Peter De Smidt 

Work
About
Research 
Contact 
Resumé 


Access Denied:  How to design for connection and visibility. 
Course: Design Innovation & Society Studio IIIDuration: September - December 2023 Software Used: Figma, Canva, Procreate, Adobe Illustrator & Rhino 3D Tags: Community Design, Urban Design, Placemaking Design, Infographic Design, Research Design 

Abstract: 


The Capital District Transportation Authority CDTA provides essential bussing transportation to Troy NY residents, but has systematically suffered from rider-experience, communication, and informational growing pains, leading to rider mistrust, ineffective transportation, and  general user dissatisfaction across the Troy NY service area. Our strategic and comprehensive multi-phase plan re-establishes communication between rider and service provider, upgrades crucial informational and way-finding infrastructure, and establishes community connection across the Troy service area, while challenging the traditional understanding of strategic bus stop development design.

Third & Ferry St. Downtown Troy NY 
Burdett Ave & Detroit Ave Troy NY 
Hoosick St. &  17th Street Troy NY 


Problem Definition:

The basis of this project comes from an analysis of public transportation in the United states and a common frustration around inefficient and rider-unfriendly public transportation. This project was also largely motivated by the ever-increasing effects of climate change. This project pushes public transportation leaders to think strategically about the implementation and expansion of public transportation and public transportation amenities to serve as a way to fight or ease the pains of climate change. 

Rider Experience Issues:

  • Inconsistent placement of CDTA bus stop signs, mixed throughout new and existing infrastructure
  • Lack of bus stop amenities, or consistency in amenities provided at each stop 
  • Confusing non informational bus stop signs 
  • Bus stops that are hidden by other infrastructure or by overgrown shrubs 
  • Confusing, non-detailed map 
  • Night-time way-finding is extremely difficult due to lack of lighting 

Ferry St. Troy NY
Fourth St. & Ferry St. Troy NY 
Sixth Ave. & Broadway St. Troy NY 
Burdett Ave. & Detroit Ave Troy NY 

What do the Riders (and non-riders) experience? 

After Identifying these problem areas we wanted to better understand specifics about real riders-experiences in Troy. To accomplish this understanding we implemented a survey across Troy featured at many bus stops. From this survey we received a lot of thanks for the presence of the buses, but confirmation of the problem spaces we identified and certified that the rider-experience was dissatisfactory. While administering this survey we also spoke with real riders utilizing this system, who discussed frustrations around bus drivers not stopping at bus stops because the driver could not see the bus stop. Riders explained that when this happens, especially on their way to work, it causes loss of wages and consequences from their employers, and the CDTA has a one week call back range to respond to rider feedback or problems, causing extreme frustration for already dissatisfied riders and ultimately building distrust between CDTA and riders.
Poster targeting CDTA riders 
Poster targeting non-riders 
Poster targeting non-riders
Poster targeting CDTA riders

Prototype Ideation #1 :Physical Stop Redesign

Our original idea for this project was to redesign the bus stops for the Troy CDTA system, involving human sized prototypes and user testing with CDTA riders. These stops would be more accessible, more easily identifiable, and better reflect the community of Troy. 

Our first ideation considered very broad questions of public infrastructure with research including how ADA requirements work, Soviet bus stop architecture, financial considerations for public works projects, ongoing and future CDTA project analysis, and how to make ecologically responsible/restorative transport infrastructure. To learn more about bus stop design we decided to meet with a DIS professor and industry expert, Raquel Velho. 

Interview with Industry Expert: Raquel Velho


 

 “Regulations are conditions of possibility”









To start our research for our first approach we had an interview with Raquel Velho, who has done extensive research in the field of disabilities studies and public transportation. She gave us insight into ADA regulations and requirements in the U.S and to look into New York-specific rules. “Regulations are conditions of possibility,” she said. In order for our bus stop to be feasible, it needed to fit within the limitations that govern real bus stops. At this stage in our development, we were using Soviet bus stops as our main source of aesthetic inspiration; however, they lacked several requirements of “good” bus stops. Their structures are often fully enclosed, which is dangerous if someone or something is blocking the only exit and may leave users feeling unsafe if they can’t observe their surroundings when in the stop. They are also so unique that they are difficult to identify as bus stops, which can potentially cause a barrier to entry for people who are unfamiliar with the routes: the exact thing we are trying to fix. 

Raquel insisted that a unifying language be used in order to clearly convey that our structures were bus stops and all a part of the same system.Standardization is a key part in governmental architecture and appealing to public works projects, which we were rapidly becoming aware were our main stakeholders above just bus riders.  Raquel suggested looking closer at the historical contexts in which the Soviet stops were developed to understand the purpose they were trying to convey. The main takeaway from the Soviet bus stop architecture was the cultural statements each one made. Could we take more inspiration from the message of these stops more than their aesthetics, and instead focus on making a stop that had a similar impact on Troy?

She also gave us considerable other factors to take into account when designing a bus stop. Public infrastructure interacts with more people than just those it serves; for example, even non-bus riders will still walk and drive past bus stops. What sort of interactions do we need to account for? How will these stops fit into the preexisting structure around them, like the sidewalks, property behind them, and foot traffic of the area? Raquel gave us many realistic restraints to consider.

After our ideation and development we met with an Industry professional from the CDTA to discuss public transportation improvements and feasibility.

Interview with Industry Professional: Megan Quirk

Megan agreed that the signs and maps were an area of concern for the CDTA


We were able to sit down with the Senior Capital Planner at the CDTA, Megan Quirk. She has only been a part of the CDTA for the past year and a half, but has worked in several other planning commissions in New York. Our main goal of this interview was to learn more about the CDTA’s method of operation, as well as current and future goals, so that we could better understand the realistic requirements. We also had questions about suppliers and design decisions that only someone who worked directly with the CDTA would be able to answer.
   In terms of the realistic possibility of something like this project ever being considered, Megan seemed enthusiastic about the idea of unique bus stops and route improvements. There is precedent of variations in designs of stops around Troy, and although they were minimal (for example, the walls of the bus stop near the hospital are white instead of gray), she said it was proof that the CDTA was open to the idea of it. Broome County also recently launched a redesign program of their line in the SUNY Binghamton area, and that was a great example of improvement and redesign initiatives.  Realistic requirements to consider when it comes to individualized bus stops though are cost of replacement; glass panes get shattered, furniture gets broken. Using common elements that can be produced in bulk reduces the cost of replacement in critical components of the shelter. Therefore, some level of standardization is necessary for financial feasibility. The CDTA receives a yearly FDA grant, but only for standard shelters. Any other type of shelter, ones that may have unique designs or structures, are usually funded through other grants or donations. The most recent addition to the CDTA, the BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) system, has its own separate grants. The CDTA’s current supplier, Brasco, offers a variety of bus stops, and the CDTA chooses from their options of pre-built structures.
    Megan agreed that the signs and maps were an area of concern for the CDTA as well. There were several outdated maps
Troy & RPI Route 87 Schedule 
BC Transit New design 
Online Route Map on CDTA website 

Interview with Design Professional: James Malazita  

In order to carry this project to a satisfying end, it may be necessary to be aspirational and idealistic—within reason.
After making this last pivot, we found ourselves struggling to carry through with any product that was useful, feasible, and not already commonly available. With the allotted CDTA budget we had learnt from Megan, it was hard to imagine any substantial change in the current bus infrastructure. 

To try to design a product that would—simply due to the nature of manufacturing and installing a new product—never realistically come to fruition felt like an exercise in the futile. 

We found ourselves in this awkward place of having fully defined our problem (and the rather overwhelming nature of it) and the context for which we were designing, but being unable to work past the ideation stage without needing to disregard a significant obstruction in our problem space (the budget and willingness of the CDTA to implement new infrastructure that is not a basic necessity). We realized that some additional outside council would be helpful. We fortunately had the opportunity to talk to James (Jim) Malazita, a game designer and researcher—and a former professor of ours.Through a conversation with Jim, he we came to the understanding that in order to carry this project to a satisfying end, it may be necessary to be aspirational and idealistic—within reason. By acknowledging the boundaries of our problem space, and utilizing the research we had done about it, our aspirational choices could be informed and grounded, even if not a likely development in our immediate future.

The CDTA's reluctance and/or inability to change was a fundamental issue stemming from the Capital Region's government, frankly and the United States' approach to urban planning. That was something we had learned early on in our research and problem definition. By acknowledging this in our final product, perhaps even conceptualizing a way to improve the situation, if even only on a local scale, we decided we could develop a product that didn't reek of ennui, but wasn't wholly imaginary. 

Final Product: 
A comprehensive approach to public bussing improvements in Troy. 

After our interview with Jim, we designed our final overall concept for our project. A comprehensive proposal and timeline for the CDTA, through which they could incrementally improve their physical infrastructure, and repair the trust between the bus system and its users. This plan would be structured chronologically, with phases of improvement that increased in ambition, scale, and budget, but had a realistic starting point that fueled the plan's overall progress. 

(This final concept utilized all of our previous iterations/stages of this project)

A key part of this proposal included ways of proving to the CDTA the importance of Troy's bus system, and why it was a worthwhile investment to implement the later stages of the proposal, or otherwise take the money and time to improve this crucial public service. Our proposal would be laid out as such:

Phase one: 
Immediate Informational Improvements
Redesigned bus map & User-conscious infographic bus signs

Phase two:  
Additive Physical Modifications
User-centered additive modifications, custom & prefabricated

Phase three: 
Community Connections
Community hubs, Inter-community connection, & Visually representative

Each of the stages in our proposal relied on its predecessor. By ensuring that the research and outreach conducted in every stage was used to inform the physical changes enacted in the next was a key part of making sure the users were always kept at the forefront of the improvements. The riders who rely on the bus network to get to work, go to school, or just get around to various places, were the ones who would be experiencing the changes implemented on the CDTA—whether they be good or bad. The system should be built for them, and their needs, so regularly receiving community feedback and actually taking it into account is something we consider integral for any change the CDTA may choose to enact. 


Check out our 
Final Product here: