The last several posts have tracked the primacy of pedestrianism as a lead motivator in reshaping our cities.
We know that attempts at making American cities more walkable are not new.
In 1962, M.R. Wolfe. Professor of Urban Design and Planning at the University of Washington, issued an early rallying call in the AIA Journal for the inevitable role of the pedestrian on the shopping street. He argued that increasingly autocentric mall development should not forget the commonality of street culture with forebears of the Western culture overseas, and plainly and with illustrative principles suggested that the pedestrian should not be forgotten.
Transit users can be broadly categorized into two groups, dependent users and choice users. Nationally, the pontification quotient was high last week–on how to sell transformative visions of urban development to the choice users–those who are not transit-dependent due to income or circumstance.
From Ontario to Seattle-based inquires about the true currency of urbanism to selling public transportation as an I-Pad-ish “seduction”, it was hard to be more creative than the next insightful blog-flaneur.
But it is a new week. We asked George Jetson about his views on choice users, after reviewing a Chicago Tribune piece last Fall which contrasted Jetsonian, airborne public transit in a future Chicago with a dense, capped “Blade Runner” model of climate control.
From his Skypad Apartments, an arguably transit-oriented development, Jetson said it simply. “We had it wrong–we forgot about our feet–we assumed that the convenience of automation and technology was the solution. Instead, we should have asked what will get us out of our vehicles.”
On cue, today the Vermont-based Planning Commissioner’s Journal sounded off via Reid Ewing: it is pedestrian-oriented development that will make the sale.
The study profiled past research on transit-dependent versus transit-choice users. Choice-users own cars and tend to be middle to upper income earners. Attracting choice-users is a primary objective of transit-oriented development and public transit in general. Choice-users tend to avoid transit if their perception of it is negative.
In Portland seven of every ten transit users claim to be choice riders; although sharp differences are found between bus and rail customers; 93 percent of MAX light-rail passengers are choice-users.
Thanks to George Jetson for validating today’s researchers and pundits. Successful urban centers and transit-oriented developments entice transit-choice users by providing good walkability, superior levels of service and access to many areas, jobs, services and amenities, particularly other urban centers.
And lately, it seems that walkability is leading the way.
See the refined and updated version of this post in seattlepi.com, here.
Seattle has recently seen and speculated: Transportation behavior changed by necessity (and consequent “community-building” often occured) during the city’s 2008 snow and Summer 2007 “freeway fright” construction.
For those weeks of necessity, we lived in an auto-limited world.
And just last week, by the way, we saw how Nord Alley can work.
Fast forward and head north from Nord Alley.
In the March 6 Vancouver Sun, Public Affairs consultant Bob Ransford reports on lessons learned from the Winter Olympic city’s experiments with pedestrian space and alternate forms of transportation, and the so-called “Vancouverism” branch of urbanism:
Last week brought active discussion of pedestrian and safety enhancements to Seattle streets. This week began with Councilmembers Burgess and Rasmussen commencing a City response to graffiti and street litter.
And below, in association with such safe and clean street initiatives, myurbanist resumes exploration of qualities might Seattle adapt from afar to implement and enhance alleys and related public space. This article, the second of a series (which began here on February 28), proposes additional qualities for Seattle placemaking.
Here is a one-stop summary of the 12 myurbanist principles to foster placemaking in Seattle, consistent with the current multiple public dialogues about enhancement of alleys, public spaces, street appearance and safety:
1. Emphasize an alluring focal point.
2. Use hanging green.
3. Use simple, green plantings and encourage ornamental building features in the path of view.
4. Where possible, enhance multi-level exposure to vernacular buildings amid the urban fabric.
5. Provide varied forms of encounter with surrounding commercial uses.
6. Celebrate exotic signage.
7. Provide for a multi-color, mixed use environment.
8. Together amplify angle, color and texture to highlight organic street life.
9. Enhance structural features to frame places enroute.
10. Celebrate the marketplaces of vending and dining.
11. Make angles magical.
12. Highlight iconic buildings.
It may be that no vantage points can create the drama of Rome’s Spanish Steps at Harbor Steps.
Nonetheless, five additional principles might apply to the seven qualities set out in the companion myurbanistFebruary 28 article.
1. Together amplify angle, color and texture to highlight organic street life.
2. Enhance structural features to frame places enroute.
3. Celebrate the marketplaces of vending and dining.
