Article citation information:
Turoń, K., Czech, P., Juzek, M. The concept of
a walkable city as an alternative form of urban mobility. Scientific Journal of Silesian University of Technology. Series
Transport. 2017, 95, 223-230. ISSN: 0209-3324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20858/sjsutst.2017.95.20.
Katarzyna
TUROŃ[1], Piotr CZECH[2], Michał JUZEK[3]
THE CONCEPT OF A WALKABLE CITY
AS AN ALTERNATIVE FORM OF URBAN MOBILITY
Summary. The article is dedicated to the
concept of the walkable city as an alternative form of urban mobility. In the
work, the authors present basic principles connected with the notion of
walkability in the context of sustainable development and sustainable transport.
The authors also discuss pro-pedestrian solutions implemented in the Polish
cities of Łódź, Rybnik, Szczecin, Gdynia, Wrocław and Katowice, including
examples of good practice regarding walkability and the “Walk Score” indicator.
The article also introduces typical problems related to pedestrians’ movement
around the city. The advantages of implementing the walkability concept and the
factors related to making cities more “pedestrian-friendly” are mentioned as
well.
Overall, the aim of this work is to introduced the concept of
walkability as an alternative form of smart mobility in the context of urban
logistics.
Keywords:
walkable city; pedestrians; mobility solutions; sustainable transport;
sustainable development; Walk Score indicator.
1. INTRODUCTION
The constant development of
technology and the desire to move more quickly have led to the creation of many
vehicular traffic privileges in cities. The focus has mainly been on aspects
related to greater road capacity, the design of high-speed routes in the city
or the provision of good car communication. This kind of trend is referred as
fostering an “automobile-oriented” attitude [1]. Automobile-oriented cities
impose many restrictions on pedestrians. Too many cars in cities, many of which
are parked on pavements or other pedestrian spaces, traffic jams, copious fumes
and other pollution are just some of the problems faced by urban transport [2].
When attempting to solve these problems, residents and urban planners have been
compelled to reflect on whom the city is for.
It has been acknowledged that
transport should be good not just for drivers, but also other people and their
public health, as well as for the environment and the economy. As such, it is
connected with sustainable transport policies. Sustainable transport also
assumes a reduction in the scale and effects of urban space dominance by
individual car transport [3]. One idea to realize the goals of sustainable
transport has been to focus on pro-citizen demands to create urban-friendly
cities.
The idea of cities being good for
pedestrians has led to the spread of the phenomenon known as “walkable cities”
[4]. Its basic principle is to create public urban spaces that are available
for pedestrians and friendly for walkers.
The aim of this work is to present
the idea of walkability and its solutions as used in Polish cities as an
alternative form of smart mobility in the context of urban logistics. The
article presents examples of good practices connected with walkability in the
case of Łódź, Rybnik, Szczecin, Gdynia, Wrocław and Katowice.
2. WALKABILITY CONCEPT
The walkability concept has become
popular due to the poor quality of urban spaces dedicated to pedestrians
(footpaths, pavements etc.). City authorities have often forgotten that the
streets offer a huge potential, which should not be limited to cars and parking
spaces; rather, they should be available to all pedestrians, even if they are
using urban transport [5, 6, 7]. The pedestrian and cycling models of
individual mobility should be accessible to all urban residents [8, 9].
Moreover, walkability is connected with quality of life (being healthy) issues,
while offering environmental and economic benefits [5, 10, 11]. To claim that a
city is “walkable”, it is necessary to meet four basic conditions: security,
functionality, attractiveness and convenience [4].
Implementing the concept of walkability
into cities has fostered a new culture of mobility, which brings with it many
benefits, such as [12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17]:
- Improving the level of safety on the streets
- Decreasing the environmental footprint and reducing
air pollution, traffic, noise or vibrations
- Improving the attractiveness of public spaces, which
can be help to support local businesses and local tourism, as well as encourage
investment
- Decreasing spending on construction of and repairs to
the road infrastructure
- Improving the health of residents and prolonging their
life
- Balancing the transport system load
- Reducing the scale of difference in the usage of means
of transport
To be able to encourage a new
mobility culture, however, it is necessary to fulfil the following five steps
[6, 9]:
1. Change in mentality and the
need to produce immediate changes in the model of urban life
2. Political will
3. The emergence of a leader who
will encourage change
4. A sense of mission among
public sector employees
5. Cooperation between local
governments and residents in order to identify the latter’s needs.
When implementing walkability in
cities, three scales are involved: the planning scale, the street scale and the
detail scale. Each of them are complementary [9].
The scope of the planning scale
includes studies of a city’s conditions and directions, local spatial
development plans and major investments (e.g., hospitals, schools, stadiums).
The street scale is related to pedestrian traffic, any road works, alterations
and construction of streets etc. The detail scale includes the requirements to
be taken into account when offering tenders or contracts for alterations to and
construction of streets, squares, interchanges etc. [9]. Specific items
included in each scale are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Types of scale and actions [7, 12]
Type of scale |
Actions |
Planning
scale |
·
City planning with the highest priority for pedestrians ·
Planning a compact city structure ·
Standardized green areas ·
Preventing the formation of large areas that are inaccessible by
pedestrians ·
Consistency and continuity of hiking trails ·
Clear spatial structure ·
Creating squares only for pedestrians ·
High level of attractiveness in pedestrian areas ·
Paths for disabled persons ·
Avoiding blind footpaths ·
Creating public transport nodes |
Street
scale |
·
Places for business and culture activities ·
Wide pedestrian paths ·
Increasing the number of pedestrian crossings at favourable locations ·
Avoiding designated pedestrian crossings in areas with slow traffic ·
Streets without car traffic ·
Removal of parking places on pavements ·
Reducing the amount of bus bays ·
Increasing pedestrian safety ·
Reducing the amount of traffic lights ·
Reducing the amount of crash barriers ·
Maintaining traffic flow during events |
Detail
scale |
·
Good quality of pavements surfaces ·
Proper placement of technical installations and small architectural
elements ·
Reducing the number of posts and road signs ·
Increasing the number of trees, bushes and flowers ·
High standards of maintenance of footpaths |
There are many techniques to make a
city more walkable and communities more hospitable to walkers. The main
criteria of a walkable city are presented in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Criteria of a
walkable city (source: author’s own collaboration based on [4, 10, 20])
Measuring the effectiveness of
streets for pedestrians is connected with an indicator known as the “Walk
Score”. The operation of this system, based primarily on Google and
OpenStreetMap data, involves producing a score in relation to the distance and
availability of shops, as well as the level of safety, convenience,
functionality and attractiveness [16]. The Walk Score is a number between 0 to
100 points and a mean [18]:
- 0-24 points - car-dependent (almost all errands
require a car)
- 25-49 points - car-dependent (most errands require a
car)
- 50-69 points - somewhat walkable (some errands can be
accomplished on foot)
- 70-89 points - very walkable (most errands can be
accomplished on foot)
- 90-100 points – “walker’s paradise” (daily errands do
not require a car)
The Walk Score for Krasińskiego 8
Street, the location of the Silesian University of Technology’s Faculty of
Transport, receives 93 points, which means it is a walker’s paradise.
3. WALKABILITY SOLUTIONS: EXAMPLES
FROM POLISH CITIES
Pro-pedestrian solutions involving
the concept of walkability are becoming more and more popular around the world.
Currently, in Polish cities, we can observe an increasing number of
pro-pedestrian solutions informed by good practice from abroad. One of the good
practices dedicated to the well-being of pedestrians is the “woonerf” concept.
A street where pedestrians and
cyclists have priority is a woonerf. On this kind of street, special emphasis
is placed on calming traffic, increasing the level of safety and ensuring
aesthetic qualities. In the beginning, woonerf combined functions of the
boulevard, a street with parking and a meeting place. To achieve this, the traditional
division of space between the road and pavements was abandoned. This restricted
transit traffic but did not exclude the possibility of introducing public
transport [20, 22].
One of the first woonerf streets in
Poland was created in Lodz in 2014 at 6 Sierpnia Street, which was positively
received by the residents and resulted in the significant growth of pedestrian
traffic. In 2015, a section of Traugutta
Street was converted into woonerf, while, in April 2016, another street of this
type was opened at Piramowicza Street [19, 20].
Another solution, which has been
dedicated to women (but, in practice, it is used by all pedestrians), has been
to create a high-heel pavements known as “szpilkostrada” in areas that are
mostly covered with cobblestones, which are difficult for walking on. These
kinds of solution are popular in old town city markets. The concept of
szpilkostrada also facilitates greater mobility for wheelchair users. The
examples of szpilkostrada in Polish cities can be found in Wrocław or Rybnik
[21]. This type of pavement, as found in Rybnik, is presented in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Szpilkostrada in Rybnik (source: authors’ own work).
An additional pro-pedestrian
solution is to ensure the adequate control of traffic lights on pedestrian
crossings. The idea is to give priority to pedestrians, rather than traffic, by
using all-green traffic lights at the pedestrian crossings. This idea was
implemented for the first time in Poland in Lodz. The principle of the
operation is that, when there no cars and trams on the road, all four of the
pedestrian crossings show a green light. This only changes when a vehicle
approaches the lights. This idea was also introduced in Gdynia, at two places
in the downtown area. Signage indicated “all-green” full pedestrian priority
can be found at the junction of Żeromskiego and Derdowski Streets [22].
The Vienna station represents
another solution, which is a type of tram stop in which the lane between the
rails and the pavement is elevated to the pavement level. This improves
passenger comfort and makes boarding and getting off the tram easier. The
safety level is also improved by forcing cars to slow down [22].
Interchanges are an unavoidable
element of travelling on public transport, as they reduce travel comfort and
increase travel time. Frequent stops are separated from each other, which
forces passengers to experience extra distances. Thus, a bus-tram stop is
convenient for passengers, as it not only improves travel comfort and shortens
travel time, but also significantly improves passenger safety [22].
Another type of good practice
created with idea of walkability in mind is a bridge dedicated especially to
pedestrians, trams and cyclists. This kind of solution is intended to increase
the safety of unprotected road users, i.e., pedestrians and cyclists, by
eliminating the possibility of accidents with motor vehicles [22, 23]. The most
popular bridge for pedestrians in Poland is called the Jagiełło Bridge, which
is located in Bydgoszcz. The Jagiełło Bridge, which was built in 2012, is an
example of a cable-stayed bridge. It was also the first suspended tramway
bridge to be constructed in Poland [23].
There are also other solutions that
are used in Polish cities, such as:
- Restricted speed zones (e.g., Zone 30 in Katowice)
- Anti-bay bus stations (e.g., the anti-bay on
Marszałkowska Street in Warsaw)
- Pedestrian crossings with a narrowed road surface
- Narrowed intersections at crossroads
- Transverse pavements
All of the pro-pedestrian practices
mentioned above have been assesses by the Walk Score indicator system. Their
values range from 68 to 100, which means that using these solutions confirms
that pedestrians are prioritized and the respective city is more walkable. The
indicator values for every solution are shown in Table 2.
Table 2. The Walk Score indicator value for Polish pro-pedestrian
solutions
(Source: authors’
own work.)
Walkability solutions |
City |
Score |
Pro-walkability bridge |
Bydgoszcz |
93 |
Szpilkostrada |
Rybnik Plac Wolności |
97 |
Wrocław Rynek |
99 |
|
Woonerf |
Łódź 6. Sierpnia |
90 |
Łódź Traugutta |
93 |
|
Łódź Piramowicza |
68 |
|
Traffic lights with pedestrian
priority |
Gdynia Żeromskiego |
97 |
Gdynia Derdowskiego |
97 |
|
Vienna stations |
Wrocław Hubska |
87 |
Łódź Piotrowska |
87 |
|
Poznań Gwarna |
100 |
|
Kraków Podwale |
99 |
4. SUMMARY
In summary, the concept of a
walkable city represents one of the possibilities for introducing sustainable
mobility. As the concept of walkability offers many advantages, particularly
economic ones, it should not be difficult trying to persuade local governments
to make such changes in urban logistics.
The analysis based on examples from
Polish cities shows that pro-pedestrian solutions affect the outcome of the
Walk Score indicator calculations, which determines whether or not a city is
pro-walkable.
The case study of Polish cities has
shown that solutions are available that are dedicated to pedestrians, such as:
woonerf, szpilkostrada, Vienna stations, bus-tram stop stations, all-green
traffic lights or bridges for pedestrians, trams and cyclists. However, the
analysed examples only involve standalone practices in cities. To fully embrace
walkability, it is necessary to become acquainted with the demands of society
and make favourable changes to urban spaces based on the findings.
References
1.
Forsyth A., M. Southworth.
2008. “Cities afoot: pedestrians, walkability and urban design”. Journal of Urban Design 13 (1): 1-3.
ISSN 1357-4809.
2.
Gehl J. 2013. Cities for People. London: Island Press.
ISBN 9781597269841.
3.
OECD. 1997. Towards Sustainable Transportation: The
Vancouver Conference. Series: OECD Proceedings. Vancouver: OECD, 12.
4.
Speck J. 2012. Walkable City: How Downtown Can Save
America, One Step at a Time. New York, NY: Ferrar, Straus and Giroux. ISBN 978-0-8654-7772-8.
5.
Frank L.D., J.F.
Sallis, T.L. Conway, J.E. Chapman, B.E. Saelens, W. Bachman. 2007. “Many
pathways from land use to health: associations between neighborhood walkability
and active transportation, body mass index, and air quality”. Journal of the American Planning Association
72: 75-87. ISSN 0194-4363.
6.
Engwicht D. 1992. Towards an Eco-city: Calming the Traffic.
Sussex Inlet: Envirobook Publishing. ISBN 9780858810624.
7.
Short J.R., L.M.
Pinet-Peralta. 2010. “No accident: traffic and pedestrians in the modern city”.
Mobilities 5(1): 41-59. ISSN: 1745-0101.
8.
Penalosa G. 2016. “Wszyscy jesteśmy
pieszymi.” [In English: “We are all pedestrians”]. Magazyn
Miasta. Kultura, Ludzie, Przestrzeń 2(14): 17-18.
9.
CED Berkeley. 2017. “Reclaiming the walkable city.”
Available at: http://www.ced.berkeley.edu/downloads/pubs/frameworks/fa06/southworth.06.fw.4.16.pdf.
10.
Montgomery C.
2013. Happy City. Transforming Our Lives
Through Urban Design. New York, NY: Ferrar, Straus and Giroux. ISBN 978-0141047546.
11.
Skrzypek M. 2016. Atlas Sytuacji
Pieszych. [In Polish: Atlas of Pedestrian
Situations]. Lublin: Fundacja Tu Obok. ISBN 978-83-938069-2-8.
12.
UN-Habitat.
2017. Urbanization and Development:
Emerging Futures, World Cities Report 2016. Available at:
https://unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/WCR-%20Full-Report-2016.pdf
13.
Saelens Brian E., James F. Sallis, Lawrence D. Frank.
2003. “Environmental
correlates of walking and cycling: Findings from the transportation, urban
design, and planning literatures”. Annals
of Behavioral Medicine 25 (2): 80-91.
ISSN 0883-6612.
14.
Szołtysek J., H. Brdulak, S. Kauf. 2016. Miasta dla Pieszych. Idea Czy Rzeczywistość. [In English: Cities for People. Idea
or Reality?]. Warsaw: Texter. ISBN 978-83-7790-403-9.
15.
Southworth M. 2005. “Designing the walkable city.” Journal of Urban Planning and Development
131 (4): 246-257. ISSN 0733-9488.
16.
Rima S., P.K.
Bhuyan. 2014. “Pedestrian level of service criteria for urban off-street
facilities in mid-sized cities”.
Transport 1-12. ISSN: 1648-4142. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2014.944210.
17.
Nicolae D., C.
Adriazola, D. Hidalgo, L.A. Lindau, R. Jaffe. 2015. “Traffic safety in surface
public transport systems: a synthesis of research”. Public Transport 7(2): 121-137. ISSN: 1866-749X. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12469-014-0087-y.
18.
The Walk Score Indicator. 2017. Available at:
https://www.redfin.com/how-walk-score-works.
19.
Pro-inhabitants Portal. 2017. “Advantages of
pedestrian friendly cities”. Available at:
http://www.akcjamiasto.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Korzy%C5%9BciZMiastaPrzyjaznegoPieszym_20-04.pdf
20.
The Łódź City Portal. 2017. “Woonerf project.” 2017. Available at: http://woonerf.dlalodzi.info/.
21.
Akcja Miasto. 2017. Raport o Ruchu
Pieszym we Wrocławiu. [In Polish: Action City. 2017.
Report on Pedestrian Traffic in Wroclaw].
Available at:
http://www.akcjamiasto.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/PieszyWroclawRaportFull.pdf.
22.
Pedestrians in Bydgoszcz.
2017. The Catalogue of Good Practices.
Available at:
http://piesi.bydgoszcz.pl/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Katalog-Dobrych-Praktyk-na-www.pdf.
23.
Keil A. 2013. Bridges
for Pedestrians. Ramps, Walkways, Structures. Berlin: Birkhauser, Institut
fur Internationale Architektur-Dokumentation GmbH&Co.KG. ISBN:
978-3-930034-91-1.
Received 11.02.2017; accepted in revised form 25.04.2017
Scientific Journal of Silesian
University of Technology. Series Transport is licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
[1] Faculty of Transport, The Silesian
University of Technology, Krasińskiego 8 Street, 40-019 Katowice, Poland.
E-mail: katarzyna.turon@polsl.pl.
[2] Faculty of Transport, The Silesian
University of Technology, Krasińskiego 8 Street, 40-019 Katowice, Poland.
E-mail: piotr.czech@polsl.pl.
[3] Faculty of Transport, The Silesian
University of Technology, Krasińskiego 8 Street, 40-019 Katowice, Poland.
E-mail: michal.juzek@polsl.pl.