Public Transport - Entorn Urbà i Salut

Urban planification

Public Transport

CONTEXT

Urban transport is the greatest source of environmental contamination (emissions of CO2, NO2 and suspended particulate matter) and ambient noise in urban areas. Cities like Barcelona exceed the air pollution thresholds proposed by the World Health Organization. This aggravates cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases and also has a strong impact on mortality rates. Noise from motorised traffic affects hearing disorders, morbidity and mortality, in addition to the children’s development and attention. The use of private transport has an effect on physical activity. A higher level of private use favours an increase in people’s levels of overweight and obesity. The availability of a good network of public transport reduces dependence on private vehicles, improving environmental conditions and therefore helping to foster healthy lifestyles.
 

OBJECTIVE

• Foster public transport and healthy mobility.

PROPOSALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

• Prioritise the provision of public transport in the planning and rehabilitation of neighbourhoods and in mobility plans.
• Plan links between the various means of transport, and connect bus stops to railway and tram stations, cycle lanes, etc.
• Ensure that public transport stops are well connected, are close and provide a selection of destinations at a reasonable distance.
• Ensure that public transport routes are preferential and cover the diversity of interests of the various groups.
• Prioritise the improvement of the quality of public transport (frequency, speed, comfort, reliability).
• Foster the competitiveness of public transport with respect to private vehicles. Ensure that the distances and times of public transport routes are similar to or shorter than those of private transport. Improve the speed, comfort and reliability of public transport.
• Foster the use of public transport with stops that are more comfortable (size, protection from the rain, shade, seats, aesthetics, etc.) and more accessible (spaces for wheelchairs, prams and pushchairs, escalators, ramps, etc.) for pedestrians, and the incorporation of new routes and more services. Make public toilets available at public transport hubs.
• Foster improvements in information services for users, install signage at public transport stops with information about distances, maps, routes, times, etc.
• Locate public transport stops along the main network of streets, connected to the pedestrian and bicycle network. Provide spaces to park or leave bicycles and foster access to public transport (bus/metro/train/tram) by bicycle. To improve the perception of safety, stops must be visible from the surrounding buildings.
• Public transport stops must be located at a safe and comfortable walking distance (400 to 500 m or 1 km depending on the infrastructure – bus, tram, metro, medium-distance rail...).
• Provide parking areas that facilitate transport interchanges.
• Improve modal interchange infrastructure, not just for public transport, but also in relation to private transport, such as dissuasive car parks and bicycle parking facilities.
• Foster the use of electric vehicles in public transport.
• Foster high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes and bus lanes, and traffic light prioritisation.
• Analyse the entire chain of multi-modal trips, placing special emphasis on the weaker links and also on the points at which decisions are made and means of transport are chosen.
• Foster multi-modal transport. Integrated information about all means of transport, fare integration, a single ticket that allows you to use any means of transport, etc.
• Work on ensuring that all data are public, open and reusable so that information is available in real time about public transport timetables and transport options.
• Improve coordination between the various administrations responsible for mobility.

REFERENCE EXPERIENCES

LEGISLATION

• Llei 9/2003, de 13 de juny, de la mobilitat.
• Decret 344/2006, de 19 de setembre, de regulació dels estudis d'avaluació de la mobilitat generada. (Correcció errades al DOGC de 30/10/2006).

STUDIES AND TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION

Technical documents:

• Government of South Australia, 2015. Urban Design Protocol. 
• Greater London Authority, 2015. Natural Capital Investing in a Green Infrastructure for a Future London.  
• Public Health Agency of Canada, 2017. Designing Healthy Living. The Chief Public Health Officer’s Report on The State of Public Health in Canada 2017. Public Health Agency of Canada.
• Stad, S., 2014. The Stockholm Environment Programme 2016-2019. Stockholms stad.
• Vancouver City Council, 2020. Greenest City 2020 Action Plan Part Two: 2015-2020. Vancouver City Council.

Scientific papers:

• Adachi-mejia, A. M. et al. (2017) ‘Geographic variation in the relationship between body mass index and the built environment Anna’, Preventive Medicine. Elsevier Inc. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.03.018.
• Adams, M. A. et al. (2015) ‘Patterns of Walkability, Transit, and Recreation Environment for Physical Activity’, Am J Prev, 49(6), pp. 878–887. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2015.05.024.Patterns.
• Albercht, S. et al. (2015) ‘Change in waist circumference with longer time in the US among Hispanic and Chinese immigrants: the modifying role of the neighborhood built environment Sandra’, Ann Epidemiol., 25(10), pp. 767–772. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2015.07.003.Change.
• Burgoine, T. et al. (2015) ‘Associations between BMI and home , school and route environmental exposures estimated using GPS and GIS : do we see evidence of selective daily mobility bias in children ?’, pp. 1–12.
• Carlson, J. A. et al. (2015) ‘Association between neighborhood walkability and GPS- measured walking, bicycling and vehicle time in adolescents Jordan’, Health & Place, 32, pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.12.008.Association.
• Cerin, E. et al. (2017) ‘Do associations between objectively- assessed physical activity and neighbourhood environment attributes vary by time of the day and day of the week ? IPEN adult study’, pp. 1–16. doi: 10.1186/s12966-017-0493-z.
• Chudyk, A. M. et al. (2017) ‘Neighborhood walkability , physical activity , and walking for transportation : A cross- sectional study of older adults living on low income’. BMC Geriatrics, pp. 1–14. doi: 10.1186/s12877-017-0469-5.
• Creatore, M. I. et al. (2016) ‘Association of Neighborhood Walkability With Change in Overweight, Obesity, and Diabetes’, 315(20), pp. 2211–2220. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.5898.
• Duncan, D. T. et al. (2016) ‘Walk Score , Transportation Mode Choice , and Walking Among French Adults : A GPS , Accelerometer , and Mobility Survey Study’. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13060611.
• Feng, J. (2016) ‘The Built Environment and Active Travel : Evidence from Nanjing , China’, pp. 1–14. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13030301.
• Fleig, L. et al. (2016) ‘Environmental and Psychosocial Correlates of Objectively Measured Physical Activity Among Older Adults’, Health Psychology, 35(12), pp. 1364–1372.
• Gao, M., Ahern, J. and Koshland, C. P. (2016) ‘Perceived built environment and health-related quality of life in four types of neighborhoods in Xi ’ an , China’, Health & Place. Elsevier, 39, pp. 110–115. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.03.008.
• Heesch, K. C., Giles-corti, B. and Turrell, G. (2015) ‘Cycling for transport and recreation : Associations with the socio-economic , natural and built environment’, Health & Place. Elsevier, 36, pp. 152–161. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.10.004.
• Hwang, L., Hurvitz, P. M. and Duncan, G. E. (2016) ‘Cross Sectional Association between Spatially Measured Walking Bouts and Neighborhood Walkability’, pp. 1–11. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13040412.
• James, P., Hart, J. E. and Laden, F. (2015) ‘Exposures to Walkability and Particulate Air Pollution in a Nationwide Cohort of Women’, Environmental Research, 142, pp. 703–711. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2015.09.005.Exposures.
• Kelley, E. A. et al. (2016) ‘Neighborhood Walkability and Walking for Transport Among South Asians in the MASALA Study’, J Phys Act Health, 13(5), pp. 514–519. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2015-0266.Neighborhood.
• Kerr, J. et al. (2016) ‘Perceived Neighborhood Environmental Attributes Associated with Walking and Cycling for Transport among Adult Residents of 17 Cities in 12 Countries : The IPEN Study’, Environmental Health Perspectives, 124(3), pp. 290–298.
• Koohsari, M. J. et al. (2016) ‘Street network measures and adults’ walking for transport: Application of space syntax’, Health & Place, 38, pp. 89–95.
• Kurka, J. et al. (2015) ‘Patterns of neighborhood environment attributes in relation to children ’ s physical activity’, Health & Place. Elsevier, 34, pp. 164–170. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.05.006.
• Liao, Y. et al. (2016) ‘Associations of Perceived and Objectively-Measured Neighborhood Environmental Attributes With Leisure-Time Sitting for Transport’, Journal of physical activity & health.
• Mackenbach, J. D. et al. (2016) ‘Interactions of individual perceived barriers and neighbourhood destinations with obesity-related behaviours in Europe’, 17(February), pp. 68–80. doi: 10.1111/obr.12374.
• Maisel, J. L. (2016) ‘Impact of Older Adults ’ Neighborhood Perceptions on Walking Behavior’, Journal of Aging and Physical activity, 24, pp. 247–255.
• Mäki-opas, T. E. et al. (2016) ‘The contribution of travel-related urban zones , cycling and pedestrian networks and green space to commuting physical activity among adults – a cross-sectional population-based study using geographical information systems’, BMC Public Health. BMC Public Health. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3264-x.
• Malambo, P. et al. (2017) ‘Association between perceived built environmental attributes and physical activity among adults in South Africa’, BMVCPublic Health. BMC Public Health, 17, p. 213. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4128-8.
• Mccormack, G. R. et al. (2016) ‘Supportive neighbourhood built characteristics and dog-walking in Canadian adults’, Can J Public Health, 107(3), p. e250. doi: 10.17269/CJPH.107.5360.
• Melis, G. et al. (2015) ‘The Effects of the Urban Built Environment on Mental Health : A Cohort Study in a Large Northern Italian City’, pp. 14898–14915. doi: 10.3390/ijerph121114898.
• Mertens, L. et al. (2016) ‘Perceived environmental correlates of cycling for transport among adults in five regions of Europe’, Obesity reviews, 17, pp. 53–61. doi: 10.1111/obr.12379.
• Mitchell, C. A., Clark, A. F. and Gilliland, J. A. (2016) ‘Built Environment Influences of Children ’ s Physical Activity : Examining Differences by Neighbourhood Size and Sex’. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13010130.
• Oliver, M. et al. (2015) ‘Neighbourhood built environment associations with body size in adults : mediating effects of activity and sedentariness in a cross-sectional study of New
• Zealand adults’, BMC Public Health. BMC Public Health, 15, p. 956. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2292-2.
• Paul, P., Carlson, S. A. and Fulton, J. E. (2017) ‘Walking and the Perception of Neighborhood Attributes Among U.S. Adults, 2012’, Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 14(1), pp. 36–44.
• Rothman, L. et al. (2017) ‘School environments and social risk factors for child pedestrian-motor vehicle collisions : A case-control study’, Accident Analysis and Prevention. Elsevier Ltd, 98, pp. 252–258. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.10.017.
• Sallis, J. F. et al. (2016) ‘Physical activity in relation to urban environments in 14 cities worldwide: a cross-sectional study.’, Lancet (London, England). Elsevier, 387(10034), pp. 2207–17. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01284-2.
• Shaffer, K. et al. (no date) ‘The Relationship of Living Environment with Behavioral and Fitness Outcomes by Sex : an Exploratory Study in College-aged Students’, (15).
• Winters, M. et al. (2015) ‘Older adults ’ outdoor walking and the built environment : does income matter ?’, BMC Public Health. BMC Public Health, pp. 1–8. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2224-1.
• Xu, Y. and Wang, F. (2015) ‘Built Environment and Obesity by Urbanicity in the U.S Yanqing’, Health & Place, pp. 19–29. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.03.010.Built.

---

---