Contract partners
The main partners involved in the decision process are:
the decision-maker, who is the contract partners;
national, regional or local government authorities, private or public sector business, including commercial partners and private or public transport operators.
These partners shall meet as a project group, where each partner has a specific role.
Specialists who bring their expertise to the project
One of the keys to the success of the project relies on the confrontation of several approaches and professional expertise. It is therefore important to build around the project a multi-disciplinary team of specialists able to address the both the legal, technical, economic, architectural issues and the political, psycho-sociological and social issues.
On the other hand, it may be difficult to manage a large team of experts over the planning of a project of moderate size and complexity.
The project leader should thus analyze beforehand the specific implications and stakes of the project in order to build the team of experts around a minimal core group including at least the responsible body, the customers, the designers and the security specialists, intervention forces (e.g. firefighters, medical emergency services, etc.)
For large projects or complex locations (e.g. difficult social environment), the project leader is strongly advised to ask for the contribution of other experts, a non-exhaustive list of which being:
designers and urban planners: urban planners, architects, landscape architects, transport/traffic engineers, civil engineers;
police and security professionals: crime prevention officers, private security firms and consultants, insurance companies;
conflict mediators, child care workers;
sociologists, psychologists, research consultants.
At such an early stage of the project, one should avoid restricting the expertise to technical or defensive methods, and should open the analysis to creative and behavioural approaches.
Furthermore, one should be able to reconcile competing interests or regulations (e.g. large exits for rescuers, access control for security purposes, etc.).
Therefore, if the core group is a minimal basis, a broad initial scope of contributions is a useful investment in order to find the most relevant and economically sensible solutions.
Customers, commercial partners and staff
Careful consideration has to be given to the dialogue with customers, commercial partners, and staff, whose advice is sought, as they constitute the end users of the operation.
Customers may be associations or they may be individuals.
The project managers
The persons contracted to perform the work can be of external or internal competency and according to the project concerned either a creation of a location or the management of an existing location.
The core stages of a project
The aim of this section is to describe the core stages of a project, as groundwork for sections, 4.4, 4.5, 5.4 and 5.5. These sections outline the specific differences in public transport-dedicated location design and management in terms of organization and the questions that need to be resolved.
Regardless of how complex a location may be, the project can be broken down into a handful of fundamental stages from the contracting authorities' initial wishes to the final project implementation and management. These key stages can be listed as follows:
- A preliminary phase (project initiation document, business analysis, initial schedule) which concludes in project specifications (objectives, issues and constraints, etc.) before the contracting authorities' commission an order (see 5.2).
A feasibility phase repeated between the contracting authorities and the project manager or project management support who will work with the preliminary studies and a joint business analysis to detail a schedule and choose a preliminary design.
A design phase including preliminary project and project stages that serve as a basis for drafting a finished project schedule, which can be transposed into project specifications, which can in turn be submitted for bids from enterprise.
An execution phase, where work is contracted out and monitored, leading to deliverables and project acceptance before being commissioned into service.
A project assessment and monitoring phase, which is designed to adjust the project via additional actions resulting from the analysis of the expected functionalities of the location (see 5.2).
The achievement of these different phases follows an iterative process integrating overall security requirements (see Annex B).
Creating a new location
In a project to create a new location, safety issues are raised in:
the preliminary phase, analysis will analyze in term of safety the location's impact on the environment, the environment's impact on the location, and project weak points1. It is also during this stage that a project group is created, associating experts from the contracting authorities and all the necessary partners.
the feasibility phase, which includes project scheduling, i.e. initial and joint project definition by the general contracting authorities.
the design and execution phases, where a multidisciplinary 'project team' (the delegated contracting authorities) is formed.
the assessment and monitoring phase, for which a contract monitoring committee may be formed, generally from the delegated contracting authorities.
Location management
In a project to manage an existing location, safety issues are raised in:
the preliminary phase, via a safety analysis that will study results generated by the observation and tracking of location use trends;
the feasibility phase, which includes project scheduling, i.e. the definition of an action plan (partnerships, roles and responsibilities, decisions made for specific actions, setting priorities, etc.);
the assessment and monitoring phase, based on management indicators and product assessment via a new analysis.
5 Analysis, actions and assessment: question-asking methods
General
A useable, overall safety problem analysis method for mass transit areas is one of the expected deliverables of the approach launched by the present process.
The general framework of this analysis features the measurement of observed or feared safety issues (paragraph 5.2) alongside discussions on the numerous interactions where these issues cross into the target location (paragraphs 5.4 and 5.5 relating to location design and location management, respectively).
Actions of fighting against crime and fear of crime shall lead to:
A definition of quantitative and qualitative objectives to achieve or a definition of problems to be solved;
The definition of the preventive measures;
the implementation of these measures;
An assessment of the results in conjunction with the previously defined objectives.
Crime, antisocial behaviour and fear of crime
The sense of insecurity shall be gauged constantly in order to continuously adapt the response measures being taken:
for a new location project, this will involve analysing the level of insecurity within the environment of the future location, either based on the existing crime rate figures or extrapolating the figures for a similar location (such as a new station built in a rural environment). Discussions should also be led on potential interactions between the future location and its environments, and a tracking tool should be created that is able to monitor shifts in the levels of insecurity at the location and in the location's environment;
for a project to manage an existing location, this will involve tracking trends in insecurity at the location, in the location environment, and their interactions, using the tracking tool designed for this purpose when the location was created/refurbished.
The analysis and the tracking of the location and its environment can be done using the following indicators:
type of crime (see Annex A) obtained from data recorded by the police, the companies present in the public transport facilities, etc.;
level of insecurity as perceived by customers or passengers (e.g. enquiry about customer satisfaction, etc.);
level of insecurity as perceived by staff (e g. data collected by the social departments of the companies and/or qualitative enquiry conducted by the companies or the social partners);
assessment of the tendencies of the criminality and fear of crime obtained from a follow-up of the indicators defined in the tools listed above.
General principles on security-related questioning
Safety and security-related considerations and specifications form an integral part of project design and management.
Every project manager is expected to draft a question-based checklist devised to fit the project context. The checklist works as a whole, although some individual questions may prove poorly suited to the case in hand.
Both the design stage and the management stage can be led independently. It is for this purpose, and to offer independent management templates, that two question checklists have been proposed, one for project design and the other for location management. These two checklists share certain core items but also have their own specific features.
The operational and technical matters put forward here to guide project delivery are grouped into four strands of analysis (location management, space usage, legibility, and how the spaces are liable to fit with safety initiatives).
Design strategies
General
The project designer's job is to look closely at the following factors before putting forward any urban planning strategy.
Anticipation on location management
General
Specific future transport production needs have to be systematically factored in from the outset, as soon as the location design process begins. This is also the ideal point at which to plan ahead for the various dimensions of space management involved. This mission is to design spaces that are as easy to service and keep in shape (including against theft and vandalism) as to deploy formal surveillance.
Specific location of activities and access control
Are passenger services (including toilets, left luggage offices, lost property, ticket machines and change machines, etc.) and sales activities (reception points, information centres, ticket counters, waiting areas, shops) mapped out in such a way as to foster a feeling of security?
Do the internal or institutional (police) security services have rooms fitted for monitoring public traffic flows and activities throughout the location?
Does the project provide access control or restriction to problematic spaces and zones at risk (crime targets)?
Robustness and maintainability (doors, windows, equipment, street furniture, fencing, etc.)
Do the design and architecture allow for durable construction which minimises deterioration and maintenance?
Is the equipment (benches, bins, signage, etc.) sufficiently robust to resist against vandalism and is it arson-proof?
Are the materials, equipment and furniture used on the location of standard use, making it easy to quickly replace or repair in the event of breakdown, damage or deterioration?
Would robust materials fit with the aesthetics of the premises and the needs of the people using the premises?
Have the location's key infrastructural networks (lighting, telephone, passenger information, fire safety, etc.) been given specific protection measures (compartmentation, fallback networks) designed to prevent a complete location shutdown?
Space usage
General
Over and above the rules on general location running, which are implemented by the location controllers (passenger carrier, location manager), quality of life in public transport spaces hinges on the way the public actually takes ownership of the location and its functions. This positive ownership includes informal surveillance (by passengers), occupancy rates, individual empowerment and the information control of incidents, natural respect for the spaces themselves and the functions offered by the location.
Key points to hone in on include how lively the spaces are, where they are positioned, whether they are relatively isolated from the rest, making it equally important to check whether they are exposed to safety problems (repeated vandalism, perceived insecurity, etc.) and to look into the options for physically or visually drawing the public spaces together in order to improve the potential for informal surveillance.
Time schedules coordination to guarantee continuous natural surveillance
Are there any specific actions planned to provide safety during downtime in location occupancy?
Are there specific activities which can be introduced/relocated to improve the time-span of natural surveillance?
Do specific spaces need activity and lighting during nighttime?
Accessibility and passenger traffic management
Are bus stops, entrances to train and underground stations and parking facilities located close to lively areas to cut down the potential for crime? Are there safe routes to reach them?
Are the access ways to public facilities located in lively areas so that their surveillance is enhanced and so that the flows they generate contribute to natural surveillance?
Are there safe access ways (under either formal or informal surveillance) to spaces that are accessible for disabled people?
Does the location layout provide naturally obvious access ways and routes, or is specific signage needed?
Have pedestrian routes and walkways been designed taking into account pedestrian risks and fear of crime?
Are parking lots located keeping safety criteria in mind?
Were passenger flows factored into a decision on whether to separate public access from staff access (for facilities, sales outlets, and recreational facilities)?
Have the connections between buildings (routing, passageways) or between public transport spaces (stations, stops) and public highways been designed taking into account safety factors?
Attractiveness (colours, materials, lighting, noise, smells, street furniture)
Have the public spaces been made passenger-friendly, as commonly understood, to enhance the degree of passenger ownership?
Does the project create attractive and useful places for passengers to enhance responsibility and a sense of belonging?
Does the project avoid creating nuisances that undermine the attractiveness of the area?
Does the location enable and foster the development of spontaneous activities that are compatible with transport services while at the same time improving the overall passenger environment?
Legibility
General
Legibility, here, is defined as a logical consistency between the status, function, use patterns and management approaches of the spaces and sub-spaces making up the location. It implies that the roles of these spaces are instantly understandable with clearly ranked levels of importance. Legibility translates as a kind of implicit communication that encourages passengers and location users to feel ownership of the premises, and to instantly understand where they need to go, despite the complexity of the location. This legibility instils a certain familiarity with the premises, even for first-time users, thus reducing any feeling of insecurity or having to be on the lookout.
Territorial boundaries (human-scale location facilities, clear public/private zoning compartmentalisation)
Is the differentiation between public, semi-public (sales outlets), and private (offices) spaces clear to users, and does it encourage the intended legitimate uses of the location spaces?
Does the design of the space clearly signpost its purpose (waiting rooms, sales, boarding)? In particular, is there explicit differentiation between free access and conditional access (e.g. holding a valid travel ticket) areas?
Is the boundary between public and private spaces physically or symbolically signposted?
Has space design been adapted to different target groups and to their needs?
Do these territorial boundaries create a feeling of ownership and responsibility among the users?
Does the scaling of the newly designed space fit its intended purpose and uses? In particular, do these spaces provide for sub-spaces enabling location users with shared interests or roles to assemble together (waiting before train arrival, specific line information, waiting for connecting services, clearly recognisable meeting points, etc.)?
Can users clearly identify these spaces?
Visibility
Do the location facilities planned offer good visibility over building entrances?
Do landscaping and vegetation allow sufficient visibility and potential for natural surveillance?
Have bus stops and entrances to underground stations and parking facilities been located in such a way as to allow maximum visibility?
Are the activities in public transport-dedicated areas have good enough visibility to allow natural surveillance and make it possible to ask for help where needed?
Have plans been made to keep the use of long blank walls along pedestrian routes or footpaths to a minimum?
Are the spaces well lit to reduce fear of crime?
Do isolated areas have good visibility in order to reduce the risk of crime and perceived insecurity?
Does the location design allow new users to know where they are and to find their way around easily, thus fostering a feeling of security?
Location compatibility with security measures
Does the project or the space itself help the surveillance and intervention missions of officers and agents tasked with maintaining law and order? Are the spaces accessible and visible to patrols, or is the location configuration geared to islanding?
Are security and safety services (public and private intervention services: police, firefighters, emergency ambulance services) guaranteed good accessibility?
Can the location be quickly and safely evacuated (assembly areas, broad access ways, liaison with public highways)?
Have crime prevention initiatives been factored into location or project design: if so, has equipment been planned for social education, outreach programs or community services, or on a broader scale, has the location perimeter been designed to blend in with the local environment or does it mark a clear boundary?
Management strategies
General
When dealing with safety issues, the location manager's role is to reassess the following factors in order to guarantee that the public transport-dedicated areas can offer a globally peaceful, reassuring environment.
Responsive location management policy
General
Specific future transport production needs have to be systematically factored in from the outset, as soon as the location design process begins. This is also the ideal point at which to plan ahead for the various dimensions of space management involved. This mission is to design spaces that are as easy to service and keep in shape (including against theft and vandalism) as to deploy formal surveillance.
Upkeep and maintenance
Have maintenance measures and strategy been planned so that spaces will be attractive and lively and foster responsibility and a feeling of security?
Does the maintenance strategy ensure quick, responsive and prompt responses to reduce the risk of vandalism and repeated offences and to reduce the feeling that the spaces are derelict or left unused?
Do the materials used on location offer fast, easy servicing?
Are the different spaces within the area equally well serviced to prevent certain spaces from becoming branded as conducive to fostering crime?
Does the management strategy provide for partnership between stakeholders to ensure homogeneous measures and strategy implementation (regular meetings, specific documents)? Does the management strategy provide stakeholders with steps to follow and regular monitoring and assessment measures?
Does the maintenance strategy feature specific measures for lighting, electricity and telephone systems (in terms of any protection and fast repairs needed)?
Formal surveillance (patrolling, CCTV)
Does the management staff include safety specialists or people explicitly tasked with safety-related missions? Who are the different stakeholders in terms of safety and security issues? What are their responsibilities and skills fields?
Have the various surveillance measures employed been studied and assessed (police, security services, all natural surveillance resources, CCTV)?
Have specific surveillance measures been taken to cover public facilities approach routes and entrances/exits for both day and night?
Does the project design feature liaisons between different surveillance systems, particularly as concerns clearly defined segregation of roles and responsibilities among location partners and the location's urban environment (passenger carriers, location manager, local traders, public authorities, and any other institutional stakeholders such as schools, etc.)?
Do specific places in the area require the deployment of CCTV coverage (even if it is not a legal requirement)? If so, does the CCTV system include regular monitoring and assessment measures? Have the links between the surveillance professionals and the location management stakeholders been organized in such a way as to synergize the effectiveness of both parties?
