Public Spaces
What makes a place "walkable"?
DC resident Jeff Speck wrote Suburban Nation, the best-selling book about city planning since Jane Jacobs. His new book, Walkable City: How Downtown Can Save America, One Step at a Time comes out on November 13. Greater Greater Washington is pleased to present 3 weekly excerpts from the book.We've known for three decades how to make livable cities
Certain large cities, yes. If you make your home in New York, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, Portland, or in a handful of other special places, you can have some confidence that things are on the right track. But these locations are the exceptions.
In the small and mid-sized cities where most Americans spend their lives, the daily decisions of local officials are still, more often than not, making their lives worse.
This is not bad planning but the absence of planning, or rather, decision-making disconnected from planning. The planners were so wrong for so many years that, now that they are mostly right, they are mostly ignored.
This past spring, while I was working on a plan for Lowell, Massachusetts, some old high school friends joined us for dinner on Merrimack Street, the heart of a lovely 19th-century downtown. Our group consisted of four adults, one toddler in a stroller, and my wife's very pregnant belly.
Across the street from our restaurant, we waited for the light to change, lost in conversation. Maybe a minute passed before we saw the pushbutton signal request. So we pushed it. The conversation advanced for another minute or so. Finally, we gave up and jaywalked. About the same time, a car careened around the corner at perhaps forty-five miles per hour, on a street that had been widened to ease traffic.
The resulting near-miss fortunately left no scars, but it will not be forgotten. Stroller jaywalking is a surefire way to feel like a bad parent, especially when it goes awry. The only consolation this time was that I was in a position to do something about it.
As I write these words, I am again on the road with my family, this time in Rome. Now, the new baby is in a sling, and the toddler alternates between a stroller and his own two feet, depending on the terrain and his frame of mind. It is interesting to compare our experience in Rome with the one in Lowell, or, more to the point, the experience of walking in most American cities.
Rome, at first glance, seems horribly inhospitable to pedestrians. So many things are wrong. Half the streets are missing sidewalks, most intersections lack crosswalks, pavements are uneven and rutted, handicap ramps are largely absent. Hills are steep and frequent (I hear there are seven). And need I mention the drivers?
Yet, here we are among so many other pedestrians Romans drive a fraction of the miles that Americans do. A friend of ours who came here to work in the US Embassy bought a car when he arrived, out of habit. Now it sits in his courtyard, a target for pigeons. This tumultuous urban landscape, which fails to meet any conventional American measure of "pedestrian friendliness," is a walker's paradise. So what's going on here?
Certainly, in competing for foot traffic, Anatole Broyard's "poem pressed into service as a city" began with certain advantages. The Lonely Planet ranking is likely more a function of spectacle than pedestrian comfort. But the same monuments, arranged in a more modern American way, would hardly compete. (Think Las Vegas, with its Walk Score of 54.)
The main thing that makes Rome Yet fabric is one of several key aspects of urban design that are missing from the walkability discussion in most places. This is because that discussion has largely been about creating adequate and attractive pedestrian facilities, rather than walkable cities. There is no shortage of literature on this subject, and even a fledgling field of "walkability studies" that focuses principally on impediments to pedestrian access and safety, mostly in the Toronto suburbs.
These efforts are helpful, but inadequate. The same goes for urban beautification programs, such as the famous "Five B's" of the eighties Lots of money and muscle has gone into improving sidewalks, crossing signals, streetlights, and trash cans, but how important are these things, ultimately, in convincing people to walk? If walking was just about creating safe pedestrian zones, then why did more than 150 Main Streets pedestrianized in the sixties and seventies fail almost immediately? Clearly there is more to walking than just making safe, pretty space for it.
The pedestrian is an extremely fragile species, the canary in the coal mine of urban livability. Under the right conditions, this creature thrives and multiplies. But creating those conditions requires attention to a broad range of criteria, some more easily satisfied than others. Laying out those criteria in no uncertain terms, and showing how we can satisfy them with the least cost and effort, is the purpose of this book.
Interested in learning more about what makes a place walkable? Join the Coalition for Smarter Growth at Politics and Prose on Saturday, November 17 at 6 pm for a discussion with Jeff. The event is free and open to the pubilc; no RSVP is required.
Comments
- Young kids try to assault me while biking
- Focus transportation on downtown or neighborhoods?
- Metro bag searches aren't always optional
- Endless zoning update delay hurts homeowners
- DDOT agrees to repave 15th Street cycle track
- Redeveloping McMillan is the only way to save it
- Vienna Metro town center won't have a town center







Question, isn't what is described as "fabric" the result of pre-auto development? Trastevre is a fantastic neighborhood, but is a medieval village. How can we transform our planned communities (and DC as a whole is a planned community) to have this fabric?
by Andrew on Oct 31, 2012 12:27 pm • link • report
I'd agree that tasking your local DOT with "more walking" is just going to result in a lot of wasted money on facilities and studies. That is what they do.
North Madrid is the same vintage as many new american cities (post 60s) but far more walkable. Having bars every twenty feet helps.
If I am doing the maths right, the density of Rome is about 6000 people per square mile -- or something like delaware. Not very dense by any standards.
by charlie on Oct 31, 2012 12:36 pm • link • report
Start talking about fabric and aura, and you trigger all the culture war hot buttons "this is about froyo for hipsters, and bars for drunk 20 somethings, and how dare you call my pleasant neighborhood "sterile" you elitist!"
Clearly aesthetics, retail mix, aura, etc matter. To some extent they simply are not accessible to policy levers - and where they are, you are going to have to be very careful to have a coalition built that supports what you want to do.
by AWalkerInTheCity on Oct 31, 2012 12:51 pm • link • report
by RJ on Oct 31, 2012 1:09 pm • link • report
by Some Ideas on Oct 31, 2012 1:20 pm • link • report
I just noticed how different my behavior is in the city driving an automatic vs. a stick -- with an automatic it is very easy to creep up all the time, driving a stick you tend to wait and dart of openings.
by charlie on Oct 31, 2012 1:23 pm • link • report
Anyway, its important to note that a key component of the "fabric" that Mr. Speck mentions is density. There needs to be a lot of shops and bars and intersections in a defined area to get that sort of walkability. It's right to note that a lot of the things that make being a pedestrian safer (crosswalks, lights, wide sidewalks) are kind of moot until you get a point where people are trying to walk somewhere. It's a chicken/egg problem that I think is usually best solved by doing both at the same time.
by drumz on Oct 31, 2012 1:27 pm • link • report
I'd like to see how we can kill more birds with one stone for once, especially since our recourses are not what they once where.
by Thayer-D on Oct 31, 2012 1:27 pm • link • report
By the way, is your friend in the American embassy a guy named Ale? If so, tell him his soccer/architect friend said ciao!
by Thayer-D on Oct 31, 2012 1:47 pm • link • report
Pedestrians > Bicyclists > Public Transportation > Private Transporation.
If street grids are built in that fashion, people are safer, neighborhoods are walkable and density will follow.
Nevertheless, mixed-use development make a neighborhood worth going to.
by cmc on Oct 31, 2012 2:25 pm • link • report
On the highway mentality - quite. I know one crosswalk that's been lobbied out of existence by drivers that are worried pedestrians will "pop up" in the middle of the intersection, and I know of one more where they're trying to get their way again.
Sadly, both places are in places that are supposed to be walker-friendly. It's laughable and depressing.
by OctaviusIII on Oct 31, 2012 3:47 pm • link • report
I did not have that experience. Italian drivers are insane and aggressive. Driving on Manhattan is peanuts compared to getting through a Mediterranean city.
Rome is of course a city built for pedestrians. When it was build, there were no cars. In fact, there were barely wagons of any kind.
This is in my mind, one reason why (North-)American cities are so much more car-friendly than cities elsewhere. Cities here were built were cars (or at least carriages) in mind.
by Jasper on Oct 31, 2012 4:41 pm • link • report
I've been in NYC several times since the beginning of the beginning of summer and have spent time in a variety of places in Manhattan, as well as in Brooklyn & Queens. Even where you have density, places can be dead some or all of the time and car-friendly spaces such as those in Long Island City aren't entirely incaptible with a walkable environemnt. I suspect that low to mid-rise areas have "more fabric" because people easily can walk out and make the street their living room.
by Rich on Oct 31, 2012 9:01 pm • link • report
I've always been fond of the way pedestrians in Paris can just walk in front of the multitude of lanes in the Place de la Concorde and the Arc de Triomphe without even looking, as they seem to do in Rome.
by Tom Coumaris on Oct 31, 2012 9:08 pm • link • report
We have an uphill climb here to build a culture of sharing the roads (cars and bikes) and sharing the sidewalks (peds and bikes) and figuring out where segways and scooters and joggers fit in but we will build our own way-sharing culture around our own infrastructure. It will never look like a quaint part of a European city, but hopefully it will look very different from car-centric suburbia.
We're making progress, but I'm skeptical that we need "fabric" as a separate concept to measure that progress. Does U Street have more fabric than Adams Morgan or Mount Pleasant? I think we already know that we need not only good pedestrian infrastructure and protection from other modes (bikes and motor vehicles) but something interesting to walk to, like street-facing retail, retail density, and retail diversity, as well as round the clock activity. Walkscore measures much of that already.
by Ward 1 Guy on Nov 1, 2012 11:40 am • link • report
by John Flack on Nov 1, 2012 1:46 pm • link • report
by Phil Spalding on Nov 2, 2012 1:08 pm • link • report
Add a Comment