Accessibility for Whom? Perceptions of Sidewalk Barriers Across Disability Groups and Implications for Designing Personalized Maps

TL;DR

Addresses how sidewalk barriers are experienced differently by five mobility groups and how current maps fail to cater to diversity. The study collects a large-scale online image survey ($N=190$ responses from $144$ participants) using $52$ sidewalk images across nine barrier types to derive passability profiles by mobility aid. It then demonstrates two applications—a disability-aware accessibility map and a personalized routing prototype based on OSMnx and Project Sidewalk data—and provides an open dataset and analysis code. The results offer actionable insights for accessibility-focused urban planning and the development of device-aware navigation tools.

Abstract

Despite diverse mobility needs worldwide, existing mapping tools fail to address the varied experiences of different mobility device users. This paper presents a large-scale online survey exploring how five mobility groups -- users of canes, walkers, mobility scooters, manual wheelchairs, and motorized wheelchairs -- perceive sidewalk barriers. Using 52 sidewalk barrier images, respondents evaluated their confidence in navigating each scenario. Our findings (N=190) reveal variations in barrier perceptions across groups, while also identifying shared concerns. To further demonstrate the value of this data, we showcase its use in two custom prototypes: a visual analytics tool and a personalized routing tool. Our survey findings and open dataset advance work in accessibility-focused maps, routing algorithms, and urban planning.

Figures (14)

• Figure 1: Our final image dataset consists of 52 images across nine categories, including fire hydrants + poles, overgrown vegetation, parked bikes/cars/scooters, cracks/height differences, bricks/cobblestone + utility panels , sand/gravel + grass, narrow, curb ramp, missing curb ramp, Above, we show two sample images from each category.
• Figure 2: Survey Part 2.1 showed all 52 images and asked participants to rate their passability based on their lived experience and use of their mobility aid. Above is the interactive tutorial we showed at the beginning of this part.
• Figure 3: In survey Part 2.2, participants were asked to perform a series of pairwise comparisons based on their 2.1 responses.
• Figure 4: In Part 3, the survey asked participants to rank order nine types of sidewalk barriers, including: missing curb ramps, narrow sidewalks, brick/cobblestone surfaces, uneven sidewalk panels, steep slopes, broken surfaces/cracks, grass surfaces, sand/gravel surfaces, and manholes on sidewalks. To elicit the most accurate responses, participants could click on the image icon to see an example image for each barrier.
• Figure 5: Participant demographics (N=144) broken down by mobility aid, including age, gender, and travel frequency. n.b. is non-binary; 1-3/m is 1-3 travels per month or less, 1-3/w is 1-3 travels per week, 4-6/w is 4-6 travels per week, 7+/w is 7 travels per week or more.