This paper presents the results of a stated preference survey to assess the value of reductions in community severance (the “barrier effect” of transport infrastructure on the mobility of pedestrians). In a first exercise, participants chose between crossing a road in a place without designated facilities or walking additional minutes to a place where the road is covered over. Half of the participants never chose to cross, regardless of the road design, traffic characteristics, and length of the detour. On average, the other half would only cross the road, if the detour was at least 7.5 minutes, or higher, if the road had extra traffic lanes, no central reservation, and high traffic density. In a second exercise, participants were asked if they would cross the road if they could save money by using a shop or a bus stop on the other side of the road, instead of one on their side of the road. 38% never chose to cross. The cost saving for which the other 62% would cross depends on the scenario, especially regarding traffic volume. On average, participants would only cross a road with high traffic volume if the saving was £2.8. Overall, the study suggests that many people are not willing to trade-off pedestrian safety with shorter walking times or cost savings. People who are willing to trade-off attach greater importance to some aspects (like traffic density) than others (like traffic speed)
