Pedestrian interface

Material Information

Pedestrian interface the missing link to urban mobility
Charland-Sass, Catherine
Publication Date:
Physical Description:
100, [2] leaves : illustrations, maps, plans ; 28 cm


Subjects / Keywords:
Pedestrian facilities design ( lcsh )
Pedestrian facilities design ( fast )
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )


Includes bibliographical references (pages 100-102).
General Note:
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Master of Planning and Community Development, College of Design and Planning.
Statement of Responsibility:
submitted by Catherine Charland-Sass.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
13107677 ( OCLC )
LD1190.A78 1985 .C426 ( lcc )

Full Text

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Planning and Community Development University of Colorado at Denver
December, 1985 ARCHITECTURE & PfA

The Thesis of Catherine Charland-Sass is approved
Professor Herb Smith, Ph.D
Assistant Dean, University of Colorado at Denver College of Design and Planning
Professor Daniel Schler, Ph.D Director of Division of Planning and Community Development, Acting Dean, University of Colorado at Denver College of Design and Planning
Professor Bob Horn
Director of Rural Community Assistance Program Center for Community Development and Design University of Colorado at Denver College of Design and Planning
University of Colorado at Denver College of Design and Planning December, 1985

Very special thanks must be accorded to Herb Smith, the author's thesis advisor and committee chair for his advice throughout the research and writing of this thesis. Appreciation is also extended to Dan Schler and Bob Horn for serving as members of this thesis committee and for helping me focus my interests.
I am also grateful to Alfred Wood, Alan Jacobs, Jan Gehl* and Ron Wiedenhoefter.participants of the 6th Annual Pedestrian Conference (Boulder, Colorado), as well as Byron Johnson, Bill Rourke, Ulrich Koch and Catherine Burke, ATRA Conference (Denver, CO), for the spare moments they lent me to discuss my pedestrian concerns.
I consider myself extremely fortunate to have had access to Forrest Cason and Henry Jackson and a woman I consider the best librarian in the business Roslyn Fleischman.
Finally, I must express my appreciation to Dianne Truwe and the Aurora Community Development Staff for helping in every way co-workers could with personal support and the mechanics of producing a thesis.

Writers don't often say anything that readers don't already know, unless it's a news story.
A writers greatest pleasure is revealing to people things they knew but did not know they knew. Or did not realize everybody else knew, too. This produces a warm sense of fellow feeling and is the best a writer can do.
Andrew A. Rooney

Foot travel has undergone a dramatic transformation. Man started out with walking as his only means of transport and scaled his environment accordingly. From the earliest hunting camps to cities like Portland, Oregon of the early 20th century, the comfort and convenience of human mobility took precedence in site planning. Walking is a necessary human activity and one that has been drastically curtailed in the last forty years.
Once the automobile became the primary mode of transport, cities became congested, polluted, socially restricted, and dangerous to the point that people usually find artificial substitutes for aerobic exercise rather than walk in the motorized environment. A total visual reorganization of the streetscape, now designed for the speed of of auto travel, has caused a disruption to scale that makes walking physically and psychologically unpleasant. The isolation caused by the space requirements of the auto has dramatic social implications we are just beginning to realize.
Transportation planning has come to mean planning for the automobile rather than planning for movement or circulation. To compound the problem, the auto and pedestrian are in constant conflict over space and for safety. The young and the elderly are especially vulnerable as pedestrian fatality victims. Many countermeasures have been established by traffic engineers, but they tend to treat pedestrians like non-motorized vehicles. Engineers appear to be frustrated that they cannot 'improve' the pedestrian and that he is erratic when it comes to following rules. New social/behavioral research is underway that will affect the future of transport planning.

The pedestrian mall phenomenon had it's roots in the cores of European cities. Post World War II brought on a process of inner city revival that concentrated on adapting radial routes that converge to the center for automobile usage. As a result of the First Industrial Revolution people moved to urban areas faster than public and private housing could accommodate them. Built up areas were reaching, and then spilling out of, their defensive walls. The walls were torn down and made into ring roads. These measures proved insufficient to handle increased traffic and congestion became impossible. A landmark decision was made to restrict automobiles and create pedestrian precincts.
The rapid European acceptance of traffic-free zoning was based on its ability to achieve reduced traffic congestion, halt environmental deterioration, improve retail conditions, and strengthen the role of the core as a focus for community activities. Streets were closed by simply redirecting existing traffic patterns. Politics played a major role. Conservation of historic districts, limitation of traffic and protection of the urban environment have become national goals. Special ministries have been created to handle legislation and financing of urban improvement programs.
European cities have great control over their territorial development. The decision making process is directly under the city council. Generally, once a master plan is approved it is rigidly enforced. Appropriation of land is an important tool in successfully implementing European development plans. The general economic recession in Europe has compelled planners to focus on utilizing existing resources. The outcome has been programs like restoration of housing stocks and recycling of streets into pedestrian spaces. The

weakened economy has halted costly urban highway projects. In specific situations traffic-free zoning has met with the national economic interests.
Pedestrian accommodation in America has resulted from downtown competition with suburban shopping malls. The mall was not fully rationalized and sold in America as being good for pedestrians. It wasn't until it became evident that Europe's malls produced a marked business growth that suddenly there were plans for them in American cities. There are better reasons to pedestrianize downtown areas:
To aid in the need for human exercise To provide alternative transport
To provide an interface between walking and other transport modes
To "Save Downtown" countering the trend toward suburbia by improving downtown access, parking and environment
To improve pedestrian safety and enhance shopping comfort by separating shoppers from traffic
To control increasing traffic and reduce traffic jams that interfere with shopping
To improve the city's image and identity
To reduce noise (by up to half the previous level)
To reduce air pollution (and aid conformance to the 1970 Clean Air Act)
To increase tourism and leisure opportunities To promote social relations within the town
To promote the conservation of historic buildings, monuments and towns
The theoretical basis of pedestrian precincts rest on either separating or interfacing vehicles with foot travel. Separation was more popular in the

past. Today's realization is that transport technologies are dependent on an interface linkage with foot travel. The grid street pattern and the superblock street pattern are two systems with broad implications for pedestrians. The superblock tends to favor separation by developing a street priority system, concentrating through traffic and keeping loads light on minor streets. Really its major advantage is that by eliminating intersections it minimizes expensive street frontage per unit. The removal of streets in the design doubles the amount of developable land. These are certainly more economic than altruistic reasons to build this design.
The grid is re-emerging from a time in the past when foot travel was important. It creates a fine-grained network where streets are infinitely divisible. It affords the opportunity in the morning or evening for the commuter to use the street system and to have a kind of street level commercial activity.
For pedestrians, the superblock is becoming history. It was an idea of the forties that should no longer be advocated. Isolated pedestrian pathways and vast open spaces met only part of the American need. Long internal open space walkways are desirable in some places but today's need is for safe pedestrian access along the streets and roadways that take up to and form our daily activities. Only when this occurs will we have true public access, and relief from the air, noise, safety, and energy problems that have plagued us.
A fundamental problem in the realization of good pedestrian space has been, and still is, the lack of a coherent land use policy at the regional or State level. The planning for highways and streets has determined our land

use pattern. Land use should be the policy. Transportation should be based on, and a part of, the Land Use Plan. Unfortunately transporation planners have planned for the movement of vehicles not people. Hence the remaining interface problems, the continuance of planning only for peak traffic periods, and the continued dependence on automobiles. It is the lack of pedestrian linkage to other transport modes that compounds our congestion problems.
A secondary, though major problem is the constraints of building codes and requirements in the design and construction of pedestrian areas. New and innovative plans cannot be implemented due to codes and regulations whose public purpose can be extremely gray. To overcome the auto environment that those standards require is going to be extremely difficult for both public transportation and pedestrians facilities. Many good pedestrian plans remain only conceptual, never making it to the implementation stage of the planning process, because they cannot overcome these constraints. The code implications can be easily overcome by good design in most circumstances, but the time consumed in negotiating even one waiver or changing a statute makes the situation most unfavorable for the pedestrian.
An imperative point of this reaseach endeavor was to question whether plans for pedestrianization are lacking or if it is somewhere within the planning process that pedestrians 'fell through the cracks'. My observation has been that good pedestrian spaces, and especially pedestrian interface with transit, is either very unpleasant or non-existent. What I've found is that very good conceptual plans exist. The 'cracks' develop in the implementation stage of the planning process.

The Aurora City Center is a development plan with a pedestrian orientation. Virtually every aspect of pedestrian planning has been taken into consideration. The plan is beautiful on paper, but somehow it is not entirely feasible. Developers feel parking and residential requirements have placed unrealistic economic constraints upon them. The negotiation process of 'development bonuses' doesn't work when there is so much competition. Access needed for a mass transit system a necessity for pedestrian orientation at this scale is not available. There is not enough open space owned by the city. In this situation, the developer hold£ all the cards. They can go elsewhere if the city doesn't bend and they know it. Private property is being asked to develop pedestrian space on a bonus basis. They may, but if its the portion of the plan that doesn't materialize it is the pedestrian that looses. A final problem is the staging of development which requires the continued use of low density transport.
The fight pedestrians have faced with the automobile has been fought by all other modes of transportation. Continued highway expansion and maintenance no longer makes sense. Public space is a resource. We are all competing for this resource. Urban mobility should be the focus, asking how transit can be optimal. Accommodating the pedestrian means finding room for them within the existing framework of our public streets. The public right-of-way's most important purpose is to accommodate the pedestrian yet, the pathway has become the vehicleway. We need to look at the enormous acerage of streets and differentiate the use. The pedestrian has for too long been overlooked, neglected, and considered an unimportant subcategory of the
urban populace.

Pedestrianism touches every part of the urban experience. The character of street life defines the character of the city itself -- its humanity, its tolerance, its sense of proportion and balance. Pedestrian spaces are where people can go "for no good reason". Not necessarily to do some specific thing, but merely to be. To be themselves. To be among others. To be alive and feeling good about it.
Pedestrian spaces created out of the desire to celebrate "place" have been the great civic spaces in Europe and America. They were created because they were worth doing strictly on the basis of human values. They do provide a financial return but, they provide so much more. Cities need to market the urban experience, design pedestrian areas for the people who will be using them and stop competing with suburban shopping malls. If walking becomes more convenient and pleasant more people will walk. Good urban space builds a constituency. What we need is a quality orientation.

Acknowledgments ...........................................
Abstract ..................................................
Table of Contents .........................................
Preface ...................................................
Chapter One "Why Walk?"
Introduction .........................................
History ..............................................
Chapter Two "The Perceived Enemy"
Urban Design .........................................
Social Impact ........................................
Air Quality ..........................................
Safety ...............................................
Countermeasures ......................................
Chapter Three "Where Do They Have Parades? [Trees Are Nice]
The European Experience ..............................
The American Application .............................
The Pedestrian Mall ..................................
Transitways ............................. ............
The Financial Framework ..............................
The Legal Framework ..................................
Design ...............................................
Chapter Four "These Are Just The Preliminary Plans"
Land Use Pattern .....................................
Site Planning ........................................
The Theory of Separation .............................
The Theory of Interface ..............................
The Grid Street System ...............................
The Superblock Street System .........................
Constraints ..........................................
Chapter Five "It's Amazing How Many Conclusions You Can Get From the Same Facts"
Overview .............................................
The Aurora City Center ...............................
Public Spaces and Circulation ........................
Activity Areas .......................................
Circulation ..........................................
The Pedestrian/Transit Network .......................
Open Space System ....................................
Limitations to the City Center Plan ..................
Special Characteristics of the Area ..................
Development Bonuses ..................................
Transit Implications .................................
Chapter Six "Conclusion: Are Good Intentions Enough?" .... 90 References...................................................100

It is with utter amazement that I begin the first chapter of this thesis
with a justification for the human activity of walking. In perusing a
multitude of books and articles on pedestrianization, I found this "new 1
science" is burdened with the orthopedic definition of human movement and Darwinian exclamations of how we differ as humans from 'the beast' because at some evolutionary point man stood erect and took a step. This finding brings two issues to mind; why is pedestrianization considered "new" if we have, in fact, been walking since the episodic split with our fellow primates and; why as human beings that naturally walk do we feel the need to question that very fact. Are we actually considering returning to the three legged crawl?
For the purposes of this paper, I will assume the reader will not question that people do in fact walk. However, a short introduction will question the benefit of the practice in modern times. There are two excellent reasons to walk: health; and mobility in high density/intensity areas. For those who are not positive that humans were ever free of the automobile, the first chapter will include some historic reference portraying pedestrian cities of the past to date the science of pedestrian planning.
Chapter two will concentrate on the inimical power of the automobile, its pillaging force and the historical opponent of the pedestrian. The imperative point being that we are, and will remain, dependent on automobiles to some extent and it is not a matter of banning cars or being "anti-car", but it is a matter of a differentiating use by creating a functional and pedestrian friendly interface with all transit modes.

Chapter three looks abroad, to Europe and her pedestrian malls, as America has in fact done to see what successes can be applied here. Chapter four will discuss specific pedestrian spaces with a look at traditional design theory and its application in American cities.
Chapter Five looks at a current application of comprehensive pedestrianization in the Aurora City Center, now in the implementation phase of the planning process. The concluding chapter sums up the issues of pedestrianization, and examines future directions of pedestrian planning while advancing a priority of components for a successful pedestrian environment.
The major frustration of pedestrian planning today is that we are still talking about concepts and plans from twenty or thirty years ago and are still asking ourselves why our cities have not been transformed. I will therefore attempt a major focus on today's lifestyles and needs, today's urban areas and economies, and today's politics and implementation strategies.

It is with utter amazement that I begin the first chapter of this thesis
with a justification for the human activity of walking. In perusing a
multitude of books and articles on pedestrianization, I found this "new 1
science" is burdened with the orthopedic definition of human movement and Darwinian exclamations of how we differ as humans from 'the beast' because at some evolutionary point man stood erect and took a step. This finding brings two issues to mind; why is pedestrianization considered "new" if we have, in fact, been walking since the episodic split with our fellow primates and; why as human beings that naturally walk do we feel the need to question that very fact. Are we actually considering returning to the three legged crawl?
For the purposes of this paper, I will assume the reader will not question that people do in fact walk. However, a short introduction will question the benefit of the practice in modern times. There are two excellent
reasons to walk: health; and mobility in high density/intensity areas. For those who are not positive that humans were ever free of the automobile, the first chapter will include some historic reference portraying pedestrian cities of the past to date the science of pedestrian planning.
Chapter two will concentrate on the inimical power of the automobile, its pillaging force and the historical opponent of the pedestrian. The imperative point being that we are, and will remain, dependent on automobiles to some extent and it is not a matter of banning cars or being "anti-car", but it is a matter of a differentiating use by creating a functional and pedestrian friendly interface with all transit modes.

Chapter three looks abroad, to Europe and her pedestrian malls, as America has in fact done to see what successes can be applied here. Chapter four will discuss specific pedestrian spaces with a look at traditional design theory and its application in American cities.
Chapter Five looks at a current application of comprehensive pedestrianization in the Aurora City Center, now in the implementation phase of the planning process.
The concluding chapter sums up the issues of pedestrianization, and examines future directions of pedestrian planning while advancing a priority of components for a successful pedestrian environment.
The major frustration of pedestrian planning today is that we are still talking about concepts and plans from twenty or thirty years ago and are still asking ourselves why our cities have not been transformed. I will therefore attempt a major focus on today's lifestyles and needs, today's urban areas and economies, and today's politics and implementation strategies.

1 The term "new science" was tossed around extensively at the 6th Annual Pedestrian Conference (Boulder, Colorado), and pedestrianization coined as such by the mayor of the town. Also the literature considers Americas attempts very new.

The most current impetus for walking is today's "movement of wellness" that
has captured the nations attention. The nation has nurtured a polluted and
sedentary lifestyle that can easily be linked to the death of one million
(1500 daily) Americans per year from heart disease. Our diets are too heavy in fats and cholesterol. Our lives are full of stress and we are a nation of insomniacs. We smoke and drink too much, and our blood pressure rises. In response, the wealthy have made the gym or health spa business boom. Bicycle and running marathons have become televised sport. But, by far the most economic and safe prescription is walking.
With the major advantage that walking is free, many Americans have taken to their feet to combine mobility with daily exercise. Because walking takes no preparation, everyone can do it whether overweight, out of shape, or previously a lounge lizard.
What walking does for the body is cause a person to loose 75 to 100 calories
per mile at a leisurely pace with minimum loss of body fluid (unlike running
which uses six times the amount of fluid), so naturally a walker will loose
weight. Additionally, fat levels decrease and cardio vascular system
endurance increases. Muscles tone and become firm as effectively as with
other exercises but, without the injuries of these other sports. Walking, in 3
itself is SAFE.
An individual needs to walk three to six days per week for 30-45 minutes per

day at 50-75% of their maximum heart rate to get the above benefits. Walking doesn't have to take time, it can create time time to problem solve, to relax, to be reflective or creative, time normally spent hunched over a desk. It becomes a challenge and duty of city planners to extend this human activity into the urban environment as a necessary daily function.
Of equal importance is walking as a means of transportation. Because of its infinite diversity (shopping, government centers, office buildings, entertainment, historic sites, restaurants) walking is the only means of transportation that can satisfy the many short, dispersed trip linkages required within the central business district. Automobile transportation becomes frustrating in these high density areas. Walking is the only form of transport that makes sense.
Our entire communities should be accessible on foot. Walking is a natural resource that remains independent of technological change. Each trip by bus, car, plane or train begins or ends on foot making an equal challenge and duty for the city planner to keep walking safe in the interface with the urban environment. The walkway system should be an integral part of the urban transportation system and an extension of the surrounding environment. Good pedestrian planning requires a scheme that considers security or visibility, convenience, slopes, and engineering for longevity, maintenance and environmental conditions.
Regardless of why we walk, why walking is important, and whether walking is a God given right, we know that walking distances shaped the first

rudimentary cities determining their location, shape and size. Even in the hunting camps a protective enclave was required that could be reached quickly on foot at any sign of danger. Darwin postulated that mans dominance of his environment began only after he gained the ability to walk erect, freeing his hands for the use of weapons and tools. Walking is one of mans most magnificent abilities.
History presents myriad examples of pedestrian accommodation. When the
first truly organized cities were founded 5,000 years ago, around religion-
oriented monarchies, careful attention was given to serve pedestrian man
and to inspire him with social and religious cohesiveness. Human lines of
sight and visual capabilities determined appropriate arrangement of
buildings and monuments (the Acropolis for example). The ancient Romans and
Hebrews recognized the disruption to scale caused by vehicular
intrusion. Julius Ceasar decreed that heavy wagons were forbidden within
the central city after dusk. The Forum in Pompeii was an extensive
pedestrian precinct. Large slab like stone barriers were placed at all
entrance points to prevent vehicular intrusion. The Talmud decreed that
areas should be set aside along main thoroughfares for pedestrians to
unload their burdens and rest. Metal spikes or stone bollards clearly
separated the area from vehicular intrusion. In later times we see that the
cobblestone streets of old Milan were paved in such a way that carriage
wheels were guided away from the walkway, thus preventing vehicles from
swerving and hitting pedestrians.
Medieval city planners recognized the need for human communication and interaction by providing a central plaza. The plaza served as the marketplace, a place for public pronouncements, religious and festive

occasions, and recreation.
In the past, human comfort and convenience as pedestrians was attended by
providing protective gallerias, canopies, colonnades and porticos. The old
city of Bologna has a twenty-mile network of sidewalks covered by porticos
which provide a cool, dry, pedestrian way in the summer and one that is
free from snow in winter. It is much like current day Calgary. The
covered, elevated sidewalk featured in some recent pedestrian proposals,
made an occasional appearance in medieval architecture. Even Leonardo da
Vinci planned a city with a double network of streets, one elevated for
pedestrians the other at ground level to serve vehicles. He was possibly
the first advocate of the theory of separation.
Colonial America, with its compactness of cities and towns and a
concentration of life in the city center around a village green or town
square lent itself to interesting pedestrian places. Walking was the
dominant means of transportation. Towns like Nantucket, Maine, exemplify
the colonial town where a century ago 10,000 residents were tightly
clustered in a square mile focused on the main street and harbor. All
streets converged on cobble-stoned Main Street with its churches, shops, and
meeting places. The whaling town carefully blended accessibility, activity, 9
and amenity.
The advent of machine transportation has forced man into an unbalanced competition for urban space. The railroad made the first great incursions into the city, paving them with ribbons of steel. But the railroad is confined to its tracks, which can be hidden underground if necessary.

America experienced the electric railway city which concentrated activity in the city center while housing was developed outward along the trolley lines. Downtowns remained centers of culture, entertainment, shopping and work. The journey to work was now made by trolley although many trips were still made on foot.
It was the automobile city that dwarfed the city center. We became a "drive-in" culture with drive-in banks, restaurants, supermarkets and theatres. The ubiquity of the automobile has introduced much broader demands for space, pervading every part of the urban structure, confronting man at every turn, causing a vast dichotomy in the goals of city planning and design. It is hard for those raised in todays cities to believe that it was so recent in history, 1920's, that cities began thinking about accommodating the automobile.
North American urban history is one of steady desertion of inner-city areas for the suburbs, and after World War II this exodus picked up as the number of cars and highways increased. The car took people away from high taxes, crime, pollution, racial unrest and income disparities. In the suburbs, land was cheap, population density lower, and life styles more homogeneous.
City cores, once centers of trade and communication, suffered a great loss
in vitality. Streets and squares became congested with commuter vehicles
during working hours. At night these same areas were deserted and
intimidating. Pollution, accidents and crime increased as a consequence.
Cities were losing not only high and middle-income residents, but jobs,
customers and tax revenues as well.

In 1970 Paul Zimmerer, head of Chicago's Economic Development committee, testified before a U.S. House of Representatives Committee that; "In Chicago's inner city alone, between 1955 and 1963 there was a net loss of some 400 manufacturing companies and some 70,000 manufacturing jobs". Construction of suburban shopping centers further reduced the importance of the city core by eliminating the need to go downtown to shop. Many of the problems that caused people to leave the cities followed them, but the richness of urban life failed to take root in the suburbs.
The U.S. government responded to the problem of urban decline with the 1954 Federal Housing Act and its Urban Renewal Program. However, due to a limited understanding of the social and environmental implications of "renewal", this program fell short of its goals. Administrative agencies would condemn and redevelop designated areas according to master plan objectives funded entirely or in part by the Federal government. In too many cities highly integrated and vital neighborhoods were torn down and replaced primarily by civic and corporate structures. While giving impetus to some malls during the 1960's, the urban renewal is now only an historical footnote, relevant to past development but not to the future of pedestrian malls.
The 1956 Interstate Highway program, provided for a 42,500 mile, $60 billion road network that well may be the largest public works program in human history. It was advocated primarily as a National defense measure; the highways would permit quick movement in case of atomic war, but construction of urban expressways caused the further fragmentation of existing communities. And because these highways made it easier to leave the city, even more residents were lost.

In more recent history, America has experienced a remarkable reversal in
its view of pedestrian importance. A new sense of spatial freedom and
participation is emerging and accepted notions of planning, economic and
social priorities are being challenged. This new attitude was partially
influenced by the writings of Lewis Mumford, Jane Jacobs, Bernard Rudofsky
and William H. Whyte, as well as by the farsighted planning strategies of
Victor Gruen. These professionals advocated a different approach to
renewal, emphasizing the potential of street life in cities and they pointed
to the European experience as a model for urban America. This, combined
with the widespread dissatisfaction of downtown businessmen and urban
advocacy groups, led to a rearrangement of urban priorities. The result was
that people began to look at cities in a new light. Deteriorating
neighborhoods were revived, not by the Federal bulldozer, but by people who
want to live there.
Architects and city planners began to shift their perspective. Those that
only a few years earlier were rationalizing technological solutions to an
impersonal and decentralized society realized that people, not buildings,
were the real heart of the city. Priority was given to the solution of
existing problems as a rational method of preparing for those of the future.
Building restoration and conversion, neighborhood rehabilitation, public
transportation and revitalization of public open spaces became key issues.
Planning policies became tailored to suit human needs.
By 1960, a number of American cities had begun to experiment with traffic-free zones. With the elimination of cars from parts of the central shopping area, urban dwellers sought to rebuild the image of "Main Street" as the center of trade, society and politics. Municipalities have rezoned and

redecorated streets, making a strong case for traffic-free environments. Restricting cars has not irrevocably confused traffic patterns as predicted. Retail trade has almost uniformly increased. Environmental conditions, including visual, noise and air pollution, have improved, with the banning of automobiles in the downtown areas. Pedestrian zoning has helped people realize that it is the city, long criticized as the ultimate technical monster, that may prove a more humane way of life. Automobiles made the suburbs possible. Now, banning them downtown may help cities survive.

2 Robert Sweetgall is a noted authority on walking that has walked the circumference of the United States twice.
3 Ibid.
4 John J. Fruin, Pedestrian Planning and Design, (Library of Congress Catalog No. 70-159312, 1971)
5 Hebraic Book of Laws
6 Fruin, 1971
7 Ibid.
8 John Napier, "The Antiquity of Human Walking", Scientific American, April, 1967
9 Herbert Levinson, "Improving the Walking Environment", (Proceedings: Fifth Annual Pedestrian Conference, Boulder, CO, 1984)
10 Charles Glaab and A. Theadore Brown, The History of Urban America,
(New York: Macmillian Publishing Co., 1967)
11 Roberto Brambilla and Gianni Longo, For Pedestrians Only, (New York: Whitney Library of Design, 1977)

The motor vehicle has long been the natural enemy of the pedestrian. Despite the advantage of personal mobility, the automobile is responsible for many negative elements. The loss of human life and the suffering caused by autopedestrian accidents is a serious National problem that affects our lifestyles in more ways than we realize. Economic cost in salary loss and
medical expense alone exceed one billion dollars annually, yet in our
preoccupation with air, rail, and highway travel we seem to pay little attention to the hazards confronting the pedestrian. The automobile is a source of frustration and humiliation to the pedestrian who is not only
forced to wait in the rain and snow while the autoist in his climatized
capsule environment enjoys traffic priority, but who may even be honked at or splashed if he does not react quickly enough.
Major changes, though subtle over time, have occurred in urban design, our social interactions, our air quality and our safety. Transportation planning, unfortunately, has been the dominant force in the shaping of our land use policy and therefore of our pedestrian environment. In less than forty years we have witnessed the total conversion of our built environment to accommodate the automobile. Still, to imply that "pedestrian" is virtue and that "automobile" is vice would be a statement in simplicity. Rather, the quality of space and the safety for human activity are the two factors raising issues on "pedestrianism", therefore elements that threaten those factors should be minimized.

The entire scale of the streetscape has changed visually due to the difference in the speed factor for which planners have designed. We now live in environments designed primarily to serve the speed requirements of those who drive. The shift has been subtle over the last forty years from a design scale based on the speed of foot travel to a new design scale based on the speed of travel by car. Thirty miles per hour has replaced three miles per hour as the new speed architects and engineers use to evaluate how their buildings will be seen. New buildings are wide fronted, smooth and shallow, so passing motorists can see and identify each one. The objective is to simplify buildings and the environment. Too often this is achieved by removal of decoration and windows and the addition of larger and less complex signs for road visibility. Consequently window displays and trees disappeared. Previously, buildings were narrow fronted, deep and intricate so pedestrians could walk past many without becoming bored. Our restructured streets, simplified in favor of the car's speed of travel, has proved a disservice to those traveling at foot speed.
40 MPH Auto Design Speed

The justification for simplifying auto-oriented environments and making pedestrian spaces more complex is that the human eye visually encompasses about three objects every second. Fewer than three per second can induce boredom, while more are likely to create confusion. A driver traveling at twenty-five miles per hour passes a thirty-foot-wide shop in slightly less than one second, distinguishing two or three objects. On the other hand, a pedestrian traveling at three miles per hour can distinguish and comprehend twenty-one different objects in the same thirty feet. Thus motorists benefit from decreased complexity of visual messages, while the pedestrians benefit from increased message complexity.
Planning for non-motorized circulation must employ a different approach than planning for cars. Traffic planners using strategies developed for the automobile or motor vehicles are bound to fail. Conditions for weather, protection, and safety vary. People on foot require a fine-grained network. Movement patterns vary. Pedestrians are more maneuverable but less mobile than motorist in their vehicles. Motorists generally use their cars to move from one place to another, while pedestrians usually travel for the experience as much as the destination. Since the car has become a temporary 'environment' roads generally serve only to link different points. The road environment through which the car passes is not as important as the speed, efficiency, and continuity of the trip. Consequently, our roadways are just part of a dull but efficient movement system, connected to destination points with many parking places.
Pedestrians, on the other hand, cannot move easily over long distances and are therefore directly involved with the environment surrounding them. Visual stimulus is important to measure the progress being made. They have

no climate control or personalized entertainment and rather than being channeled into efficiency lanes need to meander, rest, warm up in the sun, shop, visit, or seek protection from the rain. Walking environments must be more varried than the road. For drivers, the road is a medium. For pedestrians the route is an experience. If there is little break in repetitive patterns, the walk seems longer and progress slow.
Automobiles and pedestrians are incompatible uses yet dependent on each other. In this dependence we allow the automobile to impose its scale upon urban design requiring vast amounts of space allocation for automobile movement and storage. This isolates the pedestrian in a limited, ever-narrowing sidewalk environment, reducing opportunities for human social interaction and visual enjoyment. It has produced a visual clutter of traffic signals and signs. The potential pedestrian capacity of sidewalks is reduced by the intrusion of these signs and various other sidewalk impediments: refuse cans, fire hydrants, fire alarm boxes, parking meters, traffic signals and poles, newsstands, telephone booths, kiosks, mail boxes, planters, sewer and ventilation gratings, and mini banks/bank-teller machines. In the central business district these problems are magnified due to their intensive concentration.
Intense vehicular utilization of city streets is causing significant socioeconomic impacts on urban life which are only now beginning to be realized. A sociological study of nearby residential streets in the same neighborhood in San Francisco subjected to light and heavy traffic, gives a partial insight into this problem. The streets were physically alike in almost all respects except that the sidewalk on the heavy-traffic street had been

narrowed to facilitate vehicular movement. In addition, sound-meter samples on the heavy-traffic showed that sound levels were above 65 decibels at the sidewalk forty-five percent of the time, as contrasted to five percent for the light-traffic street. Despite the physical similarities of the streets drastic differences in social attitudes and neighborhood identity were noted between the two streets.
The light-traffic street was predominantly a family street, with
individually owned homes and an average length of residence of sixteen
years. The heavy-traffic street was comprised of nearly all renters, with
few children and an average length of residence of eight years. Social
interaction and neighborhood identity and interest differed widely on the
two streets. Residents on the light-traffic street were found to have three
times as many local friends as those on the heavy-traffic street. Residents
on the light-traffic street were found to have a greater sense of
neighborhood and territorial identity, striving more to maintain and improve
their homes. Residents on the street with heavy traffic stressed their
concern for safety and the continual invasions of privacy caused by the
passing automobiles. They also indicated greater concern over noise, dust,
fumes and vibration. Elderly residents of this street exhibited more
emotional stress than those of the light-traffic street.
There are two factors which influence urban air quality; street level pollution, and upper level pollution. Upper level pollution, which is less concentrated but distributed throughout the city, comes from vehicles as well as stationary sources, and is rapidly dispersed in most cities. Street level pollution, on the other hand, is highly concentrated, but

local, and is not so easily dispelled. Therefore the most effective way to
clean the air is to limit auto traffic. The case for pedestrian malls in big
cities is pressing. If the 1977 standards for air quality set by the
Environmental Protection Agency are enforced, it is hard to see how cities
can avoid severely curtailing vehicular access, as cars alone are the
single major producer of contaminants. Sixty percent of our air pollution
is attributed to automobile emissions.
As the automobile threatens the very quality and viability of urban life,
there is always an acute conflict between people and cars in cities, and
always a greater possibility of accidents. While the auto/pedestrian
conflict is an urban problem, accident studies show that despite the heavy
concentrations of pedestrians in the Central Business Districts, they
account for a small percent of city pedestrian casualties. This is probably
due to lower allowable speeds in the Central Business District and greater
driver awareness of heavier pedestrian traffic and a greater pedestrian
awareness of traffic. Still, each year nearly eighty-five percent of all
pedestrian accidents and sixty-six percent of all pedestrian deaths occur on
urban streets. In some large urban areas, up to half of those killed in
traffic mishaps are pedestrians.
The majority of adult pedestrian fatality victims are persons who have not been licensed to drive. The pedestrian who has never driven faces special hazards from being unfamiliar with the limitations of the vehicle or driver. The unlicensed are not aware of the drivers limited vision, particularly at night, nor are they capable of estimating a car's minimum stopping distances at various speeds.

Accidents span all ages but the young and the elderly suffer the most
casualties. The child pedestrian is an especially vulnerable accident
victim because of gaps in language, perception, and visual and auditory
comprehension. Many aspects of human perception such as peripheral vision,
depth perception, judgment of speed and direction, and sound recognition,
are attained through experience, which the child pedestrian has not yet
acquired. This lack of experience causes not only perceptual difficulties
but uncertain reactions under the stress of frightening or unusual
confrontations with moving traffic. In addition, children do not comprehend
road signs, or if they do, they do not fully understand their
responsibilities to obey these signs.
The stratification of accident statistics by age also shows a
disproportionate involvement risk for the young, and a higher severity risk
for the elderly In the United States, more than one-half of the
pedestrians injured came from the one-third of the population that is under
fourteen. One-fourth of the fatalities occur in the less than ten percent
of the population over age sixty-five.
While we think immediately of persons with disabilities as being handicapped pedestrians, there are others who are handicapped as pedestrians --persons with limitations related to arm movement, hearing, and vision, and persons who are confused or disoriented due to emotional illness or drunkenness. We need to include children, who are small in stature and immature in their reaction to impediments. Height can also cause problems for adults who are extremely short or tall or who travel in wheelchairs. Senior citizens are handicapped as pedestrians to the extent that their age reduces their stamina and balance and sometimes impairs their reactions. At times,

persons not otherwise handicapped will need facilities for access. They
include persons wheeling a stroller, pushing a cart, wearing a cast, or
carrying large packages. Priority Accessible Networks (P.A.N.) for the
elderly and handicapped were conceived by the Pedestrian Research Laboratory
at Georgia Institute of Technology for a study of provisions made for
elderly and handicapped pedestrians under the auspices of the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA). The P.A.N program met with success and
represents a viable alternative to current traffic systems.
Weather and darkness significantly affect pedestrian accident rates. Pedestrian casualties have been found to triple with darkness, with a similar threefold increase on rainy versus clear days. The combination of rainfall and darkness increases the pedestrian risk by a factor of more than nine.
Not surprisingly, in categories other than the very young or the aged,
alcohol is a primary culprit. Studies indicate that positive blood alcohol
concentrations were found in half of the fatality and non-fatality injuries
of adult pedestrians. Alcohol dulls a pedestrians sense of judgment and gives a false feeling of confidence that is conductive to greater risk taking.
The fact that pedestrian fatalities account for a large percent of all
highway deaths has made traffic engineers label this phenomenon the
"pedestrian problem". Unfortunately, the pedestrian as an individual and not as a moving "vehicle" has only recently been recognized by urban designers who used to think of pedestrian movement strictly in terms of safety the need to insure people were not run over by cars.

Paul M. Isakoff, a Director of Safety for the school district of an Eastern U.S. city spoke at the fourth annual pedestrian conference in Boulder, Colorado, 1984, shedding some light on the perspective of traffic engineering. He began by admitting "we are all pedestrians" and have not gotten the [necessary] attention for protection. He even admitted that "we [engineers] have not done enough to protect pedestrians at night". His following remarks depart from this understanding indicating a quite different view of the problem.
He begins a reversal of responsibility for safety by stating "pedestrians themselves contribute to hazardous situations" explaining that the population is growing and larger concentrations of pedestrians multiplies their contribution to traffic hazards. So, pedestrians are responsible for accidents by being there.
Secondly, "no matter how many more cars and how fast the traffic [or 'efficient'] pedestrians can't move any faster. This results in a timing problem for the traffic engineer". So, engineers are frustrated by pedestrians because they cannot improve us. They can educate and enforce pedestrian regulations though because "pedestrians feel that they have little or no obligation to be orderly and predictable". Imagine that.
Furthermore, young pedestrians are "careless", not helpless and senior citizens "inattentive or overconfident" rather than disabled. Most importantly "the elderly get into trouble by not being able to react quickly enough and not compensating for their inability".
Finally, a most important factor "that is not generally well known outside

of safety circles" is that the overwhelming majority of adult pedestrians being killed by cars are those who have a lifestyle that evades them. They've never been licensed to drive. Such sweet revenge.
While I apologize for any implication that the speaker is not interested in
pedestrian safety I couldn't resist this source of a perspective that I
believe retards the pedestrianization of today's cities. These earlier
perspectives, the engineering, the safety education views, are still
important today not because they are conceptually superior, but because they
have become firmly embedded in the conservative ideology of contemporary
city planning, urban design, and metropolitan administration. COUNTERMEASURES
Until very recently, pedestrian accidents were only statistically tallied.
A NHSSA Study took a behavioral approach instead and found that there are,
in fact, a limited number of accident situations which keep repeating 22
themselves. They found seven major accident types: (l)Dartout;
(2)Intersection Dash; (3)Vehicle Turn/Merge; (4)Multiple Threat; (5)Bus Stop Related; (6)Vendor-Ice Cream Truck; (7)Backing Up. With this new insight, they proceeded to treat accident types with countermeasures to break the chain of errors leading to pedestrian accidents. Solutions hoped to be gained by their countermeasure program including:
- Eliminate the human error (e.g., by teaching a child how to search before crossing)
- Add a new behavioral requirement on the part of someone else so that they compensate for errors of the other party (e.g.,child still darts out when going to or from ice cream truck, but now all drivers are required to stop before passing an ice cream truck while its vending)


- Change the physical situation so that erroneous behavior is no longer seen as being useful (e.g., the bus stop accident type). By changing the location of the bus stop from the near side to the far side of the intersection, we reduce the pedestrian need to cross in front of the bus where he is screened from overtaking drivers.
The following engineering countermeasures are also possible, if not common. Barriers can be chains, fences or similar devices which separate pedestrians and vehicular traffic, channel pedestrians to safe crossings, or prevent crossings. They can be placed in the median area along the edge of a sidewalk or roadside to reduce mid-block crossings, running in the roadway and darting into traffic between patked cars.
Crosswalks are located at intersections or in mid-block and may be marked or unmarked. Marked crosswalks control the location of pedestrians much more effectively but may give a false sense of security. Marked crosswalks are a useful tool but pedestrians must recognize what the markings can and cannot accomplish.
Pedestrian Overpasses and Underpasses totally separate pedestrians and vehicles to eliminate conflicts and accidents for those pedestrians using them. Because of their expense they are usually considered only after considering all other countermeasures to correct problems. Also, the separations must be properly designed so pedestrians will be encouraged to use them rather than continue to take their chances on a surface crossing.
Improved Crosswalk Lighting can reduce nighttime pedestrian accidents by almost half if it is properly designed to ensure the pedestrian is illuminated as well as the crosswalk.

Safety Islands provide a refuge area between opposing lanes of traffic or within an intersection. There may be an island installed to channel vehicle traffic, but used by pedestrians. These islands are beneficial to pedestrians who are not able to completely cross an intersection due to the rate of timing of the signals, or at wide or busy roads and at confusing intersections.
Sidewalks can reduce accidents to pedestrians who might otherwise be walking, standing, or playing in the roadway, particularly in areas of high pedestrian and/or high vehicle traffic. Since they do not completely separate pedestrians and vehicles, they also can sometimes give pedestrians a false sense of security.
Traffic Signals can provide safer crossing areas for pedestrians by stopping vehicles in potential conflict with pedestrians. Pedestrians still need to be aware of potential conflicts even when crossing with the signal.
Traffic Signs and pavement markings may be used to alert pedestrians and motorists or unexpected hazards such as school crossings or other heavy pedestrian areas.
These techniques provide a very broad overview of engineering countermeasures to improve pedestrian safety. In addition, educational programs for various age groups as well as enforcement programs can be included in a comprehensive and coordinated program. This is what we might call state-of-the-art in pedestrian design.
A Seattle study by Vallette and McDivitt, found that there are not too many

physical devices engineers can employ to counter these conflicts and that
most often collisions were not the result of poor, missing, or
malfunctioning physical devices. It appears drivers and pedestrians seem to
operate in two different worlds. Statistics reveal that no matter how hard
one tries to safely mix the two there are always those behaviors associated
with the two worlds that conflict and cause collisions. Drivers generally
do not understand when or where they must stop and yield to a pedestrian.
If they do want to stop they are fearful of being rear-ended. Often a
pedestrian will wave the driver on anyway. Sometimes, one vehicle will stop
and a passing driver (traveling in the same direction) will not because of
blocked visibility or a combination of factors. Drivers seem to believe
children will react as mini adults in traffic. Where as children think that
drivers, being adults, will be kind to them and that they can stop their
vehicles instantly.
The FHWA study "Pedestrian Risk Exposure Measures", 1984, was the first effort in America to develop a national profile of pedestrian activity and a listing of the most hazardous situations for pedestrians. They pursued three goals:
To identify pedestrian trip characteristics and behavior:
What are pedestrians doing?, Where and when are they walking?, How are they doing it?
To determine the characteristics of pedestrian exposure. The number of pedestrians crossing the street times the number of vehicles as the measure of exposure.
To determine the relative risk of pedestrian behaviors, activities, and various situational factors. For example, are children and the elderly really at more risk as pedestrians when the amount of their walking is taken into account? Indeed they are.

Some of the things learned about pedestrian behavior were:
- except for the 1-4 years and 60 years and over age groups, more pedestrians are males.
- Males are a greater portion of the pedestrian population than would be expected based on the composition of the general population.
- Forty percent of the pedestrian street crossings occur in commercial and industrial areas, 20 percent occur in totally residential areas, and 30 percent occur in mixed residential areas. Pedestrians who do not cross, i.e., walk parallel to the roadway, were found to be more evenly distributed among the three land use categories.
- Pedestrian activity was found to be fairly constant between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. There was a slight noon-time peak and a somewhat longer afternoon peak, but both were less than was expected.
- Crossing location, that is at an intersection or mid-block, is relatively constant for weekdays, Saturdays, and Sundays.
- Mid-block crossing occurs more frequently in residential than in commercial areas.
- Intersection and mid-block crossings both take about 10 seconds. However, males 10-14 years old take about three times as long when crossing midblock.
- Male pedestrians cross against the signal more often than females.
- Signal compliance is higher in commercial areas than in residential areas.
- About eleven percent of the pedestrians run across the roadway. Running occurs about equally in residential and commercial areas.
The relatively risky pedestrian characteristics include pedestrians ages 1-9 years or over 60 years, running pedestrians, crossing within fifty feet of the intersection or at mid-block, the time frame of 8-11 p.m., and crossing against the signal. Among the riskier accident types were mid-block dart-out, bus stop related, vehicle turn-merge, vendor, right-turn-on-red, disabled vehicle, intersection dash, and playing and walking along the roadway.
Surely an environment that provides safety for pedestrians does not just

happen. It is provided by understanding behavior, education, and design and
constant attention and effort. I question the methodology of continually
restricting pedestrians from the areas that statistically show them most
frequently violating traffic laws. If the Mid-block "dart and dash"
accounts for 40% of accidents with 71% involving children under 9 years, the
logical conclusion in my mind is that they need to be there and
street planning or traffic engineering should accommodate this crossing.
For instance, in San Francisco as part of comprehensive reconstruction on
Market Street, to prevent jaywalking, it was proposed to relocate the
crosswalk to the natural alignment of the pedestrian flow, stagger the
loading islands, and incorporate walls to discourage use of the islands as 25
stepping stones.
Reduction of the pedestrian accident toll is a National problem which is being treated at the local level with varying degrees of concern. Some standardization of pedestrian signs and signals has been recommended in the Manual of Uniform Trafic Control Devices. The confusion created by the lack of a uniform national system of traffic laws and traffic control devices, recognized by motorist and pedestrians alike, is causing unnecessary pedestrian casualties.
Government's role in behalf of the pedestrian has been erratic at its worst and uncertain at its best. The pedestrian, right or wrong, essentially travels at his own risk. Home and shop owners may worry about their liability for slipping on sidewalks, but deliberately building pedestrian safety into street and sidewalk designs has, unfortunately, been a seldom practiced art. Today that is changing. Urban redevelopment projects are rediscovering the importance of the pedestrian in the economy of the center

city, and safe access to downtown shopping malls concerns pedestrians more 26
than motorists.
Restrictions on the traffic actions of pedestrians are often opposed or inadequate regulations are adopted then not enforced. The argument for pedestrian regulation is that there are too many cars going too fast in the 1980's to do otherwise. Maybe the time has come to concentrate on the later part of the argument there are too many cars going too fast. Civil liberties are being violated to continue accomodating the automobile. It really is an unnatural case of survival of a species, this time the species being a technological monster.
Reinhold Mahler, a professor of architecture from Munich, Germany, commented while traveling through the United States "I understood that there are important differences between European and U.S. cities. Mass
transportation systems are by far not as developed and what is more important they are not as well accepted as in Europe. Quite often an
American mall depends on sufficient parking space close by. Urban renewal plans have to establish new freeway alignments, recommended circulation and parking programs. If city resources don't correlate to these plans, results are rather disappointing, often they mean deterioration for parts of the city close to the mall. Certain European cities did the contrary, they tried to restrain private traffic by introducing planned congestion, to make car travel so slow that the driver finally gives up and leaves his car home .
Ultimately, the responsibility for pedestrian safety lies with the local jurisdiction. State-level interest and support can help, but for the most

part only the locality can enact, implement, and enforce laws and
regulations regarding pedestrian traffic. Each community must decide on its
own approach to pedestrian safety, but whatever program is embraced it
should contain coordination through an inventory of current safety
activities, the cooperation of various agencies and departments of local
government together with the private sector, and continuity from the
continued support of elected and appointed officials.

13 Donald Appleyard, "Environmental Quality of City Streets", Center of Planning and Development Research, University of California at Berkeley (Working Paper No. 142, Dec. 1970, pp.44)
14 Richard K. Unterman, Accommodating the Pedestrian, (New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1984)
15 Alfred J. Farina, "A New Approach to Pedestrian Safety", National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, (Proceeding: 4th Annual
Pedestrian Conference, Boulder, CO, 1983)
16 S. Sandels, "The Child Pedestrian", School Safety, Mar-Apr, 1970
17 American Automobile Association, Washington D.C., 1964
18 Peggy L. Drake, "Pedestrian Access Networks: An Approach to Planning and Providing Access Improvements for Pedestrians Who Are Elderly and Handicapped", (Proceedings: 4th Annual Pedestrian Conference, Boulder, CO, 1983)
19 Fatal Accident Reporting System (1980)
20 Shirly Ybarra, Special Assistant to the Secretary for Policy, US Dept, of Transportation, (Speaker at 4th Annual Pedestrian Conference, Boulder, CO, 1983)
21 Michael R. Hill, "Social/Behavioral Science Contributions to Our
Understanding of the Pedestrian Experience: A Brief Review",
(Proceedings: 5th Annual Pedestrian Conference, Boulder, CO, 1984)
22 Snyder & Knoblauch, 1971 Study results discussed by Richard Blomberg in NHTSA research under contract no. DOT-HS-00952
23 Vallette and McDivitt, Seattle
24 John Hendrickson, "Pedestrian Safety: A Two-Way Street", (Proceedings: 4th Annual Pedestrian Conference, Boulder, CO, 1983
25 Eva Liebermann, "Pedestrian Safety Program For San Francisco's Downtown
Area", Pedestrian Safety Coordinator, City of San Francisco, (Proceedings: 4th Annual Pedestrian Conference, Boulder, CO, 1983)
26 Ybarra, 1985
27 Ibid.

There are many good reasons to study European trends in pedestrianization. Most central European countries are more advanced than America in converting their towns and cities for pedestrian use. We can obviously learn from their experiments and the precedents they have set. Over 500 German cities and towns have converted portions of their downtowns to foot traffic. Almost all of these cities have experienced a sharp rise in the number of visitors and a substantial rise in sales reported by merchants. Almost every major city in Europe has a pedestrian precinct. However, European use of land, public transportation and town planning goals are quite different than American approaches. European towns are older, more compact, with higher densities, mixed land-uses and extensive public transportation. American cities, on the contrary, have separate land uses and lower density, with spread-out land use patterns planned to be serviced by the automobile.
Even if direct duplication of European pedestrian spaces would not be
possible, or if the lessons cannot be applied directly in America, one
should know what European communities are doing, how they are living and
what they have experimented with. For instance, it's important to know that
the automobile is restricted in speed to under 20 miles per hour in many
places, and that European drivers have agreed to it. Likewise, it's
important to know that in many neighborhoods using the Woonerf, speeds are
restricted to 8 miles per hour, and the maximum speed for emergency
vehicles is 15 miles per hour. European drivers have agreed to, and people
have put up with closing of main streets and total conversion of automobile use to pedestrian use. Merchants have survived and the quality of the

Recommended Signing for Designation of Woonerf Type Residential Designated Area
1. no continuous kerb
2. private access
3. bench around low lighting column
4. use of varied paving materials
5. private footway
6. bend in the roadway
7. empty parking lot place to sit or play in
8. bench/play object
9. on request plot with plants in front of facade
10. no continuous roadway marking on the pavement
11. tree
12. clearly marked parking lots
13. bottleneck
14. plant tub
15. space for playing from facade to facade
16. parking prevented by obstacles
17. fence for parking bicycles etc.

environment has improved. Knowing that other people have changed their circulation patterns, have had successes, and that residents put up with inconveniences indicates that most of our objections to 'banning the automobile' are the result of our buying into a cultural milieu rather than an absolute truth.
In European cities pedestrian streets became popular in the late 1940's. Following the destruction by World War II, city administrators and planners had the chance to carry out extensive renovation of inner city areas as part of reconstruction programs. Some highly revolutionary traffic-free experiments were being conducted, for instance Rotterdam's Lijnbaan and Stockholm's Torg adopted policies which not only separated types of traffic, but urban functions as well. Unfortunately, most planners opted for accommodation of increased traffic in the City Center and new construction so many streets were widened and entire blocks demolished. Many defensive walls became ring roads. As a result, the character of many historic city cores was lost.
Within a short time, it became apparent that even the most drastic measures taken by planners to modernize core areas were not sufficient to contend with the sheer volume of cars which appeared during the post-war boom. The radial pattern of European cities exaggerated the difficult conditions, until congestion simply became intolerable. Deliveries were delayed, efficiency was impaired, environmental conditions declined and the safety of pedestrians was threatened.
By the late 1950's these conditions reached alarming proportions. It was clear that private cars had to be restricted in historic cores, if these

areas were to survive. Traffic restriction became a widely adopted policy; the trend gained momentum and by 1975, nearly every major city had banned cars from significant portions of its historic district and retail areas. In most cases, no specific legislation was necessary to implement urban improvements and costs could be allocated directly from municipal budgets.
The goals of traffic management, historic preservation and economic
revitalization, were conceived as a total system, providing the necessary
interface between transportation modes. Europe experienced the invasion of
the automobile later than America and experienced the same upheaval of
it's cities, but was quick to turn around the situation by restricting the
automobile, and it is the success of her pedestrian spaces that teach us.
Europe adapted a new hierarchy considering the needs of pedestrians first,
bicyclists second, public transit third, and the automobile only fourth.
European cities have an advantage not only in the fact that the pedestrian
is prioritized but also in their historical precedence for walking. The
major difference between the American and European situations is that
European governments support the pedestrian from the central to local levels
of the bureaucracy. Specially created ministrys have been created to handle
legislation and financing of urban improvement programs. In America, city
governments have to do it on their own.
A number of factors emerge from a close look at European public open spaces:
1. Their central location in the city and proximity to residential neighborhoods, providing a distinct focus for both residents and visitors;
2. Their accessibility to public transportation and lack of large parking lots;
3. Their integration of various uses and activities which support one

another and insure a continuous vitality;
4. Their mixture of commercial facilities with small specialty stores predominating over large department stores and supermarkets;
5. Their design which emphasizes human scale, conservation of historic and artistic features, continuity of street alignments, homogeneity of building heights, textures, materials and colors;
6. Their carefully planned landscaping and flower arrangements and constant maintenance.
In Europe, cities have great control over their territorial development. The decision making process is directly under the city council. Generally once a master plan is approved, it is rigidly enforced. Appropriation of land is an important tool in successfully implementing European land development plans. Recycling streets has come about with the general economic recession that has compelled planners to focus on utilizing existing resources. The weakened economy has halted costly urban highway projects, In specific situations traffic-free zoning has met the national economic interests. For instance, in Denmark the national government strongly supported banning traffic because the country does not have an auto industry. THerefore, reducing car imports can improve Denmark's economic balance.
The living patterns on each continent are vastly different and so must be the solutions for addressing pedestrian problems. Because of the well established tradition of downtown shopping in European cities, they were able to successfully implement additional measures to improve pedestrian spaces. They reduced the number of parking spaces, made parking prohibitively expensive, created traffic diversion routes, and improved

public transportation. As traffic restrictions were initiated, public transportation provided the easiest access to the central core. While Europeans have been successful in closing main streets to traffic, there seldom is sufficient human activity in American towns to justify this. Nevertheless Americans have many opportunities to enhance pedestrian places.
The American version of the pedestrian mall emphasizes economic
revitalization. Retail competition from suburban shopping centers has been
one of the primary motivations for a number of cities to create traffic-free
precincts. As downtown trade and urban populations dwindled, the suburbs
boomed. New shopping centers drew customers with climatically controlled
environments, innovative merchandising tactics and competitive prices. They
guaranteed shoppers the privacy of their cars, and acres of parking lots.
Some even offered drive-in services that eliminated the need to park at all.
The downtown pedestrian mall was a natural urban defense. It could compete
with suburban shopping centers. It could create a new image for a city. In
some cases this positive regard has helped raise the city's image of
itself and its citizens. The mall can fill the city's needs to increase
retail sales, to strengthen property values, and to promote new investor
interest. Providence, Rhode Island, has used its urban mall as an incentive
to locate several high-rise apartments only two blocks away. The mall can
increase retail sales and strengthen property values, and promote new
investor interest.
The mall was not fully rationalized and sold as being good for pedestrians, It wasn't until it became evident that Europe's malls produced a marked

business growth that suddenly there were plans for malls everywhere in
America. Developing only isolated spots, American mall programs and
pedestrian areas seem to lack the necessary interface between transportation
modes and appear conceived as less than a total system. "The history of
vehicle free pedestrian areas in America is a study in short sighted,
incremental development in which the concepts of civic value were submerged
in deference to the economic imperatives".
Of itself, a mall represents a series of policy decisions about zoning, building, health and safety codes, traffic regulations, taxes and assessments, and other maintenance and operation practices. These policy decisions have historically varried from country to country and city to city though there are common elements which highlight the evolution of the pedestrian strollway as both a pleasure and a growing necessity.
Pedestrian malls are special street-grade pedestrian precincts in which vehicular intrusion has either been reduced or eliminated. In many respects, the pedestrian mall is the modern equivalent of the medieval plaza, with the most successful malls duplicating the qualities of human interest, interaction and communication provided by the plaza.
As a functional reality, a pedestrian mall simply discourages the use of private vehicles. The continuity and development of a mall's success, however, depends on its being part of an overall traffic plan which is capable of solving the technical and human problems of transporting workers, shoppers, and residents from one place to another with a maximum of comfort and ease through the use of low cost, efficient and attractive

public transportation while at the same time providing for goods delivery. The most popular argument against traffic-free zones is that the elimination of cars from certain streets merely forces them to adjacent streets, which then become more congested. The threat of such a situation was successfully used against a proposed closing of Madison Avenue in New York City.
Experience, however, seems to negate this theory. A study on the effects of
reducing traffic in selected areas summarizes its findings as follows: "The
amount of motor vehicle travel in any area is, in part, dependent on the
amount of available space" which simply means that if there is less space
for cars there will be fewer cars. The same report indicates that "rather
than building to a standstill, congestion will reach a maximum point where
the average speed in a central business district decreases to eight miles
per hour. Beyond this point, traffic disappears. People turn to other
kinds of transportation. Therefore, reducing the amount of vehicular space
will not create a monumental traffic jam. It will simply reduce the amount
of vehicular traffic".
Unlike improvements to American downtowns, European counterparts have not been constructed to compete with shopping centers because their development has been restricted by land use controls. Rather, downtowns were redeveloped to correct impossible traffic congestion problems and to aid shoppers and city residents. In America, It is only within the past thirty years that pedestrianization has been used as a means for controlling traffic in crowded city centers. The creation of traffic-free streets represents the opening up of a new territory.
A pedestrian mall is an instrument for action, especially in relation to

urban economics, environmental quality and social well being. In the area of economics pedestrianization will hopefully improve the business of local merchants and the livelihood of local residents by drawing people, not only from the city proper but from surrounding regions as well, into the downtown area. In many cities, real estate values have appreciated and the tax base has increased several fold following the implementation of a pedestrian zone.
In the desire of the humanist to revive the city center as a place of human interest and interaction, pedestrian zoning is beginning to alter the image and quality of urban life. American cities are rediscovering that community is defined by people, and thus turning city streets into pedestrian thoroughfares, recycling empty lots and alleys as mini-parks and play grounds, enlarging sidewalks, and granting retail bonuses to developers for such pedestrian amenities as plazas, public art, fountains and street furniture. The surrounding storefronts, office buildings and residences are responding with beautification programs, new lighting, sculpture and graphics, fostering a new sense of identity and pride in the process. As cities provide public open spaces people are rediscovering their value. Public space is a resource.
Reducing the number of motor vehicles in central districts has the potential for improving the city's environmental quality, reducing street levels of noise and air pollution, and leading to the preservation of historic districts and restoration of landmarks, while providing incentive for building owners and operators to improve the physical appearances of their stores, homes and offices. This in turn can stimulate the upgrading of city services. Even the safety in downtown areas increases, since pedestrian

zoning eliminates dangerous confrontations between cars and people.
The social impact of a mall can be tremendous, drawing all ages and social strata, tourists and residents alike, into these areas, where they spend longer and more leisurely periods of time. As a result of the generous availability of public space, pedestrian-oriented amenities can be introduced and a wide range of special activities promoted.
Some projects have been clever enough to incorporate the attractions of suburban competitors. Although enclosing existing city streets is too complex and expensive for most cities to consider, at least two have accomplished it: Quebec, Canada and Paterson, New Jersey. Minneapolis
circumvented the issue with a system of skyways that introduced three-dimensional pedestrian spaces. The skyways are enclosed bridges that crisscross the mall vicinity to connect second-floor levels of buildings; strollers have the choice of walking on or over the mall, as whim and weather dictate.
Leadership for pedestrian malls has come from both the private and public sector. When the mall is conceived as a way to compete with regional
shopping plazas, the role has been filled by the merchant community and downtown chamber of commerce or agencies like a merchants downtown council. The concept does not necessarily require massive amounts of money or major relocation of businesses. Property improvements have often been left to the discretion of landlords. Many pedestrian malls have been built because merchants were willing to tax themselves.
The extent to which malls have achieved their objectives varies

significantly from city to city. Economic trends, retail viability, downtown accessibility and the condition of the public transportation are all elements that have affected the success of pedestrian experiments. The timing of the mall project, the degree of cooperation between merchants, property owners and city officials, and the relation of the project to overall needs and policies have proved crucial in every case. A mall's design, amenities and the way in which it is managed have also greatly influenced public response to, and therefore the success of, a pedestrian zone.
More often, it is not so much the leadership but the degree of pedestriani-
zation that determines the success or failure of a mall. The most radical
form completely eliminates traffic from the mall area. Emergency vehicles
are usually allowed, but even bicycles may be restricted. Full pedestrian
streets were most common when urban renewal funds provided
cities with the autonomy and money to implement them. Today, many cities find that transitways are a more feasible alternative now that Federal transportation monies are most available.
Ironic as it seems, it has been the transit mall that has furthered pedestrianism in our downtowns. The order of business in designing a transit facility calls first for a patronage analysis and the determination of the station capacity. How this is carried into the site planning effort is when the critical issue of the surrounding area is addressed. Primary consideration is given to pedestrian and vehicular separations and the ease of which a pedestrian can enter the facility. Through amenities, such as adequate space and lighting, landscaping, and weather protection, the

A pedestrian mall is a complex legal and financial entity that demands serious, long term planning. The financial framework of a mall is complicated, both economically and politically. Cities have tried every kind of strategy their imaginations and laws would allow. It is difficult to generalize about the American experience because of the complicated nature of the Federal-State-local government relationship and the variations between different State and local jurisdictions. Funding of traffic-free zone improvements is likely to differ in every single situation.
At the local level, the assessment district has been the most common source of funds. In this case, property owners along and near the mall are taxed according to the benefits they can be expected to derive from its construction. The levy rate is determined by the amount of front footage and depth of property, or according to a property's proximity to the mall. Assessment formulae vary from city to city, but the result is that businesses pay for all or part of the project.
Some cities feel that the assessment route is not practical because of the

opposition it can provoke. Trenton, New Jersey, had the legal authority to finance its mall by assessing property owners, but sought alternative funding because it feared legal proceedings and delays. In the end, it took advantage of a $400,000 HUD Open Space Land Grant and State Matching Funds to pay for one half of the project.
Diverting capital resources is another funding strategy. Often cities can stretch the definition of road or park construction and maintenance to include pedestrian malls, or they can bury some costs in previously planned

construction projects or utility improvements. For example, the Federal Aid Urban System program gives cities flexibility in determining how highway funds are spent.
Other sources of funding include, or have included in the past:
These sources are usually used in a combination to finance a mall project.
The costs of urban malls vary considerably, although on the whole they are relatively inexpensive undertakings. Many of the more substantial costs are so-called "invisible" improvements to underground facilities, drainage systems, and site preparations. Other invisible costs include legal work, inspection and red-tape related items. Almost two-thirds of the expense in Providence, RI, went into invisible requirements, as did thirty-one
percent in Kalamazoo and eighty-two percent in Pamona, CA.
In 1959, Kalamazoo, MI, was the first American city to approach the legal issues surrounding conversion of a city street into a pedestrian space. To do this, it had to identify legal authority to restrict access to a public right-of-way. The question on whether State or local legislation was available or necessary had to be resolved. Kalamazoo's planning commission, through the offices of the city attorney, made the precedent determination that a pedestrian mall was a valid interpretation of a street right-of-way. This established the city's authority to act without State enabling action
General Obligation Bonds Revenue Bonds Special Service Tax Areas Private Contributions Motor Fuel Tax Funds
Urban Renewal Urban Mass Transit Funds Federal Revenue Sharing Special Assessment Voluntary Assessment

or approval.
The time and legal complexities of introducing and passing legislation at either the State or local level have prompted many cities to make creative adaptations of existing laws. Relatively little specific law exists on pedestrian malls; related jurisdictions include legal provisions for parks, public safety and health, highway, traffic and municipal improvements. Galveston, Texas, classified its mall as a park and was thereby eligible to use those legal and funding resources.
Municipalities can pass mall ordinances. Springfield, Illinois needed only an ordinance to embark on its Capitol Plaza project, but local lawmaking is rarely so simple. Most cities require State enabling legislation and this can lead to political and legal delays. There are precedents, however: California, Colorado, Kentucky, Minnesota, New Jersey and Rhode Island, among others, have already passed mall enabling legislation.
California was the first to act, when, in 1960 Pomona sought the legal authority to create a mall. The resulting California Mall Law not only established legal means, but drew the attention of other cities in that State eager to renew their downtowns. The law restricts access to public rights-of-way but does not forsake public interest in the street. It provides that a majority of affected property owners can force the city to abandon an unwanted mall proposal. The law, in fact, is very explicit in formally outlining the rights, restrictions and responsibilities of a city, from resolution to final implementation.
Similarly, Colorado's Public Mall Act of 1970 defines what constitutes an

unconstitutional taking of rights of vehicular access. The governing body of a municipality has the power to a)establish pedestrian malls and to
b) prohibit, in whole or part, vehicular traffic on a pedestrian mall and
c) construct or form an improvement district to insure construction of improvements necessary or convenient to the operation of a mall and d)to acquire by gift, purchase, eminent domain, or otherwise real property and Right-of-ways which will become part of a mall and e)to make improvements in d and f) to pay from general funds of municipalities, from general obligation funds, from other monies, from proceeds of assessment levied on lands benefited by the establishment of a pedestrian mall, from funds raised through bonds issued there against, or from any other source whatsoever, the damages, if any, allowed or awarded to any property owner by reason of the establishment of a pedestrian mall and to make adequate provisions to secure the payment of said moneys and g)to pay from general funds (etc. as listed in f) of the municipality the costs of improvements and h)to levy assessments against properties benefited by the proposed pedestrian mall in an amount no greater than the total damages or compensation paid to landowners and i)to issue special assessment bonds in anticipation of the collection of special assessments payable in installments or to be levied at annual intervals and j)to do any and all other acts or things necessary or convenient for the accomplishment of the purposes of this part.
Urban malls are sometimes controversial and competitive in their design. Unlike European cities, where architectural and historic richness can support traditional or even mundane concepts, American cities must rely on the design of the mall itself to lend character to the environment. The unadorned linear street, which often runs through an uncomfortable blend of

parking lots, deteriorating businesses and varying building densities, is rarely an inviting pedestrian experience. The design process, therefore, becomes a conscious effort to introduce human scale and amenities, as well as opportunities for social interaction.
The physical characteristics and goals have basically evolved in three stages. The first has been defined by the early 1960's, when malls were narrowly envisioned as ways to return shoppers to downtown areas. Design criteria served that single aim. Few distractions to the basic shopping mission were allowed, and amenities were limited to beautification efforts. The design of the very early malls, in particular, reflected the commercial nature of their origins. Most were initiated by merchants and looked it. Amenities included items to improve the appearance and function of the area, and consisted of plants, patterned pavements and decorative sculpture, or new parking facilities. Pomona's mall epitomizes this emphasis. Kalamazoo's first mall version offered trees, fountains, grass and new lighting, but not a single bench. The clear implication was that pedestrians should shop or leave.
By the middle 1960's, designers were gaining a more comprehensive view of pedestrian streets, and they began to study the relationships between behavior and environment. Malls began to serve shoppers as people who might also like to relax and talk to each other between errands. Design schemes were introduced and it became important to articulate human scale. This mall generation illustrated a more complex interpretation of the street. A rich diversity of pedestrian amenities, including playgrounds, sitting areas, flowers and trees arranged to attract casual, as well as shopping, pedestrians were incorporated into these later traffic-free streets.

The linear park became another popular version of the mid-sixties mall. Designed as urban parks, they are most common in California because the high cost of maintaining extensive green areas is almost prohibitive elsewhere.
By the 1970's, however, malls had matured to the point where designers sought to integrate their full potential as social and community, as well as commercial, places. Shopping still attracted some people to the mall, but many others were attracted by the score of happenings that began to occur in traffic-free areas. The most recent urban malls have been designed not only to provide dramatic or pleasant physical environments, but also to encourage community participation. They become, in fact, vehicles for integrating a wide variety of urban and social needs. Kiosks or building canopies are often used to articulate pedestrian scale and intimacy. Many of the newest provide large open spaces for concerts, festivals and political forums. New London, Connecticut, deliberately left a large central area open for that purpose, at the same time highlighting an architecturally notable church in the background. The central portion of Eugene, Oregon's mall resembles an amphitheater, with balconies surrounding it. The effect is similar to that on Stockholm's Torg, where elevated bridges offer a pleasant vantage point for strollers.
The famous skyways of Minneapolis create similar, although enclosed, perspectives. By fulfilling the potential of three-dimensional pedestrian zoning, the skyways have so influenced the city's shopping patterns that the second floor levels they connect are now considered prime commercial locations, with rents and merchandise quality equivalent to ground-level operations.

On the two-dimensional plane, many cities have provided alternative circulation systems by introducing special vehicles that carry shoppers from store to store, and to and from their cars. In Europe, where people are used to walking, this option has not seemed appropriate, but many Americans seem to expect it. In California, the Pomona mall had two passenger vehicles, and still uses one of them. Fresno and Sacramento have introduced similar services. Although the shuttles may add a certain color and excitement to street life, they have not assured the future of any mall, and have more often proved cumbersome and uneconomical. Lake Charles,
Louisiana, has one of the most successful versions. Its tractor hauled passenger wagon between the mall and parking lots has become popular with shoppers carrying heavy packages. Denver, Colorado, introduced electric powered shuttle busses to their 16th Street Mall. This free transit feature was expected to make a bus ride downtown more attractive and by excluding commuter buses from the heart of the central business district to improve the flow of auto traffic.
Perhaps the most important conclusion one can draw from a design analysis is
that design alone cannot make pedestrian spaces succeed or fail. The timing
of the mall, its operation, and its integration into the surrounding urban
fabric are equally important.
Some malls have been introduced too late, or for the wrong reasons. When Riverside, California, started its project, many stores had already left the area, and they continued to leave during and after construction. Galveston, Texas built its mall to solve the wrong problems; although retail trade downtown was suffering, the city's overall decline was a result of crime and inattention to historic neighborhoods problems a mall alone could not

eliminate. Some pedestrian zones have been conceived without adequate sensitivity or regard for the overall planning needs of a city. Better parking facilities and improved access to the retail area cannot compensate for superficial forethought. Not only access to the mall, but access to the city must be considered. Not only the pedestrian street must be examined, but its role in the city.
Mall pioneer Victor Gruen believed that the development of a single pedestrian mall would not be enough to revive a slumping central business district. Activity on several other streets in the district must be enlivened in order to make the central city attractive again. The most successful CBD revitalization schemes have included programs designed to spread improvements and amenities across a broader area of the district than the linear mall. Often times malls are used in Europe to tie districts together, linking government buildings or historic areas with other plazas.
Denver, Colorado, designed the 16th Street transit mall with two purposes in mind: to improve the flow of pedestrian and vehicular traffic through the city's central business district; and to promote business in the CBD. Downtown business interests deemed it vital to the economic health of the district that it regain a position of retail and entertainment prominence. A mall, eliminating automobile traffic was seen as the answer.
Regional and Federal funds financed the mall but maintenance and future amenity enhancements were to be borne by the private sector by an assessment fee designated to a "benefit area". The consulting firm of Bowes, Bowes, and Smith (1983), amassed a list of ten reasons why the lot of benefit area occupants should be improved by their location adjacent to the mall:

0 0.2 Mi.
1 ___________1
Figure 1. The 16th Street Transitway/Mall
in Denver's Central Business District

1. Businesses located on, next to, or in sight of the Mall will benefit by improved building access and exposure to customers.
2. Enhanced attractiveness of the zone will increase property values and rents and reduce vacancy rates.
3. Employee costs such as fringe benefits, turnover, and sick leave will be reduced, because of the more appealing work environments. Advertising expenses will drop, due to increased direct exposure to the customer base.
4. The Mall's security force will increase the protection afforded area operators and so reduce losses.
5. Jointly-contracted maintenance and cleaning work being done along the Mall will reduce costs to individual property owners.
6. Transportation services will be improved for people operating out of, or commuting into, the benefit area.
7. Increased demand for hotel space and cultural activities in the area will improve business and pleasure thereabouts.
8. Auto-generated air pollution will be reduced along the Mall.
9. The market value of property in the area will increase.
10. Mall attractiveness and activities will turn the area into a pleasant recreation sector.
The concern soon arose that all benefit property owners would be paying for the mall and its amenities but the benefits would be enjoyed firsthand only by the proprietors and owners of 16th Street establishments. It became
apparent that benefits were greatly exaggerated for outlying 'benefit area' proprietors. More often, Shops which rely on foot traffic but are located away from the mall are sometimes forced to relocate or go out of business due to pedestrian traffic on auto-oriented streets tapering off after
construction of a nearby pedestrian mall. Many by-passed merchants have been leaders in efforts to extend the pedestrian zone to include their shops. Denver is now considering creating traffic-free adjacent streets. This situation has been commonly examined in many European malls. Most
European towns have extended pedestrian improvements beyond the main street

0 0.2 Mi.
1 ___________|
Figure 3. Proposed Pedestrian Streets

"Downtown Copenhagen showing Pedestrian streets and squares established gradually between 1962 and 1973. "Stroget" the main street-is the long street linking the two squares left and right on map. "Grayfriers Square" is almost in the center, just above "Stroget"."

to side streets, allowing pedestrian penetration from many places and extending pedestrian access to new shops, to link government centers, or to link historic districts to plazas.
Denver boosters of mass transit have pushed plans that would deliberately
inconvenience motorists. It was thought that a drastic reduction in parking
spaces available to motorists entering the CBD would force commuting workers
and shoppers to switch to buses. To date, however, the political power of
the motorist and the deservedly poor reputation of the regional bus system
have combined to perpetuate the reign of the automobile in downtown Denver.
Pedestrian areas have been an accepted tool for urban renewal since the 1960's, but have only recently matured as an integrated urban strategy incorporating transportation, housing and open space. In fact, the idea of pedestrian malls serving residential neighborhoods is only now emerging. Some major cities, after a hiatus of many years are again attracting new residents downtown. The short lived suburban wave has subsided and people are again responding to the attractions of urban life. Most malls have been located in the central business districts, although there has recently been encouragement to pedestrianize residential or mixed-use neighborhoods. Minneapolis plans to extend Nicollet Mall into a residential development planned along the Mississippi River only four blocks from the mall. Such attempts have been very few. It will be some time before a large number of
commercial pedestrian streets are extended into residential zones. Not only funding but logistical problems promise delays.
Hundreds of small and medium-sized cities have implemented pedestrian zoning with varying degrees of success, but almost none of the largest American

cities has progressed past preliminary planning stages. Ironically, it is
these larger cities that can benefit most from pedestrian environments. It
is they that are choking with traffic and are losing trade; it is they that
need the diversity and scale that pedestrian environments can provide. New
York City tried to implement the country's largest mall and it became the
largest debacle. But it yielded some important lessons. Big cities survive
on a delicate balance of complex political and economic factors. A mall can
threaten this balance of interest, and only the most sensitive planning and
leadership can resolve the multitude of factors and constituencies affected.
Rarely has such sensitivity been displayed on a large urban scale. A neighborhood scale approach, where urban improvements are integrated into the character, scale and interests of small communities within the city environs may prove a workable alternative.
Planners, however, cannot decree, but only negotiate; they can make zoning changes and create bonus systems to increase their leverage, but bargaining remains the key issue. New York's Madison Avenue Mall, for example, failed in part because the city tried to impose it on businesses which didn't want it; the prestigious avenue was prosperous, and the merchants along it didn't want the city to interfere with their success by limiting access or creating diversions. The city is now negotiating with smaller neighborhoods that want help and need improving. Some success is already evident in the
proliferation of plazas and public spaces along many of the city's streets.
American cities have to establish an ethic, perhaps even before a policy. Who is going to articulate the ethic is a big question. Who dictates that? Secondly, we cannot avoid the politics involved. This is a political issue. It doesn't have to come from some radical fringe group that is local.

Politics can be generated from the bureaucracy as well. The difference in
America, as opposed to Europe, is that too often the people who implement
whatever policy there is are political appointees which too often can change
with the political party. And often the positions are not competitive or
based on professionalism.
What I see in Europe is a higher degree of professionalism among the people who actually do the implementing of the plans. When a position comes open for city planner, traffic planner, etc., there is a national competition. When people are elected as Mayors their ohilosophy or ethic on what a city should become is actually an issue. We need to have more of that.
In all mall concepts there are certain goals to be considered. Functional goals focus on strategies to improve downtown mobility by traffic control. Economic goals focus on strategies to save central business districts retail trade. Humanistic goals focus on strategies to conserve the human fabric. American malls need more of a blending of the three. It is ironic that urban planning is so often seen as a defender of pedestrian interests and as an advocate for pedestrian-oriented facilities. The pedestrian mall is implemented because it is good for business. Although the planner may feel sympathy for the pedestrian, we must all realize that the planner works under very real political constraints which prohibit virtually any change in the pedestrian environment which infringes in any way on the profitability of business and industry in general or real estate development and automobile sales and servicing in particular. Until a policy is formed the pedestrianization of American cities will progress at a very slow pace.

28 The Dutch word for 'living courtyard'. The Woonerf is created by narrowing the entry to the street at each end and placing obstacles in the way of drivers throughout the course of the street.
29 Spenser Havlick, Assistant Dean, College of Design and Planning, University of Colorado at Boulder, September, 1985
30 Rubenstein, Clarks Summit, PA, 1978
31 Michael John Pittas, "An Eye Toward the Future: Factors to be
Considered in Pedestrian Design", National Endowment for the Arts, (Proceedings: 4th Annual Pedestrian Conference, Boulder, CO, 1983)
32 Boris S. Puskarev with Jeffery M. Zupan, "Urban Space for Pedestrians" (Cambridge, Mass:MIT Press, 1975)
33 Roberto Brambilla and Gianni Longo, The Rediscovery of the Pedestrian: 12 European Cities, (Columbia University Center for Advanced Research in Urban Environmental Affairs, HUD-PDR-192-2, 1976)
34 Ibid.
35 Bernie Jones, et al, "Revitilization by Design: An Evaluation of the Design Aspects of the Colorado Main Streets Program", (CO Dept of Local Affairs #220300, August, 1983)
36 Joseph Beaton and Eric P. Murray, "Spreading the Benefits of a
Pedestrian/Transit Mall", (Proceedings: 5th Annual Pedestrian
Conference, Boulder, CO 1984)
37 Brambilla, 1976
38 Ron Weidenhoefter, August, 1985

The old rules of when, why and how far people walk are slowly being broken.
New rules, based on the availability and quality of pedestrian facilities
can extend the distance people walk. Just as better roads extended the
distance people would drive, separation from cars, improved transit, weather
protection, shortcuts, attractive shop windows, plantings, street furniture,
visual stimulation and other improvements extend the distance that people
are willing to walk. Pedestrians who have tasted the pleasure of pursuing
leisurely activities become used to rhythms of the street, used to having
the chance to socialize, relax, and watch other people go by. The elemental
point about good urban space is: supply creates demand. A good new space
builds a new constituency. People's attitudes towards being a pedestrian
are indeed changing.
Four interrelated factors affect the distances Americans are willing to walk. They are time, convenience, availability of auto transport and a land use pattern that is not conducive to walking. All are factors that can be manipulated. In America the availability of the automobile is a major factor. Certainly our overdependence on the auto and the resulting land uses that have developed make walking unpleasant. Correcting these conditions involves reducing travel distances; increasing land-use flexibility; eliminating pedestrian barriers and obstacles; leveling walking routes; assuring continuity of travel; providing protection from wind, rain, noise, cold, and pollution; eliminating conflict; and increasing character, randomness, visual diversity and amenity.

This chapter examines the basis for our existing land use and how it influences walking and pedestrian spaces. In theory we have had two planning alternatives to resolve the pedestrian/auto conflict: separation
or interface. Several circulation patterns and land use patterns have emerged from this basic choice. Planners have traditionally opted for
separate use in America, hence the dominance of streets and highways devoted to automobile movement. The grid street pattern and the more recent superblock circulation pattern are most common, offering very different walking experiences. It is within our existing patterns that we must learn to accommodate the pedestrian. Once we understand the pedestrians ambitions and our land use constraints the planning process should become more productive.
The impetus that began the flight from the city to the suburbs in the 1950's was the desire to get away from the narrow, congested streets and escape to the wide open spaces. Ironically, the very nature of open space necessitated automobile usage and recreated the headache of accomodating the suburbs for them. Traditional planning and development has exacerbated the desires of pedestrians. Still there is hope.
In spite of the single-use land pattern, auto trips in urban areas are shorter than most people think and there are more dense, mixed-use places where foot travel is (or can be) faster than motorized travel. 20-25% of personal trips are under one mile in length, 20% are 1-2 miles and only 12-15% are 2-3 miles. Thus over half of all urban trips are under three miles in length. Solving the time problem of travel will require combining travel modes utilizing motorized travel to cover longer distances and foot travel

for short distances in districts once reached by car or bus. Walking is the
most convenient means of transportation for short distances of up to 500
yards, but as distance increases, the car or bus becomes more attractive.
The present desire to walk in American cities can be depicted as a steep
tapered curve, (see figure C) with most people (70%) willing to walk 500
feet, fewer (40%) willing to walk 1,000 feet, and taper in off very quickly
until only 10% are willing to walk half a mile. Americans are thought to be
lazy when it comes to walking, but the facts don't bear this out. Given a
recreational setting, Americans can walk as far as members of any other
culture. Our number of joggers exceed any country in the world. Americans
seem unwilling to walk to accomplish purposeful activities because we do not
have good walking facilities and we organize our communities for driving,
making walking difficult.
n - From pam\ RATE lAG
\\ \ \
4 / / '
X ^ ri_
" *% - T,
People who live in cities are willing to walk longer distances than suburbanites, because the driving alternative is more time consuming and expensive. The average walking distance increase as development becomes denser. The Bureau of Public Roads lists 800 feet as an average American commuter walking distance from car to work. New York City transit riders walk farther with the average being about 4.5 minutes or 1300 feet. Walking trips from private automobiles and taxicabs are shorter than those make from public transporation as drivers, accustomed to private car comfort won't

walk far. A ten minute or 2,300 foot walk seems to be the maximum distance
American people are willing to walk today, but as transportation costs
increase and traffic worsens, people may walk further. In Holland, the
average walking distance from home to a large department store is about
3,000 feet or 12 minutes. In Germany, suburban shoppers walk at least 2,400
feet to reach a convenient shopping center, and then may walk further while 41
It is important to understand that the above distances are lengths we are
willing to walk with foresight. We walk unknowingly more than we realize.
In daily activities we walk amazing distances. We walk to clean house, mow
the lawn, shop for groceries, and to or from our cars. It is not unusual
for a person to walk two miles while shopping at a regional mall or walk a
half mile between home, car, and work. Housewives may walk ten miles in a
day to accomplish their chores, while a casual weekend walk in the woods may
cover six miles. We are not adverse to walking. We are subconsciously
inhibited by our built environment.
Site Planning
"Site planning is the art of arranging the physical environment to support human behavior." Kevin Lynch has several times updated his edition of Site Planning because of 'unexpected important changes occurring in fundamental ideas: the ways of looking at site problems, of analyzing values, and of
connecting values to solutions; rather than an expected change of
techniques. Lynch said that site design in the United States today is monotonously conventional, careless, shallow, and ugly. He found that in common practice, siting is a hurried layout, in which details are left to chance, or it is an abstract subdivision to which buildings are later

mechanically attached, or it is a last-minute effort to fit a previously designed building into some piece of available land. "Site planning is thought to be a minor, independent adjunct to the more important decisions of developers, engineers, architects, or builders". Because different professions use different technologies and serve different markets, each holds a different perspective which is correct but partial. Clients may not be concerned with anything more than minimum standards, especially concerning health and stress. The lack of environmental behavioral research leaves planners most often to fall back on their own personal feelings, modified by random observation. How can effective pedestrianization occur in these circumstances? Lynch outlines a process:
The pedestrianization of cities is dependent on the existing circulation pattern options. Following is a discussion of standard patterns and

The theory of separation revolves around the idea that safety equals the reduction of pedestrian-vehicle conflict by space separation (horizontal or vertical), or time separation (ie. traffic signals like the "all walk" and "scramble" systems). As long ago as 1934, Alker Tripp, Assistant
Comissioner for the London Metropolitan Police said that "motor traffic will never, and can never, mix safely with pedestrians and pedestrian cyclists".
Separation plans in the past have included closing streets off during heavy use. For instance the New York financial district has closed it's streets during lunch hours. Again in New York, streets have been closed on weekends to promote recreation, sight seeing, and shopping.
Horizontal separation can be accomplished by establishment of a pedestrian precinct, or mall, where vehicular intrusion is restricted or eliminated. Horizontal separation is a feature of many New Town designs and many suburban shopping centers. Some central city areas like Denver's 16th street mall use this method.

Vertical separation is attained through the use of underpasses or overpasses and are successful only when incorporated into a larger pedestrian convenience network. Nicholette mall, Toronto, and Montreal malls use vertical separation. What has occurred throughout Toronto is the separation of street level activity devoted to the automobile and either above grade or below grade activities dedicated to the pedestrian. In North York, a suburb of Toronto, the street level activity was dedicated to greenery and to the automobile with very little pedestrianization, while the lower level was a shopping mall in the typical suburban sense.
Continuity, convenience and comfort are the primary objectives of the new grade-separated pedestrian networks being built or planned for the future. These networks are either above or below street level, with both having
their advantages and disadvantages. Underground systems need only be about
ten feet below street level, provide full weather protection, more efficient climate control, and are easily connected to subway transit stations. Disadvantages of underground systems are in their high excavation costs, possible conflicts with sub-surface utilities, and loss of visual identity with the cityscape above.
Above-ground pedestrian convenience networks have the advantage of lower
construction costs and greater opportunities for integration and
identification with cityscape. The primary disadvantage of above-ground
networks is their greater height above street level, required to provide
vehicle clearances, making these systems difficult to relate to below-ground
transit. Most of the underground pedestrian systems have evolved by
connecting an existing patchwork of passages built to serve below-grade
transit stations. The above-ground networks are mostly new developments.

The trouble with separation is that as motor cars become more numerous and
widely used more walking involves getting to and from them and thus takes
place in proximity to them. In response, research and design have been aimed at producing non-aggressive, pedestrian friendly areas. A good example of mixing of transportation and pedestrian activities in America is Minneapolis' Nicolette Mall. The plans are very similar to Denver's 16th Street Mall in the sense of its running transit and people in the same corridor.
There seems to be a lack of commitment in todays mall planning as to total separation or interface. We know from mall experiments that interface is
necessary, yet this interface includes separation in many areas.
Separation may be part of the process of achieving an integrated system from the existing circulation patterns and dependence on automobiles that cannot simply disappear overnight. Interface may be inclusive of some separation.
Terrance Bendixson, President of the British Pedestrian Association felt
the biggest obstacle to the achievement of an acceptable integration is
almost certainly the mindset of men aged 25 to 55 who drive to and from
work, who have never acquired the point of view of walkers or cyclists, and
who still dominate dicision making in automotive and highway engineering and
in municipal politics and administration. A major campaign is needed to win
their minds to the cause of turning drive-in urban areas into walk-about 44
Some of this mindset certainly exist in America, the extent of which is unknown. A major problem is building an image of the pedestrian as a "good

guy", while not labeling those who drive as the "bad guys". The automobile culture is strong and in control and should not be offended more than absolutely necessary by promotional activities aimed at an improved pedestrian environment. Mostly the problem is one of marketing. A popular television commercial shows a young woman returning to her car after a morning run to refresh herself with a cup of yogurt. Similarly the Maxwell House coffee commercial shows us the executive 'on the run' enjoying a cup to-go as he opens the car door. You just don't see the commercial where the young business executive enjoys their cup of coffee at the bus stop bench. Or the image of the "good guy" as a carpool participant. Couldn't yogurt be enjoyed between the bus and the pedestrian stretch to work, while breaking to watch the ducks in the stream?
Grid patterns developed when travel by foot was important. As the grid was infinitely divisible, it created a fine grained network that benefited foot traffic. The grid offers the opportunity of bringing the pedestrian to the street, bringing the parking to the rear, and orienting the front door of the building back to where they have traditionally been. It affords the opportunity in the morning and evening for the commuter to use the street system, to have a kind of street level commercial activity.
Grids in general are useful where flows are shifting and broadly distributed. Although generalized, they are clear and easy to follow. They are well suited to networks serving complex areas at large scales.
The rectangular grid is most commonly used for street patterns. For this use, it has been criticized for its visual monotony, for its disregard of

topography, for its vulnerability to through traffic, and for its lack of differentiation between heavily traveled and lightly traveled ways, which prevents specialized design and the economical use of space and paving. These criticisms, however, are not inherent in the pattern itself but in poor application. For instance, monotony can be avoided by variation of the building and landscape pattern. A grid can be curved to fit topography, or discourage through movement.
The essence of a grid system is its regularity of interconnection. It need
not be composed of geometrically straight lines, nor must it enclose blocks
of equal size and shape. The grid pattern has definite advantages of
simplicity, convenient access, good orientation, and suitability for complex 45
distributed flow.
The trend in America has been to isolate traffic, to put it in rail corridors, and to locate it away from the pedestrian activity of a neighborhood. A suburban hierarchy developed with a system of roads from arterials carrying high traffic volumes, to cul-de-sacs with virtually no vehicular traffic. The secret of this hierarchy lies in not interconnecting streets which positively directed through traffic to arterials. The hierarchy developed to accommodate the automobile, recognizing that cars can easily travel extra distance, and that as traffic disperses certain roads should carry more or less traffic than others. Pedestrians unfortunately cannot easily travel longer distances, and are the losers in this plan. The hierarchy in it's conceptual form, includes a separate pedestrian system 'internal' to the road system that purportedly assures pedestrian access to different parts of the community. Unfortunately, the internal system was not provided in most cases, and when it was, it didn't lead to the places

people wanted to reach because the destinations were located on the road. Furthermore, internal circulation spaces were often unsafe because there was so little foot traffic and the varried ownership made access dependent on private property rights.
In contrast are areas like East Colfax and Broadway (Denver) and the traditional streetcar lines in San Francisco. They present an opportunity to integrate transit right into the neighborhood framework. This integration affords a quality of pedestrian experience in the opportunity for fun, vitality, and for a choice; if its poor weather you could hop the transit vehicle. That's what pedestrianization is all about after all. The Denver area has debated the utility of this type of design for years.
Large superblocks, which increase the grain between the circulatory and noncirculatory zones, improve the amenity of the living areas at the price of frustrating through traffic. The superblock is a large piece of developable land surrounded by a continuous street. As a result of its size the surrounding street system is more indirect.
By eliminating street intersections, this technique minimizes expensive street frontage per unit. It tends to concentrate through traffic, keeping loads light on the minor streets. Adjacent to all roads is a sufficient setback to minimize the nuisances of moving cars. Large and relatively inexpensive interior parks can be provided. If interior footways are included, pedestrians can cover substantial distances without crossing a street.

Originally it was thought that pedestrian and motor access could be
completely separated within these blocks, but experience has shown that the
loop or cul-de-sac street, the point of motor access, is also used as the
principal foot entrance to the units about it. It attracts most of the
pedestrian flow, much of the close-to-horae play activity of the children,
and becomes the social focus. Therefore it is important to provide a link
between it and the main walkway system within the superblock, while branch
walks, giving access to the rear of the individual units, can often be 46
dispensed with.
At the normal residential scale the complete dissociation of foot and vehicular travel is neither necessary nor desirable. Superblocks impose a more and more circuitous path on local vehicular traffic as their size increases. Moreover, if no internal walks are provided, movement on foot

becomes very difficult. Typically there is no through access. The internal
open space seldom extends or connects beyond the property line of the
project. Fences and parking lots visually act as barriers. The internal
green spaces are often private, and the owners dont want to share their 47
Isolated pedestrian pathways meet only part of the American need, so the creation of vast, internal open spaces like those conceived in the superblock planning era of the 40's is not advocated. Though long, internal open space walkways are desirable in some places, today's need is for safe pedestrian access along the streets and roadways that, take up to and from our daily activities. Only when this occurs will we have true public access, and relief from the air, noise, safety, and energy problems that have plagued us.
Key: Superblock Mix of Uses
fesasi **

The suburban settings are characterized by the "superblock concept" which brings the streets out to the edge, brings the buildings into the middle and develops separate systems for the pedestrian. In most of the cases, the 'superblock plan' is defined as the typical suburban shopping center with a sea of parking around it, the street way out at the perimeter and very little interaction between the street and the activity itself.
The question that occurs with this kind of planning is: what happens to the
delightful land use diagrams that we do during design when they are put into
implementation? What really happens when the individual developments are
built is that one particular development may decide it doesn't want two
front doors and it turns its back on the pedestrian network. The next
parcel remains undeveloped and therefore creates no pedestrian link through
that development. And the next one becomes maybe two buildings, two parking
lots, and a pedestrian network that goes nowhere and the last one puts the
building right in the middle and the pedestrian network runs right into it.
Without control within the infrastructure early on, you in fact end up with
no pedestrian system. Still, the typical light rail or heavy rail that is
being talked about in most municipalities is the 'superblock plan'
characterized by a transit station surrounded by 'park-and-rides'.
The Denver Technological Center's 825 acres are divided into twelve superblocks. Each superblock will incorporate 20-80 acres of land where mixed-use is planned to create a pedestrian environment. A typical superblock is seen to have advantage in using only 12% of its area in streets as opposed to 60% usage in a conventional grid.

Downtown Grid DTC Superblock
At the 6th Annual Pedestrian Conference in Boulder, Colorado, Alan Jacobs discussed the existence of a host of institutional constraints in the form of standards or regulations that frustrate or make difficult the production of good pedestrian spaces. Often when we try to emulate pedestrian spaces that we've learned to love through experiencing them, like the skinny winding streets where children play in San Francisco, inevitably someone comes along and says "it won't work because it is unsafe and we [in effect] won't let you do it. Too often the someone is an expert in transportation or a legal or codified standard that can't be broken without some kind of congressional action.
In short, one finds oneself often legally constrained from achieving a desirable urban environment, not one that has been personally or arbitrarily decided, but one that has gone through the whole process of participation in design and that is an environment compatible with pace and scale and enjoyment. What is more frustrating is the constraint is usually in the name of health or safety and the standard or control has gone way beyond

demonstrable health and safety concerns.
New generations of city planners and traffic planners don't seem to bring the history of the last decades experiments with them. What this implies are forces that don't really care about places and livable urban environments but are intent as ever on speed and or efficiency as the model. Those are absolutely relentless forces.
We have been told over and over again in this profession that you cannot build economic buildings unless you have large sites. Sites have to be big enough in this day and age to be economically viable. The programs and standards in our society which have been geared to land assembly to help achieve that start back in the 1920's and 1930's and have continued to present day.
Secondly, we are told that in order to do economic development you have to have tall buildings. You can't have economic development with low buildings. Yet if we go to Tokyo, we see many buildings on twenty-five foot lots. We also see buildings ten stories high on twenty-five foot lots and oftentimes on twenty foot lots. This includes housing, offices, and department stores on twenty-five lots. The only conclusion being what is been said all your life is that Tokyo is uneconomical. But you know that is not so. The world truth is that if you believe all you have is small
parcels then you will develop on small sites. If you believe that 'X' height cannot be exceeded, then it will be economical to build within that height. That's what the truth is. If you believe, on the otherhand, that that height can be broke then I guarantee you it will be uneconomic to build within that height limit. If you believe you can somehow get a larger lot

through some mechanism, than I guarantee it will be uneconomical to build on that small parcel.
Therein lies a lot about development. It has to do with will and the firmness of resolve. It has to do with the peverseness of people and the adaptability of spaces. I think the same analogy has to do with congestion. For instance, Alan Jacobs commented on the gridlock situation in Boulder, Colorado, and Rome where he was recently living. "It is relatively safe for pedestrians and it works, yet you would never be allowed to do anything like it again because of standards usually of widths". His point was that people in their perverseness adapt to the situation. Furthermore, gridlock may be what is good about Boulder.
Alan Jacobs and Donald Appleyard observed while writing the "Urban Design Manifesto", that if you want vibrant, alive urban spaces you need people. They found that land allocation, the amount of uses permitted by a city for a site, was so low that it was almost impossible to get good pedestrian spaces. The use wouldn't permit it unless you got all the development in one very small place.
Land allocations, they found, were based on some formula for the supposed carrying capacity of surrounding transportation systems. And that once again is an efficiency/safety model. The result is they were almost forced to design a very low density and intensity development that assures an automobile environment because you are not going to get people together. To overcome the automobile environment that those standards require is going to be extremely difficult, either for public transit or pedestrianization.

Intensity and density aside, pedestrian environments are difficult because standards to be met are well over two parking spaces per dwelling, or three or more spaces per 1000 square feet of shopping or office space. The arithmetic of that is horendous not in terms of economics, but in terms of designing over large areas for pedestrian environments.
We can't help but ask why the places so many people like and we tend to use as models never meet those standards. The answer we are t^ld is "those places don't work". For example, think about tree lined streets. Spacing and location standards ruin that too. The spaced trees look good from a distance. There is so often a promise from a view ahead, but rarely can we realize the promise once there.
Still you can easily find healthy old trees growing naturally at spaces that planners insist would be unhealthy. Usually the standards have more to do with paint lines for parking cars. A set of standards have taken priority that are not pedestrian standards. Even parking could be made part of a pedestrian precinct. Pomona, CA, has done this.
Good landscaping gets cut back because it may hinder a drivers view. Certainly some traffic policies need to be rethought, like site lines. 'Dangerous corners' are inherently safe because drivers pulling out are less likely to take a 'chance' if they have to look carefully before taking the 'opportunity' of pulling out. All for safety reasons? It slows down traffic.
Building Setbacks. The best urban environments are those where buildings define public spaces, streets, pedestrian ways, and plazas. The buildings

have to be close enough to create a sense of place where people can often see each other and pass each other. Yet, we must contend over and over again with front and side yard set back requirements whose public purpose in health or safety is extroadinarily unclear for pedestrian design. I don't see why the creation of privacy through setback and space is a compelling public purpose. People may wish to do that, and that's fine, but I don't know why it should be codified.
Distances between intersections. Many pedestrian projects want to have small lot blocks and lots of streets for people to walk on. North of Market in San Francisco has always been a pedestrian area and it has small lots. There are lots of reasons we are told we must have 1000 feet between intersections. Often economics, safety, and efficiency are the reasons that explain lot size requirements. One reason is traffic, for stacking, turning, acceleration and deceleration. The design can be overcome with 500 ft. intersections and 250 ft. pedways. But the remaining problems are enormous. Ask traffic engineers why Portland works with 250 ft. blocks and you'll be told that "Portland doesn't work".
Lane widths. Often times developers are requested to design three lanes in each direction and the possibility of four for future expansion. Also, room for the potential of light rail needed to be designed in the plan. The point here is that if light rail is probable, lanes three and four are obsolete. Then of course the livable and attractive boulevard is out of the question because it doesn't accommodate standards for fire engines.
The point is that there are a host of adopted standards, regulations and norms supposedly based on criteria of health and safety that really have

little to do with those subjects, but are geared instead to outlandish safety factors and to non-urban biases of professional groups which make it extremely difficult or impossible to achieve desirable urban pedestrian environments or at least successful pedestrian urban environments.
Standards purposes, and details of good design are too often overlooked. Efficiency takes priority. There are relentless forces in American society. It is necessary to educate a whole new generation of traffic planners for whom classic notions of efficiency are not the only high priority value. We need to train a strong questioning of standards. There is an incredible propensity in schools to accept them without question. We need major research agendas, to take a particular standard and find where it came from, find what it was suppose to achieve, see how it has evolved with time, see if it achieves what it was supposed to, and to ask, given a range of urban environments that are considered desirable, is it good or bad for them or what would its effect on that environment be. That's a beginning. We need years of it. Berkeley has begun it.
Following is a summary list of current conditions affecting most city's pedestrian accommodation:
Lack of sidewalks, especially in suburban areas
Conflicts between pedestrians and turning traffic
Vacant buildings, parking lots and curbcuts along major pedestrian streets
Indirect and discontinuous pedestrianways
Difficult, indirect, or unsafe crossings of major roads
Obstructions at street corners and along sidewalks
Inconvenient connections between large garages or parking lots and office buildings
Improperly designed cul-de-sac neighborhoods

Inaccessible bus and rail transit stops Narrow, unpleasant, and overcrowded sidewalks
Blank walls along shopping streets Inadequate street lighting, landscaping and amenities
Street crime Privacy fences that separate uses
Maintenance of public right-of-ways by homeowners Incremental Development (t iming/phas ing)
Street Widths Narrow or uncurbed sidewalks
Lack of interface of commercial, retail, and residential areas Design standards that cannot be enforced Misuse of sidewalk frontage for additional selling space
Response to these problems: Conservation replacing redevelopment Pedestrian malls and plazas Public Art
Widening of sidewalks to provide for trees, benches, and vendors Pedestrian linkages between mall areas and office, retail, or residential use
Construction of underground concourses to give subway users convenient access to shops or offices Building of skyways to connect upper floors of buildings, provide direct links to garages, and provide weather protection
Conversion of warehouses and factories to shopping and tourist centers Zoning bonuses to developers that produce pedestrian amenities
Recycling of waterfronts to areas of
pedestrian activity as port-related activity centers
While these responses have introduced new ways to improve the walking environment, planning has a long way to go to create a comprehensive, user friendly environment.

39 William H. Whyte, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, (Washington DC, The Conservation Foundation, 1980)
40 Richard K. Unterman, Accomodating the Pedestrian, (New York:Van Nostrand Reinhold Co, 1984)
41 Ibid.
42 Unterman, op. cit.
43 John J. Fruin, Pedestrian Planning and Design, (Library of Congress, 1971)
44 Terrence Benidixson, "Making Cities Fit to Walk In: A British Point of View", President of the Pedestrian Association, (Proceedings: 4th Annual Pedestrian Conference, Boulder, CO, 1983
45 Kevin Lynch,Site Planning, (Cambridge Mass, MIT Press, 1971)
46 Ibid.
47 Lynch, op. cit.
48 Robert Witson, "Interface of Pedestrian Planning with Transit", JHK & Associates, Boulder (Preceedings: 3rd Annual Pedestrian Conference, Boulder, Co, 1982)

Tremendous changes have taken place in our society over the years. The role of women has changed. Family groups are smaller with fewer children.
Households are smaller. There are more elderly. Work situations have
changed and we must face the fact that there is not enough work for eight hours a day to go around. We have more free time and need to socialize outside the family structure. Public spaces serve this purpose and will
continue to gain importance in the future of society.
As a practical example of a pedestrian oriented city plan that is currently in the implementation stage of the planning process I have selected the Aurora City Center. I believe Aurora's City Center demonstrates the frustration and realities of pedestrianization against relentless opposition.
In 1981, the City of Aurora, Colorado was among the fastest growing
municipalities of its size in the country. The growth rate exceeded that of
the Denver region and new population in the city accounted for about one-fifth of all population growth in the Denver Metropolitan Area during the past decade. Prospects for continued growth are excellent, with an annual growth rate of 3.2 percent projected throughout the year 2000.
With the influx of new population, Aurora residents tend to be young, with better than average educations and middle level incomes. Population growth is primarily attributed to in-migration rather than natural population

increase. 1980 average household incomes were estimated at $25,500, up an average of 8.4 percent over the past decade.
Approximately one-third of Aurora's workers are employed at jobs located within the City of Aurora, with the rest commuting primarily to Denver. Over the next decade, jobs available in the City are expected to grow by 3.1 percent annually, compared with the regional growth rate of 2.5 percent.
Aurora is presently a bedroom community with an expanding employment base. Employment concentrations have developed along the interstate highways. Most residential growth has and will continue to take place in the southeast quadrant of the city. While the market for new apartment construction has lagged, the interest in condominium and townhome ownership has been particularly strong in the City of Aurora. During 1980, nearly one-half of all new Aurora housing units were multi-family. During the same year, Aurora accounted for over 40% of all multi-family construction in the Denver Metropolitan Area.
The largest market segment of potential attached home buyers do not have children. Approximately one-third of potential buyers are single adults and an additional one-third are couples with no children. The popularity of attached housing is expected to strengthen as buyers purchase homes as an investment and inflation hedge.
Approximately forty-four percent of the City has been developed. Half of the land is designated residential with approximately fifty-eight percent developed. Substantial amounts of land zoned for industrial, office and commercial is available for commercial development. The City Center area is

largely undeveloped and under-utilized with Aurora Mall as the current anchor of the area.
The Aurora City Center plan proposed a future multi-use activity center for regional commercial and office employment, residential and recreational facilities. Increasing development density is anticipated, with studies projecting an additional 500,000 square feet of retail space and 12,000 dwelling units by the 1-225 corridor in the vicinity of the Aurora City Center.
In support of the center's development, the City of Aurora has prepared a series of planning tools to encourage high intensity activity. A
marketability, transportation and urban design study was adopted as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan in December 1978, a City Center Zone District was approved and a Design Guideline and Infrastructure Plan was developed.
The City of Aurora views the availability of innovative financing mechanisms a key incentive for continued development of the City Center. The plan states that the secrets to a healthy and functional downtown are
accessibility, human scale, mixed land uses and livability.
The City Center is a long term project to be developed over twenty years. Substantial office development is anticipated in the first five years. Specific developments occurred as follows:
*1978 amendments to Aurora Comprehensive Plan named the Aurora City

Aurora City Center
Site Plan

Center and established goals, objectives and policies for the center *1979 Study examined marketing, transportation and urban design aspects for the City Center
*City Council rezoned the entire area with a new zoning classification designed to allow a wider range of uses. A tighter review process was required to ensure development consistent with the overall plan *In a cooperative public-private effort, Design guidelines were prepared to assist area developers in the design and development of City Center projects
*A City Center Infrastructure Plan was prepared to define the projects unique requirements and guide public investments necessary to augment private land development.
The Center has three planning areas; core, fringe and periphery (see figure 1). The difference is one of intensity not use, the core allowing the highest intensity. A concept called 'massing' is used to create tight groupings of buildings. Height is less important than volume or location. Again intensity is highest in the core. Construction in the Periphery is planned to maximize a sense of greater massing than now exists in adjacent residential areas of Aurora. The inclusion of residential uses
in all three planning areas of the City Center was seen as a critically important element of the plan because "history has shown that downtowns cannot survive without people living in and near them", and that retail and entertainment activities have moved out of downtown to the residential areas.