Elevating Awareness - Engaging a City from New Heights by Claire Gagliardi

ELEVATING AWARENESS engaging a city from new heights

a thesis exploration by claire gagliardi wentworth institute of technology 2019

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS to my mother + father for the unwavering support and love to manuel delgado for sparking my interest in urbanism and fulfilling my urban dreams on our studio trip to spain

to lora kim + curtis perrin for organizing my cluster of initial thoughts and encouraging me to explore further into the world of walkability

to j. michael sullivan for throwing me headfirst into the world of architecture and challenging me in every way possible

to my colleagues richard, nick, janice, allie, thomas; without whom i would never had made it through the year

ADVISEMENT i propose to pursue the work described here antonio furgiuele under the advisement of

thesis advisor wentworth institute of technology, faculty

kathleen onufer

independent advisor

goody clancy, senior planner

ELEVATING AWARENESS

engaging a city from new heights

Boston prides itself as being a walkable city. And

Two segments are integrated into the city's infra-

it should, it's the fourth highest ranking city in

structure: water and energy. Through each sys-

the country for walkability.1 But that's only by the

tem, people can make an impact as they move,

numbers. The number of amenities within walk-

whether it be powering the streetlights along the

ing distance doesn't equate to what's actually

pathway, or becoming engaged with water filtra-

happening on the streets. It doesn't take into

tion and distribution through the city. By creating

account the people, the community, or the basic

temporary "workers" of the city, pedestrians

infrastructure available to the residents. This

become more engaged as they do the simplest

means people aren't as active on the streets, and

task: move. Not only does the elevated structure

aren't aware of some of the issues facing Boston

become integral to the city infrastructure, but the

today. Introducing the B-LOOP, a proposal for

pedestrians gain a heightened awareness of the

an elevated pathway that allows pedestrians to

problems facing Boston, and how even the easi-

take ownership of their city through the power of

est methods can contribute in the smallest way.

walking.

walkability

revitalization

infrastructure

pedestrian

Figure 0.1 How do pedestrians rank on our city streets? An abstract image.

Walk ScoreÂŽ. Walk Score Methodology. Accessed 27 November, 2018. https://www.walkscore.com/methodology.shtml

01 02 03 INTRODUCTION

LITERATURE REVIEW

11 thesis statement 13 argument 15 setting context 17 framing the narrative 19 audience 20 book structure 23 closing

DESIGN AS RESEARCH

26 only the essentials 28 precedents + studies 32 urban planning concepts

38 criteria 40 walkability impacts 44 precedents 48 boston street analysis 54 boston mapping

04 05 06 PROPOSAL

OUTCOMES

CREDITS

66 the b-loop 68 the route 70 the structure 74 the connections

77 expectations 78 post-thesis exploration

82 bibliography 84 image citations

INTRODUCTION

In the last half century in the United States, a

This thesis proposes a continuous, elevated,

primary element has forced cities to radical-

pathway winding through Boston city streets,

ly transform: the automobile. From what was

re-engaging pedestrians with everyday city ele-

once a simple station wagon, has become pick-

ments that they've lost touch with. With connec-

up trucks and luxury sedans driving down our

tions to existing infrastructure and access points

streets. Not only did the reversal of superiority

throughout the loop, pedestrians contribute to

change the experience and movement of pedes-

their city by doing the simplest task: moving.

trians in the city, but it has also transformed how

walkability

pedestrians engage with their environment. They

walk fast, eyes straight ahead or down on their

infrastructure

phones, and are completely detached from their environment. Their disassociation from the street elements creates blinders to the issues plaguing Boston today.

how easily one can walk through a space the underlying structure of the city

revitalization

to rejuvenate a space

pedestrian

the priority

Figure 1.1 An abstract cartoon of the looming devastation the carbon footprint we're leaving will impact on us.

ARGUMENT

Studies show that people will only walk

combated in the city, with new construction using

to their destination if it takes them less than 20

greener and less invasive methods. But it's not

minutes. For example, if someone wanted to go

enough.

from the Back Bay T station to Government Cen-

ter Plaza for the Scooperbowl, they'd be more

make our cities more walkable and lower the

likely to take public transit than walk past the

impact we have on the environment. By estab-

Commons and experience more of Boston.

lishing a strong set of criteria and applying it to

the city streets, it begs the question: what can a

If one looks at maps of Boston, measur-

So what can we do? It's an uphill fight to

ing the different household incomes and transit

walkable intervention do for our city?

accessibility, it's no wonder people in outlying

Bring out the culture?

neighborhoods are relying on automobiles to go

Create better social interactions?

about their daily lives. Even bikes aren't easily

Boost residents' physical and mental

moved through the city. The dominating priority

well-being?

is always given to cars.

street?

And if people aren't on the streets expe-

riencing their city, they become less aware and

Extend the building program out into the

Open space for collaboration?

Encourage citizens to get involved in the

fight for pedestrian-oriented design?

more detached from the issues facing their city.

A lack of potable water in cities is on track

to becomig the largest economical problem in the world by 2025. Stormwater is being dumped into drains and pushed back into the surrounding bodies of water, which isn't exactly helping our rising sea levels, either. Energy is slowly being

SETTING CONTEXT Walkability almost seems like an attribute that

can't be accurately calculated. It would be hard

at 89.2, and Boston isn't far behind at 80.9. It's

to find consistency among the research. Walk

understandable that Boston ranks that high, with

ScoreÂŽ aims to redeem that as the leading data

how dense of a downtown center we have and

producer for walkability of any address in the

each neighborhood has a handful of amenities.

United States, Canada, and Australia.1

So why is talking about walkability in Boston rele-

vant when we're sitting near the top of the chart?

Using sources such as Google and the

The number one city, New York, falls short

U.S. Census, the data is analyzed based on the

address' proximity to nearby amenities and daily

street. Which would make you more comfortable:

errands. If they're located within five minutes,

a narrow sidewalk that you have to squeeze by

they receive a higher amount of points. Ameni-

passerby next to tall, dominating buildings, or a

ties located more than half an hour away aren't

wide sidewalk with people sitting outside shops

considered for points.

and businesses, laughing and having an enjoy-

90 - 100 Walker's Paradise: daily errands

able time?

don't require a car.

70 - 89 Very Walkable: most errands can

more enjoyable, more oriented to our needs,

be accomplished on foot.

rather than that of the automobile? It's not a

50 - 69 Somewhat Walkable: some errands

matter of banning cars. It's putting ourselves,

can be accomplished on foot.

and our well-being, first.

25 - 49: Car Dependent: most errands

require a car.

0 - 24: Car Dependent: almost all errands

require a car.

Walk ScoreÂŽ. Walk Score Methodology. Accessed 27 November, 2018. https://www.walkscore.com/methodology.shtml

Imagine walking down a commercial

So why not make our cities more walkable,

Figure 1.2 Walk ScoreÂŽ 2017 top 40 rankings, organized by highest to lowest walk score.

FRAMING THE NARRATIVE To gain insight into the reasoning behind this ex-

Greece, France, Spain, Poland, the Netherlands,

ploration, one can look to my travels during my

and Italy. My eyes were opened to so many

time at Wentworth Institute of Technology. I was

different types of urban spaces, going from the

incredibly fortunate to have been able to visit

bicycle-dominated Amsterdam city streets to the

nine countries as an undergraduate student.

cobblestoned pathways in Rome.

I took a personal trip to Haiti in the sum-

I was exposed to nine urban fabrics,

mer of 2015, spending half a week in the capital,

nine street typologies, nine historical layouts,

Port au Prince, and the other half in a mountain

and nine levels of sociability. I walked through

village named Brely. For my first time out of the

swarms of people, bicycles, mopeds, and vehi-

United States, it was a complete culture shock.

cles. The paths I travelled heightened my sense

Many people in Haiti don't drive cars; they either

of surrounding, more than it ever would've had

walk or bike, simply because they can't afford to

I been in a car. My passion for the urban envi-

own a vehicle. It was fascinating to watch people

ronment and pedestrian-oriented design turned

move, they didn't always have established cross-

into this exploration for transforming Boston city

walks or sidewalks, they just moved wherever

streets.

they wanted to, even if it meant they were walking in the direct path of the speeding cars. There were many times I wanted to reach out and pull back a person walking in fear they would get run over. But they never did.

My senior year I studied abroad in a ninety

day program based in Berlin, Germany. During this time, I travelled to the Czech Republic,

Figure 1.3 A photographic sequence of my travels, from left to right, top to bottom: Port-au-Prince, Haiti Berliner Dom, Berlin, Germany Prague Castle, Prague, Czech Republic Acropolis, Athens, Greece Cathedrale de Notre Dame, Paris, France Guggenheim Museum, Bilbao, Spain Szczecin Philharmonic, Szczecin, Poland Amsterdam, Netherlands Colosseum, Rome, Italy

How do you move?

Do you walk?

run?

bike?

take transit?

drive?

If you drive...

Where do you park?

metered street parking?

hourly rate parking lot?

parking garage? assigned parking space?

Why don't you walk?

do you live too far?

is there no accessible transit?

is it not an enjoyable walk?

AUDIENCE There are several groups who I hope will be in-

pedestrians. Learn how they move. Learn what

fluenced by the research and design work in the

makes them tick. Learn what they want. What

following chapters of this thesis.

they need. Take the failures and test them again. Take the successes and make them better. Walk-

To students and educators, I encourage

ability isn't a simple task. And there isn't only one

you to utilize this book as not only a source of

answer. Find yours.

knowledge, but as a precedent for your own explorations, albeit any topic that piques your interest. If it's walkability and pedestrian-oriented design, use this research as a starting ground into your own analysis (or at least steal the bibliography). If it's another architectural argument, look to the process and preliminary work to understand how studies that may not head-on address your topic may still become relevant as your design progresses.

To architects and urban planners, we all agree that walkability would be a great feature to slap onto every one of our busy streets as a way to attract more pedestrians and more diversity to our city centers. Use this thesis as an abstract way of analyzing your city, your streets, your

STRUCTURE Chapter 01 was the introduction to the thesis, shedding light on the inspiration behind the exploration, and giving an understanding to the current urban environment that the proposal is focused on. Chapter 02 is a review of important literature referenced throughout this thesis exploration. Several collegiate studies are first to be analyzed, focusing on the "key" essentials of walkable spaces. Following are existing precedents, global research, and studies directly related to the City of Boston. Finally, urban planners such as Jane Jacobs and Jeff Speck voice their opinion on what makes our cities function. Chapter 03 is the beginning of critical thinking, of design as research. The walkability criteria is defined, and preliminary work is discussed through analyzing specific precedents spread over three continents. A further study is done on the City of Boston, focusing on existing streets and studies, before diving into a mapping exercise of demographics, interactions, and employment.

In Chapter 04 the proposal is introduced, with the route strategically laid out and the structure defined in detail. The connections to nearby buildings and infrastructure are specific to each street, each moment along the pathway. The immediate impact on the city is evident, with future expansion planned for an overarching revitalization of Boston. Chapter 05 explores the process of the thesis, highlighting the expected outcomes, and bringing to light the challenges that were faced as the proposal progressed. With additional time, an idea of further exploration is analyzed.

Chapter 06 gives credit to the incredible authors and researchers whose work inspired this thesis, and the materials created by their hand. A list of all image credits follows the bibliography.

The following four chapters aim to propel you

Join in the fight for a new pedestrian dominance

into the world of pedestrian-oriented design.

over our cities.

This will not be an exploration on how walkability will revolutionize Boston. Rather, this thesis will investigate more personal connections to the residents of the neighborhoods.

Walkable spaces benefit our cities resi-

dents physically, mentally, socially, and culturally. They establish new relationships, bring more attention to local businesses, and create a sense of community in places that may be yearning for one.

Explore this thesis with an open mind, and

immerse yourself into a different way of thinking.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Our ability to access areas in and around where

This literature review begins to explore the

we live heavily influences how we live our daily

essential features of a walkable space, existing

lives. We drive, we take public transportation, we

precedents and studies, and urban planning con-

bike, and we walk. Looking at city life, and how

cepts for our pedestrian pathways.

we move throughout the day, it’s easy to ignore how little space we’re allotted as we walk. Five lanes of traffic are centered between six foot sidewalks. The pedestrian isn’t the first thought, it comes after the vehicles, the buildings, and the other street elements. What will it take to reverse this order, and how can we convince urban planners and architects that it’s a priority?

ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF A WALKABLE SPACE Walkable spaces in cities and towns are often

and around it.

defined by a “checklist” of elements that contrib-

ute to the space being successful. Many books

port these findings. Their article in the Urban

and articles touch upon greenspace, density,

Land Institute cites medium-to-high densities, a

and land use as the most prominent features,

fine-grained mix of land uses, short-to-medium

but many smaller ones contribute to the level of

length blocks, close transit routes, two-to-four

pedestrian access in a space.

lane streets, continuous sidewalks, safe crossings,

protection from traffic, street-oriented buildings,

For instance, in Tucson, Arizona, seven

Reid Ewing and Keith Bartholomew sup-

students from the University of Arizona complet-

and comfortable waiting places.3 They draw on

ed a study on the relationship between walkabil-

additional urban precedents, looking at Boston,

ity and physical activity by distributing a resident

D.C., and Miami. Similarly, the main claim of

survey.2 They created a Walkability Framework

Streets for Living is that the street is a place for

to base their research, and used nine categories:

physical and social interaction, and should not

connectivity, density, land use, traffic safety, sur-

only be designed for automobiles.4 Cars should

veillance, experience, parking, green space, and

be merely a secondary thought. They describe

community (Figure 2.1). It was sent out between

pedestrians, children at play, bicyclists, parked

January and March of 2014, with their outreach

cars, and moving cars all sharing one space.

including ages 18-70+, multiple genders and

Street sections are shown of the different options

races, varying levels of income, and all levels of

of shared space. They also speak of these “urban

education. Their results concluded that neigh-

zones,” whether environmental, social, or phys-

borhoods that prioritizes traffic safety, green-

ical, and how we can design those to be more

scape, a mixed land use, and a high density of

pedestrian-driven.

people would make its residents want to walk in

William Whyte has a different idea: that

Ewing, Reid and Keith Bartholomew. Checklist of Essential Features. “Pedestrian and Transit-Oriented Design.” Urban Land Institute, 2013. (Accessed 26 Sept 2018).

Zuniga-Teran, Adriana A., Barron J. Orr, Randy H. Gimblett, Nader V. Chalfoun, Stuart E. Marsh, David P. Guertin, and Scott B. Going. “Designing Healthy Communities: Testing the Walkability Model.” Frontiers of Architectural Research no. 6 (2017): 63-73. Higher Education Press. (Accessed 13 Sept 2018).

each and every person defines the walkability of a space, not necessarily the elements in it. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces investigates the role an individual has on each type of urban space, and how we interact with these spaces.5 To research this phenomena, Whyte formed a group called The Street Life Project and used New York City to discover what drew people to a space and what deterred them. He cites other Figure 2.1 Walkability Framework of the nine categories used to analyze the walkability levels in Tuscon, Arizona.

people, the amount of space, greenspace, and places to sit as just a few of the things that attract people to a location. Rather than simply designing spaces for people to use and interact in, Whyte argues that by creating interactive public spaces, we give the people the opportunity to make the space their own and define their own presence there.

Figure 2.2 A black and white image of an unsuccessful public space in New York City. 4

Southwork, Michael and Eran Ben-Joseph. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Chapter 5: Streets for Living.â&#x20AC;? Streets and the Shaping of Towns & Cities. London: Island Press, 2003. Whyte, William H. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Michigan: Edwards Brothers, Inc.,: 1980.

DRAWING FROM EXISTING PRECEDENTS + STUDIES The sources described already have had a more

to their advantage.

urban focus. However, cities from around the

globe have created their own walkability frame-

Konya, Turkey, the study focused more on ac-

works, albeit not as large scale. In Kalamaria,

cessibility in urban spaces, and how to prioritize

Greece, the five researchers developed a fea-

it over the other elements.8 It investigated how

sibility study on how successful the city could

people with different requirements and needs

be by transforming zones into more pedestri-

(disabled people, elders, children, pregnant

an-friendly locations with open public squares

women, parents with strollers, etc.) interact

and pedestrian roads.6 Their evidence includes

with public urban spaces. H. Filiz Alkan Meshur

site analysis and resident interviews, randomly

claims that an idea of ‘universal design’ can offer

choosing four hundred people. The article draws

a better state of living and be applied to many

attention to the design flaws of the existing infra-

different cities. It’s aimed at locations not pro-

structures, lacking greenspace, a sense of safety,

viding access and services for those who need

and parking.

accommodations with the hopes of overhauling

and redesigning of these spaces.

Meanwhile, in Martyrs’ Square in Tripoli,

Finally, in the Zafer Pedestrian Zone in

they’re looking to improve the existing pedestri-

an spaces.7 Their analysis was strategic, testing

focusing on the city of Boston itself. The Boston

the relationship between walkability and site ele-

Transportation Department released a set of

ments (time, weather, demographic, movement,

guidelines analyzing the existing conditions of

environment). Their site was a little more difficult

the streets and roads.9 Boston Complete Streets

as the history of the square impacted the limits

offers an insight into the different types of ele-

of what they could do, but they took the histori-

ments and techniques we can begin to imple-

cal rules for planning in Libyan cities and used it

ment, taking into consideration the variables

Several studies have been completed

Abdulla, Khairi M.A., Mohamed Gamal Abdelmonem, Gehan Selim. “Walkability in Historic Urban Spaces: Testing the Safety and Security in Martyrs’ Square in Tripoli.” International Journal of Architectural Research no. 11-3 (November 2017): 163-177. Archnet. (Accessed 13 Sept 2018).

of the individual streets (Figure 2.3). The street types included downtown mixed uses, various neighborhood statuses, industrial, shared streets, and boulevards.

Figure 2.3 An analytical perspective of the pedestrian-oriented changes urban planners can make on the Boston city streets, manipulated color.

Meshur, H. Filiz Alkan and Bilgehan Yilmaz Cakmak. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Universal Design in Urban Public Spaces: The Case of Zafer Pedestrian Zone / Konya-Turkey.â&#x20AC;? International Journal of Architecture and Planning no. 6 (August 2018): 15-40. ICONARP. (Accessed 24 Sept 2018).

Boston Transportation Department. Boston Complete Streets. Ebook. Boston, Massachusetts: City of Boston, 2013. http://bostoncompletestreets.org/.

The Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority

(MBTA) Focus 40 plan, compared to the previous studies referenced in this literature review, seems out of place.10 However, it would be ignorant to not speak to the effect of public transportation on our ability to walk and access our cities.

The Focus 40 aims to continually rede-

velop its transit system to keep up with the ever-changing needs of Boston and its outlying areas. Improvements to each of the subway lines, the bus routes, the ferries, and the commuter rail lines, shown in Figure 2.4, would offer more opportunities for residents to utilize their resources instead of driving to their workplaces and leisure. Why would you drive forty minutes in rush hour traffic if you could walk a block to a T station and hop on for a twenty-minute ride?

Figure 2.4 A map of the proposed outreach of the Boston MBTA transit system, with the existing stations highlighted in blue. 10

Slesinger, Jennifer. Focus 40: The 2040 Investment Plan for the MBTA. Ebook. Boston, Massachusetts: MassDOT & MBTA, 2018. https://www.mbtafocus40.com/focus40theplan/

URBAN PLANNING CONCEPTS Jane Jacob’s book starts strongly: “This book is

and wrong with American cities, and how future

an attack on current city planning and rebuild-

generations can learn from our past successes

ing.”11 She claims to have a method for overhaul-

and failures to rewrite the rules of walkability.

ing how we interpret urban design, citing several

design factors such as safety, visibility, and and

with the aesthetic appearance in mind, but also

economic impacts. As she states, “Planners must

the emotional and psychological impacts on

diagnose, in specific places, specifically what is

the users. Charles Montgomery investigates the

lacking to generate diversity, and then aim at

correlation between where people choose to live

helping to supply the lacks as best they can be

and their overall happiness level. He calculates

supplied.” She clearly defines her opinion that

this level through their environment, home life,

she prefers dense cities over sprawled ones.

occupation, and commute. He speaks to the

ratio of vehicular deaths to ease of transit ac-

However, Jeff Speck claims to have boiled

Architecture shouldn't only be designed

down exactly what makes a city successful:

cess. Happy City seeks to redefine what makes

walkability.12 He says that making cities more

a resident happy, and how the environment they

walkable can benefit them physically and so-

live in can change their mood in an instant.13 It’s

cially, calling out vehicular impact, deprioritizing

biased against urban sprawl, and how people

parking, embracing bikes, and utilizing green-

who live in suburban neighborhoods are general-

space as a focal point of pedestrian areas. He

ly more unhappier than those who live in the city.

references Jane Jacobs, as many do, but says

Finally, The Architecture of Happiness

that planners still have not yet caught up to her

aims to investigate the connection between ar-

ideals. Acknowledging that this isn’t the same

chitecture and our psychological identity, rather

type of book, that his won’t revolutionize urban

than just physical reactions to a space.14 Botton

planning, he strategically lays out what is right

claims that the environment we’re in heavily

Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House, Inc. 1961. Speck, Jeff. Walkable City. New York: North Point Press, 2012.

Montgomery, Charles. Happy City: Transforming Our Lives Through Urban Design. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2013. Botton, Alain de. The Architecture of Happiness. New York: Random House, Inc, 2006.

affects the person we become, and that itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s our

design while keeping in mind not only the physi-

role as architects to design with this in mind. He

cal, but the social, emotional, and psychological

writes about how we react to the kinds of walls,

impacts of our spaces.

rooms, spaces, and buildings that we interact with. The ideals rein true in that we need to Figure 2.5 What elements do we want to see on our streets? A symbolic image.

Architecture influences us in more ways than

We must wield these essential features and

we know: how we move, how we work, how we

concepts as weapons, striving to plan for a co-

travel, and how we walk. Breaking down our

hesive pedestrian-centric city. Through the use

streets and pathways begins to help understand

of greenscape, a mixture of land uses, a safer

the elements that contribute to a walkable space,

traffic layout, and offerings for more people from

and how the existing street structure might fight

more backgrounds, we start to form a new type

against that. Making sidewalks wider and adding

of street layout, a reversal of the usual automo-

more trees isn't enough to satisfy the need of

bile-dominating typology.

the pedestrian. It's about the experience, the journey a person takes as they interact with the street.

DESIGN AS RESEARCH

Walkability isn't something urban planners can

ability criteria is defined, and will be referenced

simply apply to city streets after they've been ful-

throughout the remainder of the book. The use

ly designed. It requires integration, an extensive

of sectionality is strategic, as it offers a way of

knowledge on the street it's being implemented

understanding the individual characteristics of

on, and a willingness to redevelop the existing

the many different pieces of the street. Finally, a

conditions. While it may not seem like it, making

series of mapping is done on the city of Boston,

our streets more walkable is something we des-

introducing the heart of the thesis strategy.

perately need. When mapping new streets, one must create an identity for the space, utilize its existing strengths, and argue for how to improve its weaknesses. This chapter seeks to discover the impacts and benefits of walkability when studied in certain cities and streets across the globe. The walk-

WALKABILITY CRITERIA

Controlled parking includes higher meter rates

Bike lanes encourage a different means of trans-

and/or reducing the amount of street parking

poratation, and could provide a means of safety

spaces to make room for additional greenscape

from traffic and storage at convienent points.

and urban seating.

Wider sidewalks allow for more comfortable

Accessible transit gives another incentive to not

walking spaces and opportunities for interaction.

walk and allows for less parking.

Greenscape adds not only an aesthetic attri-

Outdoor programming is an opportunity for

bute to the street, but also a new environmental

buildings to expand their programming to the

impact.

street.

Social interactions improve a person's social

Urban seating provides spaces for relaxation

and mental well-being and forge new bonds.

and contemplation along the street edge and connects to the neighboring programming.

IMPACTS OF WALKABILITY T

SOCIAL IMPACTS

More spaces and reasons to walk allows for more opportunities for social interaction. Seating elements along the main walkways, mixed outdoor programming, and open air spaces open the street up to a more personalized space, leading to a stronger community feel in the neighborhood.

Figure 3.1 Street perspective of the social impacts of walkability.

ECONOMIC IMPACTS

Households in automobile-dependent communities spend fifty percent more on transportation than people who have more access to transit, Figure 3.2 Street perspective of the economic impacts of walkability.

people who walk, or those who bike. Streets with access to transit stops and bike storage could decrease the amount of money residents spend on gas and car maintenance.

HEALTH IMPACTS

Physical inactivity can lead to obesity, a problem in which America has an unreasonably high percentage of. Making enjoyable spaces for people to walk will encourage them to take an alternate means of transportation. Wide sidewalks and greenscape elements contribute to a more pleasant walking experience.

Figure 3.3 Street perspective of the health impacts of walkability.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Motor vehicles contribute to eighty percent of carbon monoxide emissions and fifty-five percent of nitrogen oxide emissions in the United States. Figure 3.4 Street perspective of the environmental impacts of walkability.

By controlling parking, adding bike lanes and racks, and allocating sidewalk space for transit stops, people could spend less time driving and start walking more.

PRECEDENTS

SAN FRANCISCO - California, USA

Year founded: 1850 Population: 884,363 Size: 281.89 sq.mi In 2010, the city created a $604 million dollar plan to ban cars and add bike lanes on 2.2 miles of Market Street. In 2018, construction on the first phase began.

Figure 3.5 An existing and proposed street section of San Francisco, and the walkability criteria that apply to that street.

MADRID - Spain

Year founded: 865 Population: 3,141,991 Size: 233.3 sq.mi Figure 3.6 An existing and proposed street section of Madrid, and the walkability criteria that apply to that street.

In 2018, the city banned non-resident cars from the center. By 2020, they plan to ban all cars from the 500 acre center and redesign twenty-four of their busiest streets for pedestrians.

BOGOTA - Colombia

Year founded: 1538 Population: 8,080,734 Size: 613 sq.mi In 1974 the city established Ciclovia, a day-long event that closes 75 miles of roads to vehicles. In 2013 they began the Pico y Placa program, which bans certain cars on certain week days.

Figure 3.7 An existing and proposed street section of Bogota, and the walkability criteria that apply to that street.

PARIS - France

Year founded: 52 BC Population: 2,206,488 Size: 40.7 sq.mi Figure 3.8 An existing and proposed street section of Paris, and the walkability criteria that apply to that street.

In 2016, all drivers with cars made before 1997 were banned from the city center on weekdays, and by 2020 they plan to double bike lanes, create electric-car streets, and have car-free days.

BOSTON ANALYSIS Boston prides itself as being a mostly walkable

character. But these rankings are based off the

city. An analysis of the walk, transit, and bike

location of the amenities people need, not off of

scores of the city's neighborhoods confirms that.

social interactions, cultural needs, and communi-

The top five neighborhoods - the North End, Bay

ty spaces that are hard to analyze.

Village, Beacon Hill, Chinatown/Leather District,

and Downtown - all have perfect transit scores

neighborhood by the amount of personalized

and near perfect walk scores. The lowest neigh-

connections without asking every single resident.

borhood, East Boston, is fifty-three walk points

But by breaking down the layers of the street,

lower than the highest one, but is also home to

represented in green below, one can begin to

Logan International Airport, which contributes to

analyze each element separately to understand

the low score.

the effects on the pedestrian and the walkability

criteria elements it's boosting, and which ones

So why study a city that is already so

pedestrian-friendly? The scores show that almost

It would be impossible to organize each

it's lacking.

all of Boston's neighborhoods boast a walkable

BUILDING

PEDESTRIAN

GREENSCAPE

VEHICULAR TRAFFIC

NEIGHBORHOOD

WALK

TRANSIT

BIKE

North End

100

Bay Village

100

Beacon Hill

100

Chinatown - Leather District

100

Downtown

100

Back Bay

South End

West End

100

South Boston

Fenway - Kenmore

Roxbury

Hyde Park

Mission Hill

Roslindale

Dorchester

Allston

Charlestown

Mattapan

Jamaica Plain

Brighton

East Boston

Figure 3.9 Walk ScoreÂ® 2017 walk, transit, and bike scores of the neighborhoods in Boston.

BOYLSTON STREET - Back Bay Dalton Street to Arlington Street

Primary land uses: Commercial

Mixed use

Institutional

Residential (4-6 units)

Figure 3.10 An aerial view and two sections of Boylston Street, and the walkability criteria that apply to it.

NEWBURY STREET - Back Bay Massachusetts Avenue to Arlington Street

Primary land uses: Commercial Figure 3.11 An aerial view and two sections of Newbury Street, and the walkability criteria that apply to it.

Mixed use

Institutional Residential

CHARLES STREET - Beacon Hill Beacon Street to Cambridge Street

Primary land uses:

Single family residential

Apartment Condominium

Mixed use

Residential (4-6 units)

Figure 3.12 An aerial view and two sections of Charles Street, and the walkability criteria that apply to it.

WASHINGTON STREET - Downtown Winter Street to Court Street

Primary land uses: Commercial Figure 3.13 An aerial view and two sections of Washington Street, and the walkability criteria that apply to it.

Mixed use

Institutional

everett

chelsea

somerville charlestown east boston

cambridge

north end

west end beacon hill

downtown back bay bay village

chinatown

allston fenway + kenmore

south end south boston

mission hill

jamaica plain

roxbury

Figure 3.14 A map of the existing neighborhoods in Boston, as well as the neighboring Somerville, Cambridge, Everett, and Chelsea.

dorchester

Figure 3.15 An analytical map of the walkability levels of the neighborhoods of Boston according to Walk ScoreÂŽ, with the darkest shade being the most walkable.

<$75K

$1.5M+

Figure 3.16 An analytical map of the median listing prices of homes in the city Boston, according to Trulia.ÂŽ

Figure 3.17 An analytical map of the pedestrian collisions in the city of Boston in 2017.

MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOMES

$100,000.01 - $176,357

116

111

$71,738.01 - $100,000 $53,136.01 - $71,738 $30,000.01 - $53,136 $10,446 - $30,000

MAJOR BUS ROUTE

T T

T T T

57 T

T T

T T T

T T T1

T T T Figure 3.18 An analytical map of the accessible transit in Boston, with the subway trains and major bus routes, layered over the median household income levels in the city.

PROTECTED BIKE LANES EXPOSED / SHARED BIKE LANES GROUND MARKINGS

Figure 3.19 An analytical map of the existing types of bike lanes in Boston, defining the protected bike lanes, shared with automobile lanes, and where there are only ground markings.

30,000 SPACES > 10,000 - 30,000 SPACES < 10,000 SPACES

Figure 3.20 An analytical map of the amount of parking spaces per square mile in the city, with the darkest purple having thirty thousand or more spaces.

PUBLIC GREENSPACE PRIVATE GREENSPACE

Figure 3.21 An analytical map of the existing greenspace in Boston, distinguishing between public and private.

DESIGNED PROGRAM INFORMAL PROGRAM

Figure 3.22 An analytical map of different types of outdoor programming in the city, both purposefully designed and informally defined.

WORKING PROFESSIONALS WORKING HOSPITALITY WORKING HEALTHCARE WORKING EDUCATION COMMUNITY CENTER

Figure 3.23 An analytical map of the existing social interactions available to the citizens of Boston, documenting the current locations of community centers over the range of creative class residents to working class residents.

PROPOSAL

The B-LOOP. A proposal for a continuous, elevat-

water fountains and features along the pathway.

ed pathway that gives the power back to pedes-

trians. By reclaiming ownership of the street, pe-

activate piezo energy strips underneath the

destrians gain an enhanced insight into Boston.

surface, generating enough energy to light a

streetlamp, lights embedded in the handrails,

There are two typologies of the structure:

In terms of energy, as people move they

along existing center medians and resting on the

and downlights directed back towards the street.

edge of the sidewalk. With an elevated height

clearance for vehicles below, pedestrians enjoy

issues facing the city, and transform how its ev-

an enhanced experience through the city while

eryday users will engage with their environment.

invoking a new environmental way of thinking.

This new infrastructure will radically redefine the

fabric of Boston for the next 100 years to come.

In terms of water, stormwater is collected

The proposed B-LOOP will mitigate the

through drains on the sides of the path, which continually distributes it around the loop, passing through four filtration systems and supplying

Figure 3.24 An analytical map of the proposed elevated pathway, titled "The B-LOOP," highlighting six of the 67 access points for ramps and stairs.

om ed fre il a tr

north station

government

commons

o rath

john hancock

m a ou rch r l fo iv r es

prudential

Figure 3.25 An analytical map of the existing pathways and landmarks in Boston, with the B-LOOP highlighted in blue.

st da . pa y tri pa ck ra â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s de

THE B-LOOP With every great form of infastructure, a city can

connections to the mbta

begin to reimagine itself, to re-establish itself.

The B-LOOP will allow pedestrians to reclaim

hynes convention center

ownership of Boston, whether they're walking,

government center

in wheelchairs, on crutches, running, cycling,

boylston

boarding, however they move. People utilizing

this pathway will engage water, energy, and the

south station

environment, and redefine sociability in the city

of Boston.

chinatown

The elevated pathway is strategically rout-

ed to connect with existing infrastructure, nodes

green line

red line

prudential

charles/mgh

orange line state street

blue line

goverment center

aquarium

of transference, and areas of sociability. It takes over areas where significant amounts of pedes-

connections to major movements

tian-car collisions have occurred, and intersects

boston marathon

with major movement paths through the city.

march for our lives

freedom trail

Pedestrians access the B-LOOP through

stairs and ramps, strategically placed to give more opportunities for movement. It's not the

connections to landmarks

intention that people must use the entire loop,

prudential center

it's a means of re-integrating the pedestrian with

boston commons

their city and offering a continuous, safe move-

goverment center plaza

ment through Boston.

charles river esplanade

TYPOLOGY 1

8” stormwater drain

Typology 1 of the tapered B-LOOP would be placed bracket beam along the center median of the street. This would allow for access from street crosswalks via a ramp, and for connections to nearby buildings.

destrians and cyclists are given the same travel experience as drivers - from fifteen feet in the air.

A structural section

A structural detail

14’-0” clearance height Figure 3.26 An architectural study of B-LOOP Typology 1, including: An elevation Δ

By being located in the middle of the road, pe-

TYPOLOGY 1

structure along the street median led lighting embedded in handrails

weatherproof protection layer

piezo energy strips

epoxy loctite hysol

8” stormwater drain

tapered bracket beam

14’-0” clearance height

TYPOLOGY 2

integrated streetlight

Typology 2 of the B-LOOP would be placed along the sidewalk edge. This would allow for access via strategically placed stairs and ramps, as well as intertwined relations to the nearby establishments. Pedestrians are offered an elevated

have the opportunity to interact with the impact

embedded downlighting

A structural section

A structural detail

stopping for a drink from the public fountain.

they create, whether it be lighting their path or

Figure 3.27 An architectural study of B-LOOP Typology 2, including: An elevation Δ

experience as they move through the city, and

TYPOLOGY 2

structure along the sidewalk edge

TYPOLOGY 2

structure along the sidewalk edge

streetlight powered by the pathway

mountable brackets attached to railings mountable brackets attached to railings

slight ridge in center for surface runoff slight ridge in center for surface runoff

integrated streetlight integrated streetlight

embedded downlighting

STRATEGIC CONNECTIONS Access to the B-LOOP is available in strategically placed locations along the 6.2 mile pathway. Through a series of staircases and ramps, pedestrians and cyclists can move freely between the ground level and the B-LOOP. Connections

ton Bridge, Massachusetts Avenue bus station,

A perspective at the Mass Ave bus station

A perspective at Essex Street

Plaza.

Boylston Street T stop, and Government Center

Figure 3.28 An architectural study of the access for the B-LOOP, including: Plan typologies Δ

to existing infrastructure include the Apple-

ACCESS

by means of stairs and ramps viewing platform bike rack

fountain

raised bump to prevent runoff

fountain

raised bump to prevent runoff

OUTCOMES

This eight-month exploration was a series of

that I myself hadn't thought of walking through,

twists and turns, not unlike the final proposal for

which led me to design for people to begin to

the B-LOOP.

experience these spaces, often out of sight on

daily travels.

What started out as studying street sec-

tions - understanding the layers of pedestrians,

greenscape, bicycles, and automobiles - transformed into a large infrastructure project that tackled the entire city of Boston. This urban scale proposal forced me to develop a pathway in the eyes of a person walking on it, in the eyes of a person driving by it, and in the eyes of the city wanting to build it.

By creating a comprehensive series of

maps on the city of Boston, I discovered areas

POST - THESIS QUESTIONS What further refinements to your method

How would the thesis progress if you were

would you make?

given an additional semester?

The methodology used involved a series of

If I had an additional three months to explore this

mapping done on the city of Boston. To further

thesis, I would like to further develop the types

refine this, I'd like to do a closer exploration of

of programming that would occur on each leg of

each neighborhood in Boston, understanding a

the B-LOOP. An earlier thought included creat-

deeper demographic. The B-LOOP runs through

ing a typology along each segment, defining a

almost all of the neighborhoods in the Greater

lounge, kitchen, classroom, playground, stage,

Boston area, and a further analysis of individual

breakroom, and a garden. I believe the route

blocks and streets could strengthen each leg of

throughout the city could be strengthened by

the pathway.

this strategic programming, and could begin to further connect the street level, the second floor of buildings, and the elevated B-LOOP, creating

How will you carry on this thesis moving

a new level of sociability along the city streets.

forward?

The defined walkability criteria would push this further, using those eight elements to sharpen

As someone who's developed a passion for

the connections on the street level and the types

urban planning, I intend to continue this fight

of activity that could happen along the B-LOOP

for pedestrian-oriented design in the way I prac-

itself.

tice, and hope to work with the city of Boston to reshape its city streets and create a new era of sociability and walkability for years to come.

Figure 3.29 An analytical map of the times it would take to walk or bike down each leg of the B-LOOP. Total time would by ninety-six minutes walking, and forty-eight minutes biking.

12 min 6 min

5 min 2.5 min

total loop 96 min in 15 m n mi 7.5

7 min

in 9 m min 4.5

48 min

5 min 2.5 min

3 min

min 12 in 6m

3 min in 1.5 m

in in m

CREDITS

To all of the people that helped along the way,

To the amazing architects, planners, and re-

even in an unofficial capacity;

searchers whose work I referenced in the liter-

Mark Pasnik

ature review, thank you for your findings, your

John Ellis

dedication to the field, and your passion for

Penn Ruderman

transforming our everyday environments.

Zsuzsanna Gaspar

NJ Unaka

Thank you for offering key pieces of insight throughout this exploration.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abdulla, Khairi M.A., Mohamed Gamal Abdelmonem, Gehan Selim. “Walk ability in Historic Urban Spaces: Testing the Safety and Security in Martyrs’ Square in Tripoli.” International Journal of Architectural Research no. 11-3 (November 2017): 163-177. Archnet. (Accessed 13 Sept 2018). Boston Transportation Department. Boston Complete Streets. Ebook. Bos ton, Massachusetts: City of Boston, 2013. http://bostoncomplet estreets.org/. Botton, Alain de. The Architecture of Happiness. New York: Random House, Inc, 2006. Ewing, Reid and Keith Bartholomew. Checklist of Essential Features. “Pe destrian and Transit-Oriented Design.” Urban Land Institute, 2013. (Accessed 26 Sept 2018). Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Ran dom House, Inc. 1961. Meshur, H. Filiz Alkan and Bilgehan Yilmaz Cakmak. “Universal Design in Urban Public Spaces: The Case of Zafer Pedestrian Zone / Kon ya-Turkey.” International Journal of Architecture and Planning no. 6

(August 2018): 15-40. ICONARP. (Accessed 24 Sept 2018).

Montgomery, Charles. Happy City: Transforming Our Lives Through Urban Design. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2013.

Panagopoulos, Thomas, Stilianos Tampakis, Paraskevi Karanikola, Aikaterini Karipidou-Kanari, and Apostolos Kantartzis. “The Usage and Per ception of Pedestrian and Cycling Streets on Residents’ Well-being in Kalamaria, Greece.” Land 2018 no 7-100 (August 2018): 1-17. MDPI. (Accessed 24 Sept 2018). Slesinger, Jennifer. Focus 40: The 2040 Investment Plan for the MBTA. Eb ook. Boston, Massachusetts: Massachusetts Department of Trans portation and Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, 2018. https://www.mbtafocus40.com/focus40theplan/ Southwork, Michael and Eran Ben-Joseph. “Chapter 5: Streets for Living.” Streets and the Shaping of Towns & Cities. London: Island Press, 2003. Speck, Jeff. Walkable City. New York: North Point Press, 2012. Walk Score®. Walk Score Methodology. Accessed 27 November, 2018. https://www.walkscore.com/methodology.shtml Whyte, William H. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Michigan: Ed wards Brothers, Inc.,: 1980. Zuniga-Teran, Adriana A. et al. “Designing Healthy Communities: Testing the Walkability Model.” Frontiers of Architectural Research no. 6 (2017): 63-73. Higher Education Press. (Accessed 13 Sept 2018).

IMAGE CITATIONS 0.1 Davis, Nathaniel. Twitter Post. 4 May, 2015. 1:41pm. https://twitter.com/ ThinkCritical12/status/595327406099030016 1.1 Parker, Jeff. "Trust Your Mirrors." Cartoon. Cagle Cartoons. May 29, 2008. Accessed 7 January, 2019. http://www.caglecartoons.com/viewim age.asp?ID={726C81B0-8BD6-4913-AACA-7DC146537651}. 1.2 Walk Score®. Most Walkable Cities in the United States, Canada, and Australia. Accessed 27 November, 2018. https://www.walks core.com/cities-and-neighborhoods/ 1.3 Claire Gagliardi ©. “Photographic Travel Sequence.” 16 April, 2019. 1.4 Ho, Michael. Can Digital Service Restore Public Faith in the MBTA? Me dium: 2018. Accessed 30 November, 2018. https://medium.com/@ michaelho_74783/can-digital-service-restore-public-faith-in-the-mb ta-a7992c70751a 2.1 Zuniga-Teran, Adriana A., Barron J. Orr, Randy H. Gimblett, Nader V. Chal foun, Stuart E. Marsh, David P. Guertin, and Scott B. Going. “De signing Healthy Communities: Testing the Walkability Model.” Fron tiers of Architectural Research no. 6 (2017): 64. Higher Education Press. 2.2 Cope, Bill, and Mary Kalantzis. Whyte on the Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Accessed 10 November 2018. http://newlearningonline. com/literacies/chapter-12/whyte-on-the-social-life-of-small-urban spaces. 2.3 Boston Transportation Department. Boston Complete Streets. Ebook. Bos ton, MA: City of Boston, 2013. http://bostoncompletestreets.org/.

2.4 Massachusetts Bay of Transit Authority. “System Map.” Boston. Accessed 17 November 2018. https://www.mbta.com/schedules/subway. 2.5 Claire Gagliardi ©. “What Do We Need?” 02 December, 2018. 3.1 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Social Impacts of Walkability." 4 December, 2018. 3.2 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Economic Impacts of Walkability." 4 December, 2018. 3.3 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Health Impacts of Walkability." 4 December, 2018. 3.4 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Environmental Impacts of Walkability." 4 December, 2018. 3.5 Google Maps. “San Francisco, California.” Accessed 30 October, 2018. https://www.google.com/maps/place/San+Francisco,+ CA/@37.757815,-122.5076406,12z/ data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x80859a6d00690021:0x4a501367f076 adff!8m2!3d37.7749295!4d-122.4194155 Sections and Criteria Bubbles drawn by author. 3.6 Google Maps. “Madrid, Spain.” Accessed 30 October, 2018. https://www. google.com/maps/place/Madrid,+ Spain/@40.4379543,-3.6795367,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x d422997800a3c81:0xc436dec1618c2269!8m2!3d40.4167754! 4d-3.7037902 Sections and Criteria Bubbles drawn by author.

3.7 Google Maps. “Bogota, Colombia.” Accessed 30 October, 2018 .https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bogotá,+Bogota,+Colom bia/@4.6482975,-74.107807,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x 8e3f9bfd2da6cb29:0x 239d635520a33914!8m2!3d4.7109886!4d-74.072092 Sections and Criteria Bubbles drawn by author. 3.8 Google Maps. “Paris, France.” Accessed 30 October, 2018. https://www. google.com/maps/place/Paris,+ France/@48.8588589,2.3470599,11z/ data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x47e66e1f06e2b70f:0x40b82c3688c9 460!8m2!3d48.856614!4d2.3522219 Sections and Criteria Bubbles drawn by author. 3.9 Walk Score®. Boston Ma - Walk Score. Accessed 29 November, 2018. https://www.walkscore.com/score/boston-ma 3.10 Google Maps. “Boylston Street.” Accessed 29 October, 2018. https:// www.google.com/maps/place/Boylston+St,+Boston,+MA/@42. 3486464,-71.0827003,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x89e37a0f cee87b83:0xef7cad061437154e!8m2!3d42.3486464!4d-71.0827003 Street Sections and Criteria Bubbles drawn by author. 3.11 Google Maps. “Newbury Street.” Accessed 29 October, 2018. https:// www.google.com/maps/place/Newbury+St,+Boston,+MA/@42.3 491606,-71.0841329,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x89e37a0f 6dcb65c5:0x9a534479f63150bf!8m2!3d42.3491606!4d-71.0841329 Street Sections and Criteria Bubbles drawn by author.

3.12 Google Maps. “Charles Street.” Accessed 29 October, 2018. https://www. google.com/maps/place/Charles+St,+Boston,+MA/@42.35946 54,-71.0707655,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m8!1m2!2m1!1scharles+stree t!3m4!1s0x89e3709947b8eb97:0x494264f0421a46f8!8m2!3d42.359 4654!4d-71.0707655 Street Sections and Criteria Bubbles drawn by author. 3.13 Google Maps. “Washington Street.” Accessed 29 October, 2018. https:// www.google.com/maps/place/Washington+St,+Boston,+MA/@42. 3508646,-71.0630285,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x89e37ef 8bccfdd27:0xc824a15c5ab9263e!8m2!3d42.3508646! 4d-71.0630285 Street Sections and Criteria Bubbles drawn by author. 3.14 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Mapping: Boston Neighborhoods." 1 February, 2019. 3.15 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Mapping: Boston Walk Score." 1 February, 2019. 3.16 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Mapping: Boston Real Estate." 1 February, 2019. 3.17 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Mapping: Boston Pedestrian Collisions." 10 February, 2019. 3.18 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Mapping: Boston Accessible Transit + Household Income." 10 February, 2019. 3.19 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Mapping: Boston Bike Lanes." 1 February, 2019. 3.20 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Mapping: Boston Off-Street Parking." 2 February, 2019.

IMAGE CITATIONS 3.21 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Mapping: Boston Greenscape." 2 February, 2019. 3.22 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Mapping: Boston Outdoor Programming." 10 February, 2019. 3.23 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Mapping: Boston Social Interactions." 6 February, 2019. 3.24 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Proposal of the B-LOOP." 20 March, 2019. 3.25 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Existing Boston Infrastructure." 19 March, 2019. 3.26 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Architecture: Typology 1." 19 March, 2019. 3.27 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Architecture: Typology 2." 20 March, 2019. 3.28 Claire Gagliardi ©. "Architecture: Access Points." 5 April, 2019. 3.29 Claire Gagliardi ©. "B-LOOP Distance Map." 20 March, 2019.