Is It Too Crowded in Here?: In Search of Safety Standards for Pedestrian Congestion in Rail Stations

Author:

Antos Justin D.1,Jia Wendy2,Parker Jonathan H.1

Affiliation:

1. Office of Planning, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 600 5th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20001

2. World Bank, 1818 H Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20433

Abstract

Many transit agencies have developed measurements of pedestrian crowding in rail stations but lack clear standards for when crowding becomes a safety risk that justifies an operating or capital intervention. How frequent, consistent, or severe must congestion be before a capital improvement is warranted to mitigate a safety risk? How should agencies weigh severe but infrequent congestion against moderate but daily congestion? Adoption of such standards is a critical step for a transit agency in identifying and prioritizing safety risks and capital needs. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA, or Metro) uses a variety of methods to measure pedestrian crowding at Metrorail stations on platforms, escalators, and stairs and through fare gates. WMATA has incorporated big data into its measuring of crowding in rail stations and has recognized that using demand on a typical weekday can mask important variations and issues in normal operations. The agency has relied on the Transit Capacity Quality of Service Manual (TCQSM) to establish the capacity of station circulation elements, but the manual’s existing measures do not address questions of the frequency and severity of overcrowding or of what levels of crowding warrant action or capital projects. Although peer agencies commonly use station capacity values consistent with the TCQSM, other agencies have developed specific guidelines for acceptable peak crowding duration and special event conditions. This paper summarizes WMATA’s analytic approaches, including the use of pedestrian microsimulations to derive volume-to-capacity ratios and level of service. The paper concludes by calling for clear standards that consider frequency, severity, and acceptable safety thresholds.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Mechanical Engineering,Civil and Structural Engineering

Reference4 articles.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3