1. THE IMPACTS OF BUS RAPID TRANSIT
ON PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT
GWYNETH CAMERON
A project report submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the
degree of
BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING (CIVIL ENGINEERING)
In the
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA
July 2013

2. i
PROJECT REPORT SUMMARY
THE IMPACTS OF BUS RAPID TRANSIT
ON PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT
GWYNETH CAMERON
Supervisor: Professor C Venter
Department: Civil Engineering
University: University of Pretoria
Degree: Bachelor of Engineering (Civil Engineering)
Cities and road networks are planned for vehicle traffic efficiency while pedestrians are
considered as an afterthought. There is a growing demand for safe, efficient, economical,
and environmentally friendly alternatives. Facilities such as Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) has
been implemented all over the world but to retrofit this concept in different cities requires
various techniques to make the system work. BRT is a new initiative that has been brought
forward in South Africa. An investigation of the impacts that BRT has on the pedestrian
movement is crucial in keeping the urban environment a safe and accessible place.
After statistical analysis like the t-test and chi-squared test was done on the data collected
on various streets. It was apparent that pedestrians perception of safety remains constant
even though there is a higher risk when crossing a BRT corridor. Although busses on the
BRT corridor have low average speeds of 23 – 30 kilometres per hour, these speeds are
significantly faster than an average vehicle on a congested corridor in peak time traffic.
Therefore a pedestrian crossing a BRT corridor would have a false perception of safety.
Planning a BRT corridor will require pedestrian safety techniques that will have minimum
impacts on vehicle traffic flow.

3. ii
DECLARATION
I, the undersigned hereby declare that:
I understand what plagiarism is and I am aware of the University's policy in this
regard;
The work contained in this thesis is my own original work;
I did not refer to work of current or previous students, lectures notes, handbooks or
any other study material without proper referencing;
Where other people's work has been used this has been properly acknowledge and
referenced;
I have not allowed anyone to copy any part of my thesis;
I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted this thesis at any university for
a degree.
______________________
Gwyneth Cameron
27088937
20 July 2013
Number of words in report: _______words

4. iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I wish to express my appreciation to the following organisations and persons who made this
project report possible:
a) The following persons are gratefully acknowledged for their assistance during the
course of the study:
1) Dr Xolo
2) TI Clark
3) PN Kekana
4) M Mabeba
b) Professor C Venter, my supervisor, for his guidance and support.
c) My family for their encouragement and support during the study.

5. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1 - 1
1.1 BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................1 - 1
1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY................................................................................1 - 1
1.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY..........................................................................................1 - 2
1.4 METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................1 - 2
1.5 ORGANISATION OF THE REPORT ........................................................................1 - 2
2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................. 2 - 1
2.1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................2 - 1
2.2 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.............................................................................2 - 1
2.3 SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT .................................................................................2 - 1
2.3.1 SMART GROWTH................................................................................................2 - 3
2.3.2 COMPACT CITIES...............................................................................................2 - 4
2.4 TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT...................................................................2 - 4
2.4.1 BENEFITS...........................................................................................................2 - 5
2.4.2 PLANNING...........................................................................................................2 - 5
2.4.3 DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES...........................................................................2 - 8
2.5 BUS RAPID TRANSIT............................................................................................2 - 10
2.5.1 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION ................................................................................2 - 10
2.5.2 BENEFITS..........................................................................................................2 - 11
2.5.3 EVALUATION FRAMEWORK ............................................................................2 - 12
2.5.4 IMPLEMENTATION ...........................................................................................2 - 13
2.6 PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT...................................................................................2 - 14
2.6.1 PEDESTRIAN ILLEGAL CROSSINGS ...............................................................2 - 14
2.6.2 THE IMPACTS OF BRT ON PEDESTRIANS......................................................2 - 16
2.6.3 ANALYSING PEDESTRIAN BEHAVIOUR..........................................................2 - 17
2.6.4 PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY TECHNIQUES FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING.........2 - 18
2.7 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................2 - 19
3 EXPERIMENTAL WORK AND DATA COLLECTION ................................................... 3 - 1
3.1 OBJECTIVES ..........................................................................................................3 - 1
3.1.1 USER PROFILES.....................................................................................................3 - 1
3.1.2 ROUTES ................................................................................................................3 - 2
3.1.3 STREET SEGMENTS................................................................................................3 - 2
3.2 STREET ENVIROMENT ..........................................................................................3 - 2
3.2.1 EFFECTS OF DEPENDENT VARIABLE ..............................................................3 - 2
3.3 SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT...............................................................................3 - 5
3.1.1 JOHANNESBURG CBD .......................................................................................3 - 5
3.1.2 PRETORIA CBD...................................................................................................3 - 6
3.2 CHARACTERISTICS OF POTENTIAL STUDY SITES .............................................3 - 7
3.2.1 COMMISSIONER AND KRUIS STREET ..............................................................3 - 7
3.2.2 MARKET AND SMALL STREET...........................................................................3 - 8
3.2.3 BERNETTE AND HILDA STREET........................................................................3 - 9
3.2.4 MADIBA AND LILIAN NGOYI STREET..............................................................3 - 10
3.2.4 SELECTION OF STUDY SITES .........................................................................3 - 12

6. v
3.3 MEASUREMENT OF DEPENDENT VARIABLE.....................................................3 - 12
3.3.1 PROCEDURE CONDITIONS .............................................................................3 - 12
3.3.2 PROCDURE.......................................................................................................3 - 13
3.3 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................3 - 14
4 DATA ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................... 4 - 1
4.1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................4 - 1
4.2 HYPOTHESIS TEST................................................................................................4 - 1
4.2.1 PAIRED T-TEST STATISTIC................................................................................4 - 1
4.2.2 T-TEST HYPOTHESIS TESTING.........................................................................4 - 3
4.2.3 RESULTS OF THE T-TEST STATISTIC...............................................................4 - 4
4.3 CONTINGENCY TABLE TEST.................................................................................4 - 4
4.3.1 CHI-SQUARED HYPOTHESIS TESTING.............................................................4 - 7
4.4 SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................4 - 8
5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ................................................................ 5 - 1
5.1 CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................5 - 1
5.2 RECOMENDATIONS...............................................................................................5 - 1
6 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 6 - 1
APPENDIX A: TABULATED DATA .....................................................................................A - 1
APPENDIX B: STATISTICAL ANALYSIS............................................................................B - 1

7. vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2. 1 : Sustainable spheres (Kurry, 2011) .....................................................................2 - 1
Figure 2. 2: Urban Index Rating .............................................................................................2 - 2
Figure 2. 3: Flow Chart of Regulatory techniques (Miller and Hoel, 2002)..............................2 - 3
Figure 2. 4: Flow Chart of Financial techniques (Miller and Hoel, 2002).................................2 - 3
Figure 2. 5: Flow chart of Educational techniques (Miller and Hoel 2002) ..............................2 - 4
Figure 2. 6: Bus stop (SANDAG,2002)...................................................................................2 - 6
Figure 2. 7: Sidewalk cross section........................................................................................2 - 9
Figure 2. 8: Typical BRT cross section (Alasdair Cain et al, 2006) .......................................2 - 10
Figure 2. 9: BRT station proposal.........................................................................................2 - 11
Figure 2. 10: Poorly designed street.....................................................................................2 - 15
Figure 2. 11: Pedestrian footbridge ......................................................................................2 - 15
Figure 2. 12: Redesigned intersection..................................................................................2 - 19
Figure 3. 1 : Market St (Cameron, 2013)Figure 3. 2: Park Station (Cameron, 2013) ............. 3 - 1
Figure 3. 3: Independent Variables ....................................................................................... 3 - 2
Figure 3. 4: Burnett St (Cameron, 2013) ............................................................................... 3 - 4
Figure 3. 5: Burnett St (Cameron, 2013) ............................................................................... 3 - 4
Figure 3. 6: Park Station (Cameron, 2013)............................................................................ 3 - 5
Figure 3. 7: Routes for Rea Vaya BRT (Official site of Rea Vaya, 2013) ............................... 3 - 6
Figure 3. 8: Tshwane CBD (Cameron, 2013) ........................................................................ 3 - 6
Figure 3. 9: Tshwane BRT routes (iolproperty, 2012)........................................................... 3 - 7
Figure 3. 10: Commissioner Street (Google, 2013) ............................................................... 3 - 8
Figure 3. 11: Street map location of Commissioner Street (Google, 2013)............................ 3 - 8
Figure 3. 12: Signalled intersection on Market Street (Google, 2013).................................... 3 - 9
Figure 3. 13: Street Map location of Market Street(Google,2013).......................................... 3 - 9
Figure 3. 14: Burnett Street (Google, 2013) ........................................................................ 3 - 10
Figure 3. 15: Map location of Burnett Street (Google, 2013)................................................ 3 - 10
Figure 3. 16: Madiba Street (Google, 2013) ........................................................................ 3 - 11
Figure 3. 17: Street Map location of Madiba Street (Google, 2013)..................................... 3 - 11
Figure 3. 18: Route 1 Figure 3. 19: Route 2 Figure 3. 20: Route 3 ................ 3 - 13
Figure 4. 1: Comparison between Commissioner and Burnett Street .................................... 4 - 2
Figure 4. 2: Comparison between Market and Burnett Street............................................... 4 - 2
Figure 4. 3: Expected with BRT lane Figure 4. 4: Observed with BRT lane........................ 4 - 5
Figure 4. 5: Expected without BRT lane Figure 4. 6 : Observed without BRT lane ................ 4 - 5
Figure 4. 7: Chi-gram for a BRT street. ................................................................................. 4 - 6
Figure 4. 8: Chigram ............................................................................................................. 4 - 7