees

• Parking lanes

• Seating and bollards

Where directing a pedestrian is still required due to busy traffic, alternatives to fencing include:

• Adding mid-block crossings at desire lines

• Updating traffic signals to address changing pedestrian numbers

• Slowing traffic speeds