Archive for walkability

Walkability: The Evolution of Its Definition

Posted in Comprehensive Planning and Codes, Town Planning, Urbanism with tags , , , , , , on May 20, 2012 by John Olson

A topic very close to my personal and professional interests is the idea of walkability. This phrase is used often, perhaps too often? But what does walkability really mean? Is it something that we can really define? Probably not. Present party included, geographers, architects, planners, urbanists and landscape architects will still continue to try.

Pedestrian Propulsion

Recently, I provided a blog post on the EVstudio Blog (Inverse Relationship of Level of Service and Pedestrian Propulsion) that referenced Steve Mouzon’s phrase “Pedestrian Propulsion“. I love that phrase, doesn’t it just roll off your tongue?!

The way that Steve defines this on the Original Green is about the closest way that walkability can be defined. Steve’s definition is as follows:

A characteristic of a street that entices you to walk further than you otherwise would on lesser streets… literally propelling you along the way.”

Walk Score

Steve’s definition is a very eloquent definition, however it is qualitative and can be misinterpreted.  It is best used as a complement to other quantitative methods of measuring walkability. WalkScore.com is one of the best at using quantitative measures to define the walkability of a place. Although, the scores of places can be argued, especially using personal experience of comparative places. The arguments need Steve’s Pedestrian Propulsion consideration to better establish the true walkability of the place. For example, WalkScore does not always account for major barriers like high-capacity streets, or as the brilliant folks at Strong Towns call them — STROADS.

Perhaps the idea of allowing users to rank places with social media will assist Walk Score? A Beta site is currently being tested in Denver utilizing MapQuest with this in mind. It is called MQVibe, check it out here.

5-Minute Walk

The five-minute walk is often represented with a simple 1/4 mile radius circle centered on the place of interest. This is another great reference point for planners in determining block lengths and master planning of adjacent locations in a plan. However, we have all experienced some places that we could walk for miles, most of which are in places with that right level of density. I referred to this playfully for a Halloween post as Goldilocks Density  in the Blog Post A Neighborhood Designed for Halloween. Richard Florida defined it recently as Jane Jacobs’ Density. I think I like Richard’s term better. This gets us back to Pedestrian Propulsion of course — some places propel us; others repel us.

Mapnificent

Thank you to Patrick Kennedy at Walkable DFW for pointing out this site: Mapnificent.net. This website is extremely fun and addictive. There are several options included in the website to assist in measuring the existing mobility options in some of the major cities in the World. I am illustrating a couple of diagrams with the location of the new EV Studio Planning office as the point of beginning. (201 East Las Animas, Suite 113).

A five-minute trip utilizing transit and walking from the new EV Studio Planning office. Map provided from Mapnificent.net.

A five-minute trip utilizing transit, walking, and bicycle from the new EV Studio Planning office. Map provided from Mapnificent.net.

The first map above is showing a 5-minute ride/walk utilizing only bus transit and by foot at the default walking speeds. The lower map shows the same duration of time with the use of bicycle. Mapnificent did a great job of illustrating the interdependence between transit, walking and cycling. Great site, hopefully you also find it useful!

A Neighborhood Designed for Halloween

Posted in Comprehensive Planning and Codes, Town Planning, Urban Planning and Design, Urbanism with tags , , , , on October 31, 2011 by John Olson

Today is Halloween, which means that the evening streets are going to be full of little princesses, vampires, witches, ghosts, action heroes and pirates with dreams of candy and gum. As I reflect back on my former days of trick-or-treating, there were characteristics of each neighborhood that I lived, or trick-or-treated in, that certainly separated them. They are the same characteristics that many of us strive for in designing safe, walkable neighborhoods. The following are some of the characteristics that make trick-0r-treating a more enjoyable experience:

1. The Right Monsters: The Quote “When you’re on the street [as a pedestrian], all cars are monsters. When you’re in a car, all pedestrians are idiots” by Alan Pisarski certainly is a true statement in a neighborhood. Highly connected streets decrease the need for automobile sewers, classified as arterials and collectors. Fast moving streets are a major barrier to trick-or-treating. Most kids, with or without parents, are not permitted to cross these barriers on Halloween. Therefore, the area for trick-or-treating is confined to the parameters of vehicular streets as opposed to pedestrian streets. The best trick-or-treating areas in this regard are either in areas developed prior to the classification system (1940′s) or those areas that have a large enough land area within the confines of the classification system.

2. Goldilocks Density: There are neighborhoods designed that have too low of a density (T-1 through T-3) and neighborhoods that have too great of a density (T-6) for effective trick or treating. Just as in the story of Goldilocks and the Three Bears, the best neighborhood is in the middle, or “just right“. The sweet spot for trick-or-treating is between T-4 and T-5. The lower densities have increased need for walking which takes valuable bag-filling time away for the evening. Long driveways, greater distances between homes and large distances where trick-or-treating does not occur makes for an exhausting Halloween. On the other side of the spectrum, climbing stairs in condominiums or apartments, or worst riding on vertical cul-de-sacs (elevators) can take away from the experience of the outdoor Halloween environment. When a neighborhood is designed with townhouses, rowhouses and detached single-family homes aligned along the street, the experience is elevated.

Homes with minimal setbacks make for an enjoyable trick-or-treating experience.

3. Young and the Old: Diversity of the residents in a neighborhood is also critical. You may be wondering why this would matter for Halloween? Simple. With a diverse population, the chances of someone being home are higher with a presence of homeowners who are retired or have kids that are too old for trick-or-treating. With this in mind, you may think it would be ideal to trick-or-treat in a retirement community or 55-plus neighborhood. I happen to agree, except you must drive to trick-or-treat in these areas.  As a parent, I feel the presence of community is more important in trick-or-treating than the extra loot that my kids bring home. There is a great piece of mind accepting candy from friends and neighbors and the evening usually elevates the sense of community.

It is my hope that your Halloween is filled with great friends and neighbors, but more importantly, I hope that it is safe. If you must drive a vehicle this evening, please put the phone and all other distractions away.  There will be kids and adults in the streets, don’t be a “monster“.

The Village of Castle Pines as a Neighborhood Center

Posted in Comprehensive Planning and Codes, Streetscapes, Town Planning, Urban Planning and Design, Urbanism with tags , , , , , , on August 22, 2011 by John Olson

The architecture appropriately addresses the sidewalk and street at Village at Castle Pines.

Based upon the suggestion of a Colorado Springs friend, I visited a relatively new neighborhood commercial center south of the Castle Pines Golf Course, or northwest of Castle Rock. The neighborhood center, Village at Castle Pines, appeared to be a conventional retail center that is auto-centric from Highway 85; however, I knew from viewing the neighborhood center via Bing (image below) that the center was much more than a conventional retail center. Upon driving into the “Village“, my family and I enjoyed the delightful feel of the street. People were walking, dining outside, conversing and enjoying the beautiful day on the Front Range of Colorado. My assumption was that the patrons of the Village at Castle Pines were predominantly Castle Pines residents or at least very local, as this is a bit hidden from the primary transportation corridors of Colorado.

A Birds Eye View Image of the Village at Castle Pines from Bing.com.

I was pleased to see how the shops, restaurants and offices addressed the street. It was designed as a compact, pedestrian-scaled neighborhood center, as a neighborhood center should be… with one exception-Residential Presence. The shops had an elegant scale, equipped with 2nd floor habitable space, street trees and a streetscape conducive to an urban setting, but shops alone do not have the ability to give a neighborhood center a 24-hour street life. Neighborhood centers should be places that do not close down as a whole for the evening. To clarify, I am not one that believes that a neighborhood center must have 2nd floor residential in order to qualify as a neighborhood center. I stray from the majority of new urbanists in this regard. Many neighborhood centers and small town central business districts (CBD’s) have been extremely effective at providing great places for people without the direct presence of residential above. It is the adjacency AND the enablement of mobility between the symbiotic uses that provide a 24-hour life to the neighborhood center.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,366 other followers