Yule Heibel's Library tagged pedestrians → View Popular, Search in Google

Jan

2012

The Science of How We Walk - Commute - The Atlantic Cities

I left a comment on this:
QUOTE
Not every society reacts to pedestrian congestion the same way. A recent comparison of Germans and Indians revealed that although people from both cultures walk "in a similar manner" when alone, their behavior varies greatly in the presence of others. As one might expect given the densities of their respective countries, Indians need less personal space than Germans do, according to the researchers. As a result, when Germans encountered traffic during a walking experiment, they decreased speed more rapidly than Indians did. "Surprisingly the more unordered behaviour of the Indians is more effective than the ordered behaviour of the Germans," the study concludes [PDF].
UNQUOTE
My comment:
Re. the Germans slowing down when in a crowd vs the Indians not lessening their pace as much: I'm really curious to know whether Moussaid's research has anything to say on who arrives at their destination most efficiently / quickly? Is it more efficient to act counter-intuitively to your body "needs" and just to continue plowing through a crowd, body contact and all, even if your acquired cultural norms demand more distance? Since the study says the "unordered" behavior is more effective, it suggests it does get the job of moving from A to B done more efficiently, yes? This is fascinating, I think.
UNQUOTE

www.theatlanticcities.com/...927

- Preview

cities atlantic_cities eric_jaffe walking pedestrians socialtheory

May

2008

In praise of the lost art of strolling, by Christopher Hume (Toronto Star)

Last (so far) in what almost amounts to a series of articles on the importance to a true urban fabric of sidewalks and pedestrians. Hume adds some interesting speculation around Modernism's aversion to mingling/ chance encounters.

www.thestar.com/420945

- Preview

thestar christopher_hume pedestrians flaneur toronto

It was the French who first grasped the cultural significance of walking.
The French even devised new words to describe these denizens of the expanding city. They were boulevardiers and flaneurs. The former were sophisticated and worldly, urban and urbane. The flâneur, on the other hand, was the man-about-town, idle but intellectually curious and aware.
12 more annotation(s)...
- As much as anything, he realized, walking defines us. It is one of the things that make us what we are. Unlike running, marching, crawling, hopping, skipping, jogging, walking is essential; left foot, right foot, left foot ...
- And so it is a measure of how far removed we have grown from ourselves that many of us now see walking as extraneous. It is viewed as a kind of hobby, a pastime, a luxury, certainly not essential, and definitely not a means of transportation.
  Indeed, we have reached a point where we classify ourselves according to whether we walk or drive. Thus we are either drivers or pedestrians. Because walking is not considered necessary, we give precedence to those who travel in cars and trucks. From their perspective, people who walk are obstacles, in the way.
- walking
- is a mode of being, a way of relating, of existing in the world. The mere act of going out onto the street opens up a whole set of possibilities that lie at the heart of urban life.
- Though the early Modernists were deathly afraid of the chance encounter, human or otherwise, most welcome them. Sad to say, however, the Modernists were hugely influential; their vision of a neat, clean and tidy streamlined world devoid of the messy chaos of the big city lies at the heart of innumerable suburban developments.
  - Yule Heibel on 2008-05-06
    - I had always linked this to car-centrism, to suburbanization, and also to a horror of density (equated with "urban slums" and "blight"); but it's interesting to think that Modernism might, among other things, have been an aesthetic response specifically designed to "clean up" one's aesthetic space (which of course includes the urban environment).
  Add Sticky Note
- "A house is a machine for living in," Le Corbusier famously declared. By extension, a city should be a machine for many to live in.
- Congestion for pedestrians, if not drivers, can be a pleasure. It is another word for richness and diversity.
- Behind the wheel of a car, isolated, protected and feeling invulnerable, we are forever in a hurry. The rest of the world is reduced to nothing more than a series of obstacles.
- On foot, sharing the landscape with countless others, we have no choice but to slow down and enjoy. We become a member of a community, connected and part of something larger.
- Not only that, but walking speed allows us to absorb what's going on around us and react. Looking in a shop window, we can decide whether to stop or not. We have time to engage in the city, not simply move through it.
- In fact, among the curses of our age is the tendency to think strictly in terms of destination; convenience consists of reducing any act to its most basic elements and performing them as fast and efficiently as possible – a sidewalk becomes a road becomes a highway becomes an expressway.
- Though we can't turn back the clock, the only way to ensure urban health is to plan cities with walking in mind. If nothing else, this necessitates a human scale. There's no better measure of that than walking. Not to say that everyone will walk everywhere, but that we should be able to, it should be an option. No, it must be an option.

City needs to put its foot down, by Christopher Hume (Toronto Star)

This article, linked to the other Apr.26 piece in terms of theme and championing the idea that sidewalks (& therefore pedestrians) are key to a good urban fabric, tackles the question of planning & design. Too much is individual project driven, vs. falling into place as part of an overall sense of what the city should be.

www.thestar.com/417262

- Preview

thestar pedestrians infrastructure toronto urban_design christopher_hume

Architecture is important, but planning is crucial. Though Toronto's known for second-rate design, our real problem is poor planning. Throughout the city there are examples, painful examples, of the lack of intelligent planning. The result is not just visual chaos, but a clear feeling that nothing adds up, that nothing makes sense, that the city consists of a growing number of disjointed projects.
insist on certain basic elements that will eventually allow a number of unrelated developments to be transformed into a genuine neighbourhood? And why doesn't the city do what's necessary to give the pedestrian a fighting chance? As it stands, the residents of these new condos are at the mercy of (usually bad) drivers more focused on their cellphones than pedestrians. They block the crosswalks, drive too fast and generally treat walkers with utter contempt. Given that Lake Shore Blvd. has six lanes and Fleet two, pedestrians must take their lives into their hands just to cross the street. This isn't just suburban; it's dangerous, dumb and no way to build a city. It also reveals the hollowness of a community that loves to congratulate itself on its creativity, and its innovative spirit. When it comes down to making choices between cars and people, we invariably choose cars. This is outdated and marks us for the civic dinosaur that we are.
1 more annotation(s)...
- Lake Shore must be narrowed and new buildings designed to have a relationship with streets with adequate sidewalks and connections beyond. Right now, unless you're a resident, there's no reason to be here. And the south side of Lake Shore, with green space and of course the lake, is almost completely unreachable from the north side of Lake Shore. The result isn't a city but a series of enclaves cut off from one another and everything else by highways. Fleet St. isn't just a missed opportunity; it's a disaster in the making.

A flaneur's lament for the sidewalk, by Christopher Hume (Toronto Star)

Together with 2 other articles (Apr.26 and May 3), a nice trilogy in praise of walking and pedestrian rights.

www.thestar.com/418560

- Preview

thestar flaneur pedestrians infrastructure christopher_hume toronto

If only people were cars, maybe then we could get the city to take our sidewalks seriously.
In addition to the decayed state of city sidewalks, many are too narrow to begin with. And given the city's love of widening roads whenever possible, that makes for a dangerous combination.
6 more annotation(s)...
- Have we forgotten the importance of sidewalks? Did we ever know?
- They are an essential element of the public realm, not, as we have come to believe, simply a way of getting from A to B. Indeed, they are an irreducible part of the urban fabric.
- Sidewalks are stage sets, backdrops and seating areas all in one. They are the very place where urban life occurs. Without them, a city can't be a city.
- That's why so much more than broken ankles is at stake when they are allowed to deteriorate. Urbanity depends on sidewalks.
- Fleet St., Lake Shore Blvd. and around the Rogers Centre. These islands of condos separated by six-lane highways are hostile, even dangerous, for walkers. Pedestrians are definitely not welcome here; they get in the way of drivers, who are always in a hurry.
  This is not how to build a city. This is how to destroy a city.
- "Having adequate space and lots of sunshine means a lot psychologically," Brown insists. "But what we're getting is suburban dimensions infiltrating the city. Traffic lanes in an urban condition need be no more than 3.1 metres, that's about 10 feet. On a highway where you have greater speed, lane widths have to increase. But engineers are used to working on an average, a standard. You need to approach things more finely, taking what you can find here and there."
  - Yule Heibel on 2008-05-06
    - this idea that road engineers use the same rule in urban & suburban settings for arterials, secondaries, etc., reminds me of Andres Duany's critique, and how the transect should be used to contextualize what's needed.
  Add Sticky Note

Dec

2007

Waterfront plan: A magnet and, hopefully, model (Toronto Star)

Dutch landscape architect Adriaan Geuze's vision for T.O.'s waterfront: "The point must be that we won't have to live on the waterfront to feel at home there." In this article by Christopher Hume, some really interesting discussion (by Geuze) about cars, how they've taken over urban spaces, why all-pedestrian zones aren't necessarily a good idea ("scary at night"), and that cities today compete with one another.

www.thestar.com/...288394

- Preview

cars christopher_hume development pedestrians toronto urban_parks urban_renewal waterfront

Relax, Toronto, all is not lost; the wheels of change grind no slower here than in any other city.
So says Dutch landscape architect Adriaan Geuze, whose firm, West 8, is now redesigning the central waterfront in partnership with Toronto's DTAH.
"Bureaucratic resistance is normal," he says, smiling reassuringly. "It's the same everywhere."
Geuze and his team won an international competition last year to redesign the waterfront between Bathurst and Parliament Sts. It is a huge project, including the narrowing of Queens Quay from four lanes to two, the planting of thousands of trees, the construction of a boardwalk along the water's edge and bridges across various slips.
5 more annotation(s)...
- "Today it feels like the pedestrian is a guest on the waterfront," Geuze says. "But in the future the car will become the guest. We're going to restrict traffic to one-half of the street, but we're not going to torture it. We'll keep the flow and create a more readable situation. It's not that we don't like cars, but we need more balance."
  As Geuze explains it, Europeans love their cars every bit as much as we North Americans. The difference, he argues, is that we have gone too far.
  "Devotion to the car is the same here as in Europe," he says. "But in Europe there are some guiding cities. And we're not talking about medieval cities, but modern urban communities with large commercial centres – Strasbourg, Grenoble, Bordeaux, Lyon, Nantes, Zurich, Copenhagen. ... There's a competition between cities now."
  - Yule Heibel on 2007-12-24
    - great point re. pedestrians feeling like guests in some parts of the city
    
    - also, that today cities compete amongst themselves (echoes Florida's mantra about creative economy revolutionizing the global economy)
  Add Sticky Note
- Geuze makes it clear he's not advocating the complete abolition of the car; he feels a certain amount of traffic is healthy. Besides, he adds, large pedestrian zones can "become scary places at night."
  The intention, he insists, is to establish a state of equality between cars and people: "People will be happy, shop owners will be happy, and police will be happy."
- He sees Toronto's waterfront as a perfect example of the vast potential of the city, but also of how much needs to be done. "North America is about the car," he says. "But Queens Quay can mark a revolutionary change. It will be a magnet for anyone who wants to walk, jog, cycle or stroll. It will be a place for merchants to make a living, and that will attract people."
  - Yule Heibel on 2007-12-24
    - this articulates a vision based on USE, = important, vs. doing things based on "style" or "height restrictions" (Victoria) or other physical characteristics. The physical characteristics should flow from the uses planned
  Add Sticky Note
- In this respect, one can only hope the post-Geuze waterfront will become a model for the rest of the city. Though there has been much debate in recent years about the car, it's clear that Toronto has a long way to go before it catches up with Europe. Indeed, we are falling further and further behind. Worst of all, we have allowed public transit to deteriorate. For many Torontonians it is not an option; they have no choice but to drive.
- "Toronto is ready to have a waterfront with its own identity," Geuze asserts. "It's a marvellous site, a south-facing waterfront. What more you could ask for?"
  The answer, many might say, is greater public access. As well as controlling the car, we must ensure the waterfront is as inviting as possible. That's not to say people won't be living and working on the lake – they definitely will – but as Geuze likes to say, it's a question of balance. The point must be that we won't have to live on the waterfront to feel at home there.