Pedestrian routes choice analysis chang zong

Pedestrian Route Choice Analysis Central Square

1

INTRODUCTION Research question: What is the effect of specific variables on pedestrian route

choice in Cambridge, MA? Research method: Survey in MBTA T-station and choice analysis model in Excel Variables: sidewalk width business frequency building age diversity Survey location: Central Square MBTA Station

2/16 7:30am

2/17 9:00am, 5:30pm Sample size: 56 people 2

LITERATURE REVIEW Preferred and Minimum Widths for Sidewalk Zones

QUESTION:

The width and design of sidewalks will vary depending on street typology, functional classification, and demand.

Below are the City of Boston’s preferred and minimum widths for each Sidewalk Zone by Street Type.

Frontage Zone

Pedestrian Zone*

Greenscape/ Furnishing Zone

Curb Zone

2 Or because sidewalks on commercial streets are wider?

Total Width

Minimum

Preferred

Minimum

Preferred

Minimum

Preferred Minimum

Downtown Commercial

2’

0’

12’

8’

6’

1’-6”

6”

20’-6”

10’

Downtown Mixed-Use

2’

0’

10’

8’

6’

1’-6”

6”

18’-6”

10’

Neighborhood Main

2’

0’

8’

5’

6’

1’-6”

6”

16’-6”

7’

Neighborhood Connector

2’

0’

8’

5’ (4’)*

5’

1’-6”

6”

15’-6”

7’

Neighborhood Residential

2’

0’

5’

5’ (4’)*

4’

1’-6”

6”

11’-6”

7’

Industrial Street

2’

0’

5’

5’ (4’)*

4’

1’-6”

6”

11’-6”

7’

Shared Street

2’

0’

Varies

5’ (4’)*

N/A

N/A

N/A

Varies

Varies

N/A

N/A

6’

5’

10’

5’

6”

16’-6”

10’-6”

2’

0’

6’

5’

10’

5’

6”

18’-6”

11’-6”

2

Preferred

SIDEWALKS

Street Type

1 Does commercial density or business frequency really attract pedestrians?

Parkway Boulevard

Notes

*

5’ is the preferred minimum width of the Pedestrian Zone in the City of Boston. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) minimum 4’ wide Pedestrian Zone can be applied using engineering judgement when retrofitting 7’ wide existing sidewalks where widening is not feasible.

Jane Jacobs advocated “four generators of diversity” that “create effective economic pools of use”: Zone 1 >Frontage Mixed primary uses, activating streets at different times of the day Where buildings are located against the back of the sidewalk and constrained situations do not provide width for the Frontage Zone, the effective width of the Pedestrian Zone is reduced by 1’, as pedestrians will shy from the building edge.

2 > Short blocks, allowing high pedestrian permeability The preferred width of the Frontage Zone to accommodate sidewalk cafés is 6’.

3Pedestrian Buildings of various ages and states of repair Zone Based on engineering judgment in consultation with PWD and the Mayor’s Commission for Person’s with Disabilities, the ADA 4 >Density minimum 4’ Pedestrian Zone (plus 5’of width every 200’) may be applied.

Greenscape/Furnishing Zone > The minimum width of the Greenscape/Furnishing Zone necessary to support standard street tree installation is 2’-6”. > Utilities, street trees, and other sidewalk furnishings should be set back from curb face a minimum of 18”.

Curb Zone

3

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1 2 3 4

What effect does sidewalk width have on pedestrian patterns, particularly in winter?

What effect does business frequency have on route choice, both in terms of cleared sidewalks and the attractiveness of one’s walk?

Does diversity of building typologies, measured through building age, have an effect on one’s route choice?

What other factors do pedestrians value when selecting a route choice?

4

HYPOTHESES

1 2 3 4

What effect does sidewalk width have on pedestrian patterns, particularly in winter?

Wider sidewalks attract more users, particularly in winter, because of snow accumulation.

What effect does business frequency have on route choice, both in terms of cleared sidewalks and the attractiveness of one’s walk?

Users prefer routes with a greater number of businesses.

In winter, this is particularly relevant, as businesses are likely to shovel snow.

Does diversity of building typologies, measured through building age, have an effect on one’s route choice?

Users prefer routes with a greater diversity of building age, making it a more interesting walk.

What other factors do pedestrians value when selecting a route choice?

Commuters will likely choose the shortest, most direct path.

5

SITE: CENTRAL SQUARE Bro a

dw

Ave nu

spe ct A ven ue

use tts

Str eet

ach

Inm an

Ma ss

ay

Har

Pro

e

Fra nk

lin

ve Western A

et

nue

Gr ee

nS tre et

Au bu r

nS tre

ho

pA lle

nD

t

riv

e

Ma ssa

ch u

et

se tts

Av en

ue

yS tre et

Br oo kli

Si dn e

et

ne

St ree

t

Ma g

az ine St re

et

t ree

Pe ar lS tre

R

St iver

Bis

St re

var dS tree

6

0

0.125

0.25

miles 0.5

SITE: CENTRAL SQUARE

Central Square MBTA Station where the team surveyed.

Intersection of Mass Ave and Prospect Ave / River Street.

Commercial mix along Massachusetts Avenue.

Bicycle land and street furniture along Massachusetts Avenue.

Commercial mix along Massachusetts Avenue.

Crosswalk and open space at the intersection of Mass Ave and Prospect Ave / River Street.

7

SURVEY INSTRUMENT

8

COMPLETED SURVEY

9

VARIABLES SIDEWALK WIDTH BUSINESS FREQUENCY BUILDING AGE DIVERSITY

Calculated average sidewalk width of route in meters Average sidewalk width: 2.2m

10

VARIABLES SIDEWALK WIDTH BUSINESS FREQUENCY BUILDING AGE DIVERSITY

Business frequency calculated as Commercial frontage in meters from commercial business data

11

VARIABLES SIDEWALK WIDTH BUSINESS FREQUENCY BUILDING AGE DIVERSITY

Building age diversity calculated as the standard deviation of building age along route.

Average building age 1919

12

SELECTED ROUTES

56 routes

13

0

0.125

0.25

miles 0.5

ALL POTENTIAL ROUTES

potential 4,633 routes within 10% of the distance of selected routes

14

0

0.125

0.25

miles 0.5

SAMPLE ALTERNATE ROUTE CHOICES

Female, age 17 Began her trip at home, traveling to work, with no stops along the way Selected route because she believed it was shortest, as indicated by Google Maps

Actual route

1,094m

All possible alternatives*

206 routes

* within 1.10 of actual walk

Shortest and most direct were selfreported motivations (5 on a scale of 1-5) Shortest route

1,056m

Alternative route

1,102m

15

RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS

56

participants

[

55% female, 45% male 84% age 18 - 35 91% take same route daily, mostly to work (“necessary” pedestrian activity) 78% employed, 15% students

buying lunch (x 3) coffee (x 3) breakfast 16

REASONS FOR ROUTE CHOICE

“Other” included: comfortable familiar sidewalk (x2) parks greenery neighborhood

17

REASONS FOR ROUTE CHOICE

[

reasons given for route choice on open-ended question

18

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS Meters Walked

Histogram

9

O 19

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS Deviation from shortest route

Histogram

45

O 20

FINDINGS rho2 = 0.31 0.1

building diversity

businesses

0.2

0.6

distance

0.22

sidewalk width

21

KEY TAKEAWAYS +1 Meter

Additional Sidewalk Width along route

β sidewalk* β distance

-335.56

+ 335 Meter Detour *average sidewalk width along the route

People willing to walk an additional 335 meters in length if they can walk along widertosidewalk Peopleawilling walk an addition 335 meters in length, if they can walk along a wider sidewalk

22

KEY TAKEAWAYS ACME CO

-4.5 businesses

=1M

β distance (M) β business

Adding is equivalent to removing 4.5 businesses from from the route.

Addingaameter metertotoa route a route is equivalent to removing 4.5 businesses the In other people prefer to walk along with business frontage. route.words, In other words, people prefer toroutes walk along routes with business frontage

-4.51

23

KEY TAKEAWAYS +22 Standard Deviation of Building Diversity

1 Meter Detour

β distance (M) β building diversity (SD)

AnPeople additional 1 Meter of route length has a similar effectthan on walking choice that inwould rather walk an extra +1 Meter walk along a street creasing diversity (although very slightly).typologies with abuilding slightly more would diverse array of building

-22

24

RECOMMENDATIONS Widening sidewalks may help to increase walking during winter, when snow piling up can impede pedestrians on narrow sidewalks. +1 Meter

Additional Sidewalk Width along route

+ 335 Meter Detour

People willing to walk an addition 335 meters in length, if they can walk along a wider sidewalk

25

RECOMMENDATIONS Increasing the number of business frontages along a route can improve the walkability of the area.

ACME CO

-4.5 businesses

=1M

Adding a meter to a route is equivalent to removing 4.5 businesses from the route. In other words, people prefer to walk along routes with business frontage

26

RECOMMENDATIONS A slight preference for building uniformity could point to the importance of building design codes, which might improve aesthetic qualities of the walk.* +22 Standard Deviation of Building Diversity

1 Meter Detour

People would rather walk an extra +1 Meter than walk along a street with a slightly more diverse array of building typologies

* While research has pointed to diversity and variety as stimuling walking (Jan Gehl, Appleyard), there is a group of urban designers of the New Urbanist School, inspired by the work of people like Christopher Alexander, who call for more standardized design guidelines as having beneficial effects for community, neighborhood identity, coherence, etc.

27

CONCLUSION + CHALLENGES + Sidewalk width was the strongest variable, followed by distance, then businesses, then building diversity + Sidewalk width could be a significant factor in winter, due to the difficulty piled snow causes, especially on narrow sidewalks +Business frontage also could play a role in helping to clear snow--thus wide sidewalks with business frontage might be particular attractive for pedestrians during winter +Building diversity seemed to have a neglible to small impact, and people’s sensitivity to architectural styles is hard to measure--people seem to be more sensitive to conditions that immediately affect their path environment, such as sidewalk width.

28