Re-Design of Peripheral Bus Stops

Prepared for TriUPA World Usability Day 2008 | November 13, 2008

Re-Design of Peripheral Bus StopsTriUPA World Usability Day 2008

Presented by Andrew Wirtanen, HumanCentric


Agenda• Our Team

• The Problem

• Scope of Project

• Research

• Users & Goals

• Design Sketches

• 3 Final Proposals


The Team• Human factors and design backgrounds

• Very ad hoc – Andrew guided the process

• Had already established rapport

• Transportation design discussed as a result of CityRacks


The Problem

Source: triangletransit.org


Solution Scope

Peripheral Bus Stops

Hubs

Payment

Ticketing

Personal Technology

On bus


Process Scope

BrainstormingPrioritization

ResearchUsers and GoalsIterative Design

Ethnography

Physical mockups

Outside evaluation

Iteration with users

Feasibility assessment

Personas


Brainstorming & Prioritization

•Bus stops are locally relevant

•Opportunities for improvement

•Potential to be highly visible

•Peripheral stops are less complex


Research

•Design competitions

– CHI 2007

– MIT


Research• Transit authority long terms plans

– Materials online

– Calling transit authorities

• General goals

– Increased ridership

– Altering routes

– Rider amenities such as shelters

– Technology such as Wi-Fi access


Research

•Existing technologies


Research

•Design Standards


Research

•Existing Transit Systems

– Dublin Bus System

– Boston MBTA – the “T”

– Chicago Transit Authority


Users & Goals• Where is the bus stop?

• Where am I?

• Which bus do I need?

• Which bus stop am I at?

• When does my bus arrive?

• How much will it cost me to ride the bus?

• I have a question but who do I ask?

• It is raining and I want to stay dry.

• Which bus comes to this stop?


Design Sketches

•Team members asked to create 1-3 sketches


Design Proposal 1: “The Triangle”


Design Proposal 1: “The Triangle”•Advantages

– Visibility

– Distinct branding/recognition

– Maintenance

– Conventional materials and installation

– Scalable

– Small footprint

•Disadvantages

– No arrival information

– No shelter

– No seating

– Accomodating horizontal textual information

– No on-demand information and emergency help


Design Proposal 2: “Skinny”


Design Proposal 2: “Skinny”•Advantages

– Conveys more detailed information

– Visibility

– Environmentally friendly

– Shelter and lighting

– Options for seating

– Room for advertising

– “Cool” factor – image

– Can call for help

•Disadvantages

– Maintenance

– Complexity

– Cost

– Potential increase in workload for on-demand information


Design Proposal 3: “E Ink”


Design Proposal 3: “E Ink”•Advantages

– Conveys very detailed information

– Visibility

– Can call for help

– Recognizable bus symbol

– Shelter and lighting

•Disadvantages

– Maintenance

– Complexity

– Cost

– Potential increase in workload for on-demand information

– No seating


Tying it Back to World Usability Day

•Putting the user at the center expands understanding and possibilities

– List of user goals helped generate improvements


Contributors

– Mauricia Blackwell

– Miranda Capra

– Daniel Hamilton

– Jon Howarth

– Jessica Phipps

– Jennifer Ross

– Tim Swezy

– Paul Tuorto

– Andrew Wirtanen

– Keon Pettiway

– Carl Seglem

Re-Design of Peripheral Bus Stops

Design

Transcript of Re-Design of Peripheral Bus Stops