Discussion

From the findings, most of the streets in the core zone of Melaka are not pedestrian friendly. The streets that need the most improvement of pedestrian facilities are as follows (Refer to Figure 3-9):

1) Jalan Tun Tan Cheng Lock (Heeren Street) - Street Segment 1 2) Jalan Kampung Kuli (Kampung Kuli Street) - Street Segment 6 3) Jalan Hang Lekiu (Forth Cross Street) - Street Segment 8 4) Jalan Gereja (Church Street) - Street Segment 16

5) Jalan Chan Koon Cheng (Chan Koon Cheng Street) - Street Segment 17

66 The reason why the street segments didn’t get higher star rating:

1) Inadequate mobility - Most of the street segments have only one side of pedestrian pathway. Discontinuities exist in the pedestrian flow due to obstruction of narrow pedestrian walkways by numerous items of unplanned street furniture and illegal installation of business activities.

2) Very unsafe for walking - Most of the street segments did not separate pedestrian pathway and motorized roadway. It shows that pedestrian is not protected because they need to share the same street spaces with motorized vehicle. It is dangerous to pedestrian especially for children and parents with stroller. Only Laksamana Street (street segment 14) have physical separation while the others haven’t.

3) Non-existence or negligible pedestrian facility - Most of the street segments in the core zone did not provide basic crossing facility such as bollards, ramps and zebra crossing. The vulnerability of pedestrians is further increased when they should negotiate among moving traffic while crossing. Pedestrians are not guaranteed safe crossing at intersections, must deal with turning vehicles and speeding cars.

Based on the findings, the most severe indicator for the street segments are as follows:

1) Safety indicator is the most severe (15 street segments got 0 mark), followed by,

2) Facility indicator (11 street segments got 0 mark) and, 3) Mobility indicator (6 street segments got 0 mark)

To increase the star rating to achieve 5-stars indices , these followings indicators should be improving:

1) Safety indicator - Every pathway must separate the pedestrians from the motorized vehicles, both spatially and physically.

2) Facility indicator - Every crossing must have bollards, ramps and zebra marker.

3) Mobility indicator - On every street, regardless of either single or dual-carriageway, there must be paved pedestrian pathways on both sides of the roadway.

67 However, there are some constraints of increasing the number of star in heritage cities due to impact factor. For instance, it cannot have both sides of pedestrian pathways due to narrow street condition. Function of this model should be adjusted like focus on facility indicator.

This study defines a good pedestrian pathway as ‘a paved, unobstructed walkway that provides continuous safe access to land uses.’ So, in this study, only paved walkways are counted in computing the equation. Unpaved pathways are not considered a proper pedestrian facility by the definition. As cars prefer paved roadways, pedestrians similarly prefer paved pathway. It is because paved pedestrian facility provides pedestrian comfort when walking in rainy day or sunny day.

There is also some world heritage site especially the old heritage city that have mostly unpaved street. However, this study doesn’t deal with unpaved street. In case of Melaka World Heritage Site, all streets should be paved. So, this is not matter anyway. Basically, this kind of idea should be applied to all world heritage site but details of index might be different considering the characteristics and local distinctiveness of the heritage sites itself.

In a world heritage site, people want street conditions that is easy to move from an origin to a destination point, to feel protected, to feel safe along walking paths, to feel ease while walking such as to feel secure, comfortable and convenient and finally, accessible. So, the pedestrians would enjoy their walking experience. The detailed explanations of pedestrian needs are as follows:

1) Easy to move from an origin to a destination point was assessed by Mobility (M) indicator which means continuously available. In this method, the ideal 5 stars Mobility indicator (excellent mobility) can be achieved if the street conditions have paved pedestrian pathways on both sides of the roadway.

2) To feel protected and to feel safe along walking paths were assessed by Safety (S) indicator which means physically and spatially separated. In this method, the ideal 5 stars Safety indicator (excellent safety for pedestrian)

68 can be achieved if every pathway separate the pedestrians from the motorized vehicles, both spatially and physically.

3) To feel ease while walking such as to feel secure, comfortable and convenient were assessed by Facility (F) indicator which means promote ease of usage. In this method, the ideal 5 stars Facility indicator (excellent pedestrian facilities) can be achieved if every crossing has bollards, ramps and zebra marker.

4) Lastly, accessible was assessed by Accessibility (A) indicator which means closeness to land uses. In this method, the ideal 5 stars Accessibility indicator (excellent accessibility to land uses by walking) can be achieved if at least 80% of the land uses are located within walking distance (500 m).

This study verificate the physical parameters of street conditions in a heritage site. The P-Index method were used as the evaluation tool to measure provision of pedestrian pathways in Melaka World Heritage Site, Malaysia as a case study.

Basically, this kind of idea should be applied to all world heritage site but details of index might be different. The basic framework is commonly use and same, but in detail, this might be differ site by site. We may change some of these equations with some adjustments. More variables and new indicators can be incorporate in the method, depends on the characteristics of the heritage sites itself.

However, P-Index method only assessed the physical conditions of pedestrian pathways and didn’t consider user perception. There is a need to understand the relationship between the physical condition and user perception in the future.

As a conclusion, P-Index method that is very easy to apply, is an analytical tool developed to increase the visibility of pedestrian needs in urban planning policy application. It encourages urban planners, city agencies, developers and community groups to use the index and its concepts for transportation planning and land use planning.

69 3.5 Chapter Summary

This chapter proposes a star rating system structure and applied the rating to the case study based on physical data on traffic function. The rating for pedestrian facilities in Melaka WHS can be interpreted as unfavorable to pedestrians. The pedestrian level of service for traffic function is expressed as inadequate mobility, very unsafe for walking, non-existence or negligible pedestrian facility, and good accessibility to land uses by walking. This reflected the poor walking environment of Melaka WHS and improvement strategy is necessary to create a pedestrian friendly environment in the heritage site.

The first model is just the simple first step application to check the structure of PLOS evaluation method. The method only focus on traffic function to make the street safer. This model can be applied to that tourism site that have a similar condition like Melaka. For example, small/ narrow streets and some concentrated, very densely developed. The next chapter will discuss the model estimation using psychological data by incorporating pedestrian perception/responses to propose a pedestrian satisfaction index by introduced Type 1 and Type 2 assessment.

CHAPTER 4

4 SIMPLE MULTIPLIER TYPE FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION