Walkability and built environment: An understanding of central Geelong in terms of walkability

Deakin University Master of Landscape Architecture SRR 711: Thesis Trimester 1

………………………..

Walkability and built environment An understanding of central Geelong’s urban environment in terms of walkability ………………………..

Sujan Shrestha 218199974 Supervisor Dr. John Rollo Word Count to date: 8010 12 June 2020

A dissertation submitted to Deakin University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Landscape Architecture

Copyright 2020 Sujan Shrestha 1

Abstract Car-centric urban design practice, the principle with which most cities in the world are being built today or since mid-century of 20th century, is affecting the essence of humanscale design or pedestrian friendly/ walkable friendly design. With the rise of numerous problems already in the world with excessive use of non-renewable energy, the talks and discussions are being conducted for the ways of reduction of use of non-renewable energy on global basis, or for the formulation of alternative ways of high use of energy. Not only from problems-related-with-energy perspective, but from social, health, and economic viewpoint as well, just prioritising car-driven approach seems to no longer serve the built environment in a positive way. Several planners, designers and built environment professionals have put forwarded words to re-think about the way urban environments are being built today, and new approaches of prioritising from human-scale perspective i.e. pedestrian or walkable friendly built environment to be explored and given a thought. This research paper concentrates on investigating the deeper understanding about walkable friendly urban environment, the need of today's world.

In this paper, framework that shows the relationship of walking activity and behaviour with surrounding physical features, is derived from literature review for the systematic visual assessment. There is no clear and a comprehensive understanding about one particular way that depicts influencing factors of walkability, the corelates between the urban environment and walking behaviour not explained clearly, or if explained the method is somewhat complex and inflexible. Throughout existing knowledge in literature, there is lack of one consistent method of assessment. This research has attempted in finding simpler methods/solution, incorporating with existing knowledge and methods to investigate underlying factors possibly informing about the degree of walkability scale of an urban environment. The study of observation is done on the commercial streets in the central Geelong with the selection of variety of streets form and functions.

The findings are separated in qualitative and quantitative evaluation through different methods derived and refined from already existing knowledge, opening up new knowledge about underlying relationship that correlates between the people’s perception and built environment in one unit. Geelong, nominated in UNESCO city of design, has opportunities in accepting new ideas regarding urban regeneration and intervention. This research or other similar type of research could assist in understanding urban fabric of the city in detail, see the hidden entities through the work of findings in terms of giving a thought about creating walkable- friendly urban environment.

The study of urban design qualities i.e. imageability, enclosure, human scale, complexity and transparency corelated with major physical elements of an urban environment, has been done with mapping exercise and ‘shades of black’ analysis to obtain new results, that could possibly inform about walkability in both smaller and bigger picture. Keeping in mind, the complexity of the walkability, the methods being used is flexible in alteration and modification. The quantitative finding and qualitative finding this paper have achieved in the assessment of urban design qualities could present a new outlook in how the measurement of subjective entities can be done is simpler method and process.

2

Acknowledgements I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr. John Rollo for his continuous guidance, knowledge and support. His generosity in willingness to impart knowledge along with providing extensive advice, is purely commendable. I would also like to express my gratitude to Dr. Vittoria Grossi, Student Academic Support Services for her sharing knowledge about thesis writing.

A grateful thanks to the Deakin school of Architecture and Built Environments for providing me an opportunity to undertake my master’s thesis degree and providing a favourable environment even in hard time of Covid-19 pandemic. And, big thanks to my fellow master’s student friends, family and relatives for their warm and continuous support, encouragement and guidance.

In particular, my special thanks to my parents and my siblings for incessant love, support and motivation specially in the uncertain and hard time, in a foreign land, which have helped me push to all the way here.

And above all, my greatest thanks and love to God.

3

Table of Contents Abstract Acknowledgements Table of contents

2 3 4

Chapter 1. Introduction 1.1. Background 1.2. Walkability: The definition 1.3. Aims and objectives 1.4. Research significance 1.5. Methodology

5 6 6 7 7

Chapter 2. Walkability: Relation and context 2.1. Walking and the built environment 2.2. Benefits of walkability 2.3. Geelong's past vision 2.4. Geelong's approaches: Walkable friendly environment

10 11 13 16

Chapter 3. Literature review 3.1. Background 3.2. Analysis and synthesis 3.3. Literature review matrix

18 19 20

Chapter 4. Empirical study 4.1. Observation study: Description of method and data 4.2. Serial Vision 4.3. Quantitative evaluation 4.4. Qualitative evaluation 4.5. Observation study: Results and analysis

22 24 27 29 30

Chapter 5. Discussion and Conclusion 5.1. Discussion 5.2. Conclusions

32 33

Bibliography List of figures List of abbreviation

34 39

4

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Background The issue of walkable-friendly urban environment is being discussed lately, and the influence it may induce in terms of benefits, has been of increasing importance.

‘Walkability’ means how walkable-friendly an urban environment is. Speck (2012) points benefits of walkability in three sectors - wealth, health and sustainability. Arup (2016) indicates sixteen areas of benefits under the main benefits as - social, economic, environmental and political. The term ‘walkability’ is likely introduced because many critical thinkers like Lewis Mumford, Jane Jacobs, William H. Whyte and Jan Gehl (Arup, 2016) had questioned on the sole approach of car-centric urban design rather than human-centric approach after late mid-centuries, and many other researchers and scholars have presented similar thought. Most recent work of Speck (2012) in his book, walkable city, has explained the significance of walkable urban environment in depth. So, the drawbacks of car-centric design and benefits of human-centric design might have informed a new approach in shaping the urban environment, directed by ‘walkability’. Therefore, there is growing need of knowledges about the relation of walkability with the built environment.

Since, walkability is not a linear issue, and is multidisciplinary in nature - it is a complex organisation in attaining a generic method that guides walkability in a built environment, evaluates the status of the environment on the basis of walkability and informs factors clearly that influence walkability. However, “Walkability studies have provided enough evidence through statistical analysis that walking behaviour is related to the condition of the built environment” Choi (2012).

Choi (2012) implies correlation analysis between the amount of time spent on walking by individuals and different attributes of the urban environment is being used in order to identify walkability factors within built environment in the area of researching about walkability. According to Ewing and Handy (2009), in the past few years, many tools have emerged for the measurement of quality of walking environment. Across the US, the researchers, local governments and community groups use generically called walking audit instruments.

5

1.2 Walkability: The definition Merriam-Webster defines walkable as ' capable of or suitable for being walked’.

The terms walkability is referred on various context in present scenario, but it appears the term is poorly defined.

Southworth (2005) defines walkability as “the extent to which the built environment supports and encourages walking by providing for pedestrian comfort and safety, connecting people with varied destinations within a reasonable amount of time and effort, and offering visual interest in journeys throughout the network” “Walkability is a quantitative and qualitative measurement of how inviting or un-inviting an area is to pedestrians. Walking matters more and more to towns and cities as the connection between walking and socially vibrant neighbourhoods is becoming clearer.

Built environments that promote and facilitate walking – to stores, work, school and amenities – are better places to live, have higher real estate values, promote healthier lifestyles and have higher levels of social cohesion” (Jane’s Walk 2013).

According to Speck (2012), his general theory of walkability explains four main conditions for a built environment to be defined as walkable, or to create a walkable- friendly environment. These conditions are useful, safe, comfortable and interesting that support walkability. ‘Useful’ refers to the accessibility of aspects of daily life needs in an easy and organised manner, ‘safe' refers to feel safe from automobiles and other intimidating factors in an urban environment, ‘comfortable’ refers to buildings and landscapes serving as ‘outdoor living room’ and ‘interesting’ refers to pleasing walking experience factors along the journey with friendly faces and signs of humanity abound.

1.3 Aims and Objectives The aim of this research paper is to approach and investigate possible methods of objectively analyse seemingly subjective parameters of urban design in relation with their influence in walkability. It will assess the physical features, with a degree of objectivity by an observer, present in an urban environment (streetscape) that shape the qualities of urban design. As previous research methods for an objective analysis of the urban environment in regard with walkability are quite complex, this report attempts in finding simpler method that can depict the range of walkability through qualitative and quantitative analysis in simultaneous manner.

The objectives of this report are: • To identify methods and processes of finding out relation of perception of people with the surrounding urban environment and its walkable friendliness • To investigate deeper understanding of the influence of built environment with walking behaviour of the people 6

• • •

To consider new approach and method of objective - analysis of subjective parameters of an urban environment.

To investigate the refinement of used methods and processes of the visual assessment in urban scenario To investigate the determinants that affect walkability in micro and macro scale

1.4 Research significance As discussed earlier, creating walkable environment is beneficial in several ways.

Since, the aspects of walkability are associated with so many factors, the walkable friendly approach in design might not only support walkability, but also assist in different approach for the creation of well-designed spaces. “Walkability can be a proxy for better environments that generate investment, are more sustainable (in economic and social terms as well as environmental)” as mentioned by Forsyth (2015) also suggests walkable friendly places are not just limited to, that are simply good to be at. The sense of place of an urban environment is well appreciated by people and tourists if it gives importance to promote walkable-friendly environment (Shamsuddin & Hassan & Bilyamin, 2012).

This paper attempts in better understanding of the qualitative and quantitative variables of an urban environment possibly influencing the walking behaviour of pedestrian, by refining the methods and measures used for the assessment of co-relation between walking behaviour and built environment. Also, the investigation of qualitative and quantitative factors simultaneously is attempted and is assessed if they co-relate in terms of influencing walking behaviour of people. The investigation of the attempts and approaches performed in this research could be a guideline or framework for performing future research.

1.5 Methodology Literature reviews and empirical study are chosen as methods of research in this report. Qualitative and quantitative both methods are used for assessing data and information. The data and information extracted from the field visit study, seemingly showcasing subjective area, are processed and attempted to see from the lens of degree of objectivity.

“Urban design qualities are different from qualities such as sense of comfort, sense of safely and level of interest that reflect how an individual reacts to a place [...] Perceptions are just that perceptions. They may produce different reactions in different people. They can be assessed with a degree of objectivity by outside observers, individual reactions cannot” (Ewing and Handy, 2009).

Conceptual framework for the influence of walking behaviour (Ewing & Handy, 2009) is used as framework that informed the field study parameters. Ewing & Handy (2009) have used this framework to establish consideration of the result of perceptions from the 7

physical features, as how they intervene or mediate walking behaviour within the built environment. For recording data, and assessing information, several methods such as visual analysis (Gordon Cullen, 2007), measuring perpetual qualities (Ewing & Handy, 2009) and evaluating experiential qualities of streetscapes (Rollo & Barker, n.d.) are adopted in this paper. The new approach of analysis called ‘shades of black and white’ analysis is attempted in this research- the idea behind being showcasing the result in the value of range rather than in number, giving consideration for the complexity of walkability to analyse in exact number.

There are several limitations in this area of research. One is, the study of human element as the potential factor influencing walkability within built environment is avoided due to possibility of procuring misleading data caused by global pandemic- Covid-19 disease.

Another one is, only commercial streets of the Central Geelong are taken into consideration for the field study of which only significant physical features are recorded and assessed- following the conceptual framework for the influence of walking behaviour (Ewing & Handy, 2009).

8

Objective 1

Primary sources • Published books • Ebooks • Journal papers

Secondary sources • Government documents • Magazines • Newspaper • Websites Objective 2

• • •

Field visit study Pictures and drawings Collection of data and information

• • •

Mapping technique Serial vision Perceptual analysis

•

Synthesize of different ideas and approaches with existing knowledge

Objective 3

• •

Review methods and techniques used Existing knowledge from literature

Figure 1.1

Methodology flowchart 9

Chapter 2: Walkability: Relation and Context

2.1 Walking and the built environment The response people experience in and around the built environment has lot to do with how the environment is designed and that has to be taken into consideration aligned with the reaction people can have. Gehl (2010, p.118) argues ‘the starting point is simple: universal human activities. Cities must provide good conditions for people to walk, stand, sit, watch, listen and talk’. He also points out quality design comes from small urban scale.

Whether people can walk, sit, listen and talk inside buildings, in the neighbourhood or in town should be considered for their direct senses. He points out the pleasurable walk should be free and unhampered, without being pushed and shoved by others, and without weaving in and out. Gehl (2010, p.120) implies ‘there is more to walking than walking’. He says walking is basically a linear movement that brings people from place to place, however, walking has more definition and effects. Walking activity can be changed into other activities like standing, sitting, running, dancing, climbing etc. Walking is a form of transport, but it is also a potential beginning or an occasion for many other activities.

Walking activity is the natural instinct people have. The necessity of inclusion of pedestrian- friendly spaces over car- friendly spaces seems the need of todays’ scenario.

Gehl (2010) suggests pedestrians have always been part of the places: walking, moving freely even 100 years ago, cities were majorly province for pedestrians. With the invasion of cars in the cities, pedestrians were pushed towards sidewalks which are often shrinking and crowded – which are unacceptable and a problem worldwide.

The walking activity is, however, limited in terms of capacity of people for walking. The co-relation between walking limitation of people and built spaces can have affecting or guiding factor in terms of thinking about walkability in built environment. Gehl (2010, p.127) claims about 500m being an acceptable walking distance, however, it is not an 10

absolute truth. He says if comfort is low the walk will be short, while if the route is interesting, rich in experience and comfortable, pedestrians forget the distance and enjoy experiences as they happen. This implies it is probable that not just physical features in an urban space, but also perception of the people or the experiential factor that comes from the subjective response people have with the surrounding is to be taken into consideration as well, before concluding the relation between walkability and built environment.

Speck (2012, p.9) points out ‘walkability is both an end and a means, as well as a measure.

While the physical and social rewards of walking are many, walking is perhaps most useful as it contributes to urban vitality and most meaningful as an indicator of that vitality.’. This suggests there are several benefits an urban space can draw from walkability perspective.

Many of the western- cities since mid-century have prioritised car-centric urban planning and design, thinking less about pedestrian, intentionally or by accident, and Australian cities aren't exception. With the rising issues regarding pedestrian-friendly urban spaces over carfriendly environment, the need for the discussion of planning and design of cities considering walkability feature seems legit in the present context. The report, Arup (2016) presents numerous benefits shifting from car-centric to human-scale; areas of benefit includes social benefits (health and wellbeing, safety, place -making, social cohesion and equality), economic benefits (local economy, city attractiveness, urban regeneration cost savings), environment benefits (virtuous cycles, ecosystem services, liveability, transport efficiency) and political benefits (leadership, urban governance, sustainable development planning opportunities).

2.2 Benefits of walkability "Get walkability right and so much of the rest will follow”.

-Jeff Speck - Walkable City, 2012 Arup global (2016) prepares report listing 50 benefits of walking which is achievable and practical. Benefits include social aspect, economic aspect environmental aspect. Jeff Speck (2018) points out numerous reasons such as economic, health environmental, equity, community to invest in walkability.

2.2.1 Social benefits The report, Cities alive (Arup.2016) mentions social and health benefit of walkability. An active and healthier lifestyle is the outcome of a walkable environment, which has, safe walking trails and infrastructures around. According to WHO, "physical inactivity has been identified as the 4th leading risk factor for global mortality causing an estimated 3.2m deaths" (cited in Arup, 2016). The physical activity among people have decreased 32% in past 44 years in the United states and 45% in 18 years in China - resulting in rise in car ownership in urban content and ‘passive' mode of transportation. (Arup, 2016). Therefore, all the statistics suggests degrading walking infrastructure, congested traffic, degrading recreational facilities environmental problems are causes and effects of this phenomenon.

11

Mental health and happiness are other benefits of walkable city - improving mood, reducing stress, anxiety and depression. One of the reasons of isolation is car-dependency, leading to risk of affecting mental health, and social deficit - making people less happy, that could come from longer drives.

Arup (2016, p.41) states ‘a walkable environment can naturally aid the prevention of crimes.

Summer streets’ study (cited in Arup, 2016 p.41) implies that since the 1980s, the theory suggests that a neglected urban environment may encourage vandalism and crimes' escalation.

Vibrant urban experience could be achieved through establishment of walkable streets which have potential of shaping the environment - attractive public realm. If the walking is enjoyable, safe and entertaining, people are willing to walk more. And, people tend to play, shop, run or walk if there are more events happening in the public space, which allow people to experience the open streets.

Arup (2016) indicates the experience walking' can instil in people about the places and cities at the human scale, and it improves their sense of place. For example, Superkilen, an urban park, Copenhagen, which addresses multicultural community and is one of the most ethnically diverse areas provides people with sense of belonging and sense of place.

Walking and interacting with landscape elements and urban furniture give people a lifetime experience, and hence make the place more thriving, interactive and vibrant.

‘Enhancing the sense of place can raise awareness around the local history, helping communities to build a collective memory and a cultural identity Arup (2016). The report, also says pedestrian-oriented places expose art and culture within the street life, giving the place and identity, and providing artistic and cultural expression in a unique way. It is more likely vibrant and liveable public spaces feature public street art and open-air cultural events. Combination of arts, architecture, street art, public art provides interesting element for walking, attracting people to the streets and public spaces - providing an opportunity for converting places into destinations.

William H. Whyte, (cited in Arup, 2016) p.48) pointed out, 'peoplewatching is one of the primary activities shared by different classes of people in public spaces, which suggests meeting, sharing and mixing are the opportunities that walkable environment can create.

Public spaces act as the stage for public life, while also acts as ‘mirror' for social fabric.

Exchange of values, beliefs and experiences happen when people meet, greet and undertake other social activities. - fostering social integration and inclusiveness.

2.2.2 Economic benefits Research has shown positive result regarding improved walkability with raised local retail spend, and creation of more job opportunities. Recent research commissioned by Living Streets shows that making places better for walking can boost footfall and trading by up to 40%. Local, social and economic vitality is obtained from improved public spaces - and fostering local independent businesses, and economic success of local shops.

12

The report, Cities Alive (Arup, 2016) suggests the issues such as 'food deserts' is created as the result of car-dependency in suburban malls allowing less life in urban areas. A dense and walkable urban network could improve the presence of local shops and street markets, independent retailing, improvement in delivery of variety of goods and services, local employment and start-up opportunities.

Demetrio, (cited in Arup, 2016) claims the identity of city is characterised by how its places are defined in terms of cultural and social interaction. Since the 1980s, cities like Barcelona are more focused in establishing new parks, squares and promenades, with regeneration of waterfront and reclamation - by demolishing former warehouses and factories. On top of that, more and more cities are branding and marketing and investing in walkability which is supposed to contribute the cities’ liveability at first place.

Arup (2016, p. 59) states for tourists walking is the best way to experience a city since it increases imageability' of a place - the quality that makes it recognisable and memorable’.

Public spaces that are interesting to walk by is achieved through walkability, thus, an indicator for how tourism can be affected by a city's infrastructure. - establishing pleasurable moments between destinations, and increasing vibrancy of local services, shops and landmarks can provide a big contribution.

2.2.3 Environmental benefits Speck (2012) says 'The more walkable we make our cities, the less they make us pollute…. If our society is going to slow climate change, it will be by reorienting our cities around transit, biking, and walking. The pedestrian mobility can impact hugely on the reduction of use of non-renewable resources.’

Pedestrian-oriented spaces and walking infrastructures are comparatively more compact than car-dominated infrastructure reducing environmental impacts and use of fewer materials (Arup, 2016). And also, air pollution is addressed with the decrease of vehicle emissions and the improvement of air quality - with encouragement in pedestrian strategy rather than motorist approach. Another environmental benefit includes noise reduction, which could be achieved through design of spaces with free coverage and landscaping and promoting walking and improving walkability. Green walkable areas are not just pleasing and interesting to walk but it contributes heavily in environmental health.

2.3 Geelong’s past vision Rollo and Estaban (2019) in the chapter ‘The promise of vision-making a city: a perpetual journey’, in the book, Geelong's changing landscape mention that after initial town allotment plan by surveyors Robert Hoddle and W.H Smyth in 1838, the planning of Geelong's central business district (CBD) concentrates on the four decades 1975 and 2017.

These four decades defined by two key documents - one is, Geelong: City by the Bay (GRPA 1975), and the other one is, Greater Geelong: A clever and creative future (CoGG 13

2017)., a 30-year community led vision. The chapter also discusses 22 vision studies Geelong City has formulated along with these two major documents.

Rollo and Estaban (2019, p. 284) imply that ‘the Urban Analysis of Geelong : City by the Bay (GRPA 1975) was very thorough and the identification of the weaknesses and threats of a city in significant industrial transition enabled the Planning Consultancy to produce a strategy that is still highly relevant today’. The introduction of more comprehensive public space and pedestrian -oriented strategy within core business districts, the expansion of tree canopy that with linking Johnstone Park with the Botanic Gardens by tree lined boulevard along Malop Street are among many projects which have recently started taking shape.

The visionary document, Greater Geelong: A clever and Creative Future (CoGG 2017) is a 30-year community-led series of aspirations from staggering 16000 people from the Greater Geelong region (Rollo and Yolanda, 2019). They find out nine headings of aspirations within the document viz. prosperous economy, technology, creativity, robust transport network, tourist destination, safe, connected community, sustainable development and implementation of sustainable solutions.

The report, Central Geelong Action Plan (2013) focuses on envisioning of Geelong as safe, more vibrant and mined use area. The vision includes connecting people and places, city loop bus and public transport, bay views, northerly aspect and great connections and active edges, greening Central Geelong, integrated health and well-being precinct, an arts and events city.

Within Central Geelong, it shows the vision presented by Geelong : City by the Bay (GRPA 1975) has considered in formulating pedestrian-oriented strategies, and making it more vibrant , walkable by concept of connecting Johnstone Park with Eastern Botanic Gardens along Malop Streets, and linking the Waterfront with Barwon River with green spines, but seems they have ended up just on visions.

14

Fig 2.1: Open Space structure linking core regions in central Geelong Source: Geelong’s Changing Landscape (from GRPA 1975)

Fig 2.2: Green link, from Cunningham pier to Johnstone Park Source: Geelong’s Changing Landscape (from GRC 1979)

15

2.4 Geelong’s approaches: Walkable-friendly environment Green Spine Malop Street Project Geelong, being relatively smaller city has initiated approaches in creation of walkable- friendly urban environment. ‘The Green Spine project will transform Malop street into a vibrant street and linear park, connecting from Johnstone Park to Eastern Park (Revitalising Central Geelong, 2016). The project on the vision Botanic Walk runs in Malop Street having different stages of action to be undertaken before it, taking its physical shape, envisioning as a continuous layer of trees, seating spaces, gathering spaces, series of paths and different alfresco.

Numerous parklands are featured to the Southern side of the street, installing more places for people to relax, meet friends, shop, eat a, walk and play, and complemented by more trees, plantings and sidewalk to the no northern part of the street (Revitalising Central Geelong, 2016) Kane Smith (2017) suggests the green spine project will deliver more trees and green spaces to the city, it will transform Geelong into a more attractive and inviting place. It will offer a unique attraction as there will be nothing else like it in Australia.

Along with greening the street, the report, Malop Street Green Spine - The Plan (Revitalising Central Geelong, 2016) mentions the stretch will be more people-friendly considering thought for bike riders with the inclusion of robust bike network along the path. So, several efforts on visioning and preparing strategies seem to have given thought of, in the shaping of urban design of Geelong.

However, the conflict has arose because of the issues related with traffic. Patrick Hunn and Emily Wong (2020) write ‘the council of Greater Geelong has approved a plan to partially remove an award-winning green spine project in the Geelong CBD, less than two years after its completion’. The portion of community had shown dissatisfaction related with the congestion, the streets with the green spine, is experiencing and also voicing about safety concern for pedestrians and disabled. Geelong mayor Stephanie Ashes, says the vision of the Green Spine is no doubt a major project and will be more obvious once it gets its final shape, but at the same time, changes don't happen overnight and it's unfair to expect community to leave their cars at home, and using public transportation considering the city is still lack of robust transport network. Council hands are tied in terms of taking decisions.

16

Fig 2.3: A section of Malop street green spine Source: Revitalising Central Geelong

17

Chapter 3: Literature review

3.1 Background Urban environments, mostly in western countries, have been planned and designed giving foremost priority to automobiles since the advent of automobiles in 20th centurythat has created issues related with pedestrian- friendly built environment. “Walkability was essential in cities before the automobile era […] the walkable city came to an end in the 1920s with the appearance of the automobile, coupled with the emergence of modernism” (Southworth, 2005). The writer implies the streets of the pre-industrial cities were walkablefriendly by necessity, since the only choice for going to jobs and the marketplace was on foot or slow-moving cart, wagon, or carriage. Since the invasion of automobiles, many streets became mere traffic roads or service roads catering less necessity for the need of pedestrians. Arup (2015) suggests although the issue of awareness of walkability is being raised in recent time as urban debate, the critical thinkers like Lewis Mumford, Jane Jacobs, William H. Whyte and Jan Gehl had already begun questioning about the car-dominance in urban planning and design, and had shown concern upon human centric approaches to the urban projects.

Automobile- centric design in an urban environment puts cars and traffic in first place, and people and places in the second. Jacobs in her book, the death and life of great American cities, writes back in 1961 “today everyone who values cities is disturbed by automobiles. Traffic arteries, along with parking lots, gas stations and drive-ins are powerful and insistent instruments of city destruction (Jacobs ,1961), and numerous problems, in different sectors like social, economic, environmental have been identified with the increase of cardominance in the city (Forsyth, 2015).

Currently, a number of talks and discussions are being discussed regarding the approach for creating walkable environments and improving walkability. Forsyth (2015) points such visions and strategies should address vital problems related to obesity crisis, lack of vibrant central city, traffic congestion, environment degradation and injustice, and social isolationcreated from lack of pedestrian-friendly urban environment, the writer also adds18

walkability could be the holistic solution for establishing better built environment that fosters sustainability in economy, social and environmental sectors.

3.2 Analysis and synthesis The understanding of different factors in larger scale and smaller scale that have direct impact in urban environment in terms of walkability and walking behaviour of people, is significant in understanding walkability in a bigger picture. The concept of walkability is multidimensional, along with major measures of density, mix and access- the walkability in a built environment is affected by several variables (Talen and Koschinsky, 2013, as cited in Dovey and Pafka, 2018). Dovey and Pafka (2018) implies the synergies of density, mix and access emerge walkable friendliness in an urban environment, along with larger assemblage of relevant variables like topography, climate, car dependency, safety etc.

According to Southworth (2005), along with macro variables like capacity, demand, volume, rate of flow etc in terms of transportation planning, micro design qualities such as landscape path design or street furniture could affect the pedestrian behaviour in terms of walkability. Walking activity plays key role in improving the vibrancy and vitality of a place, and it also has numerous benefits under its belt. But the difficulty is in finding out measures and variables that actually improves or degrades the quality of a place on the basis of walking standard.

19

20

3

2

S. n 1 o

Published Date: 2005 Author: Michael Southworth Cited by: 680

Designing the walkable city

Published Date: 2009 Author: Reid Ewing, Susan Handy Cited by: 658

Measuring the unmeasurable Urban: Design Qualities related to walkability

Six criteria of a successful pedestrian network 1.

Connectivity 2. Linkage with other nodes 3. fine grained land use 4. safety 5. quality 6. path context

Measurement of 5 urban design qualities- physical characteristics of streets and their edges- imageability, enclosure, human scale, transparency and complexity

Importance of walkability in terms of social and recreational value with reduced traffic congestions and low environmental impact

Measuring subjective entities objectively to have operational definitions

The complex synergy of Urban DMA, their interconnection and inductive three factorsdensity, mix and access, assemblage, density, functional, mix, permeability, walkability

Measure of walkability in terms of density, mix and access (DMA)

What is walkability?

The Urban DMA

Published Date: 2018 Author: Kim Dovey, Elek Pafka Cited by: 7

Focus

Study parameter

Title (Journal paper)

3.3 Literature review matrix

Questions of what about other public spaces like squares, parks etc

Just limited to commercial street, small and big town.

Extended finding on how relevant factors such as climate, car dependence, safety and their affect walkability

Knowledge Gap

Creation of walkable city will be possible if priority is given to pedestrian strategy over auto orientation

Need of integrated pedestrian access at scales of movement

Abstract urban design qualities investigation in terms of physical characteristics of the street environment

Walkability is just one aspect of urban DMA. Walkability emerges from the synergies of density, mix and access, but the larger assemblage of relevant factors such as topography, climate, car dependency, safety and so on

Findings

21

6

5

S. n 4 o

Published Date: 2015 Author: Ann forsyth Cited by: 148

What is a Walkable Place? The Walkability Debate in Urban Design

Published Date: 2003 Author: Elizabeth Shay, Steven C. Spoon, Asad J. Khattak Cited by: 41

Walkable environment and walking activity

Published Date: 2012 Author: Eunchoyng Choi Cited by: 25

Discussions made on the basis of the term walkabilityif it’ s a proxy for better urban spaces, and also discussion about multidimensional nature of walkability

Study of strategies between environment of walkability in terms of relation and behaviour, and environment and utilitarian/ nonutilitarian walking

Key themes or dimensions such as traversable, compact, safe, physical enticing, lively and sociable, sustainable transportation options etc

Surveys of walkability environment and walking behaviour, descriptive definition walkable environment and types of walking travel

Objective analysis of different dimensions mentioned

Investigation of relation Study conducted in the neighbourhood residential between built environment and walking scale behaviour through Investigation isn’ t done correlation analysis in dense urban form i.e.

CBD

Study about methods and measures in terms of analysis of relationship between built environment and walking behaviour

Walkability as an Urban design problem.

Understanding the activity for walking in the urban environment

Knowledge Gap

Focus

Study parameter

Title (Journal paper)

3.3 Literature review matrix

Walkable environment has variation and aren't same in nature.

The debates formed in walkability can be better understood through study of multiple dimensions

Descriptive definition of walking in terms of mixed, landuse, accessibility, pedestrian facilities, connectivity, street, density, aesthetics, open spaces, traffic

Confirms the findings from literature reviews of existing studies on walkability influence factors- density, connectivity, landuse diversity Along with major factors such as experiential quality, liveliness, sociability also matters

Findings

Chapter 4: Empirical Study

4.1 Observation study: Description of method and data Adopting a spatial sequencing process (visual analysis) (figure 4.3), e.g. Gordon Cullen (2007) ‘Serial Vision’, measuring perceptual qualities (Ewing & Handy, 2009) (figure 4.1 and table 1.1 ), evaluating experiential qualities of streetscapes (Rollo & Barker, n.d.) (figure 4.4,4.5,4.6,4.7,4.8,4.9), and ‘shades of black’ analysis, collectively, this study attempts to measure subjective qualities of the urban street environment objectively, by refining already used methods and techniques.

Figure 4.1 Conceptual framework for the influence on walking behaviour (Ewing & Handy, 2009)

As shown in the above figure 4.1, the urban design qualities co-related with significant physical features are adopted for this report, and those qualities are visually assessed, similar to the study performed by Ewing & Handy (2009) in the paper ‘Measuring the Unmeasurable: Urban Design Qualities Related to Walkability’. After figuring out the presence of 22

these urban qualities: imageability, enclosure, human scale, transparency and complexity on the images of each observation spots- a simple mapping exercise (Rollo & Barker, n.d.) was performed where the percentage of the coverage of each urban design qualities were assessed. The image was equally divided into 100 cells and the percentage of coverage was measured by counting number of cells. The percentage of each urban design quality was measured (figure 4.5 to 4.9) on the image showing distinct urban design qualities, and on each image (each spot) total percentage was added up- likely informing high walkability for the highest coverage (percentage) (table 1.3). This method is an attempt to objective analysis directed by quantitative evaluation.

Shades of ‘black and white' analysis is the attempt to assess the range of walkability (towards black-more walkable, towards white- less walkable) after analysing significant physical features associated with each urban design qualities, in terms of subjective response related with coherence of the built environment. Black colour being high coherent and white colour being less coherent (table 1.4), By mixing total parts of black or white (www.trycolors.com) on each image (each spot), the resultant colour, in the form of shade of black, shows where the range of walkability of that particular spot lies- informing how walkable-friendly that urban space is (table 1.5). This method is an attempt to objective analysis directed by qualitative evaluation.

Both mapping exercise (coverage) and ‘shades of black’ analysis was attempted to measure the subjective qualities of urban design objectively, in terms of walkability.

23

4.2 Serial vision Visual analysis

Waterfront

Johnstone Park

4 1

Westfield 2

Market Square 3

Figure 4.2: Central Geelong Numbers depicting ‘observation spots’

As a field study, four (4) observation spots (figure 4.2), were chosen - mainly commercial street in central Geelong. One of the streets is Malop street which stretches from the edge of Johnstone Park (East-West direction) and another one is Moorabool street beside Westfield (North- South direction). Three (3) (figure 4.3-spot 1, spot 2, spot 3), observation spots from Malop street and one (1) (figure 4.3- spot 4), from Moorabool street are chosen that have different physical features and urban fabric. A picture of each street from main location is taken with camera for further study of the visible elements in the street. The study is performed individually.

24

2

Spot 2

Spot 4

Spot 1

Spot 3

Figure 4.3 Table 1.1 Urban Design Quality

Significant physical features

Imageability

proportion of historic buildings courtyards/plazas/parks buildings with non-rectangular silhouettes major landscape features buildings with identifiers

Enclosure

proportion street wall—same side proportion street wall—opposite side proportion sky across long sight lines proportion sky ahead

Human scale

all street furniture and other street items small planters proportion first floor with windows

Transparency

proportion first floor with windows proportion active uses proportion street wall—same side

Complexity

outdoor dining public art dominant building colours accent colours Urban design qualities related to walkability (Ewing & Handy, 2009)

25

Spot 4

Complexity

Human Scale

Transparency

Enclosure

Imageability

Table 1.2 Colour mapping of urban design qualities (relate to table 1.1) Spot 1 Spot 2 Spot 3

26

4.3 Quantitative evaluation Mapping the coverage (Total coverage of each urban qualities) Observation spot 2 (sample)

Figure 4.4

Figure 4.5

Figure 4.6

Observation spot 2 (Imageability + Enclosure + T ransparency + Human Scale + Complex)

Imageability Coverage: 30.5 %

Enclosure Coverage: 14%

Figure 4.7

Figure 4.8

Figure 4.9

Transparency Coverage: 4%

Human Scale Coverage: 5%

Complexity Coverage: 3%

27

Similarly, as above technique, detail analysis for all of the locations Table 1.3 Urban design Qualities Imageability Enclosure Transparency Human Scale Complexity

Spot 1 (coverage) 14.5 % 14 % 0.5 % 2% -

Spot 2 (coverage) 30.5% 14% 4% 5% 3%

Spot 3 (coverage) 7.5 % 25% 3% 1% -

Spot 4 (coverage) 18% 17% 8% 0.5% -

Total coverage

31%

56.5%

36.5%

43.5%

The qualitative definition of the urban design qualities: Imageability is attribute of a place that makes it distinct, memorable and recognizable.

The unique instinct human beings have in memorising and recognising pattern enable human to sense this quality.

Enclosure is defined by well-defined buildings, walls, trees etc. Sky acting as ceiling in a room, pavement the floor of a room and buildings the wall of a room, provides the feel of enclosure.

Human scale refers to the proper size and proportions of the baseman eta urban elements in regard with the scale of human. Building details, Pavement texture, trees, urban furniture contribute to human scale.

Transparency refers to the degree of interaction of human beyond the edge of the street.

Human activity beyond the edge of the street contributes to transparency.

Complexity refers to the visual richness of an environment. It denotes architectural diversity, landscape elements, street furniture and overall physical environment. (Ewing & Handy, 2009)

28

4.4 Qualitative evaluation ‘Shades of Black’ analysis Measuring the features in relation with ‘coherence’ Table 1.4 Observation spots Urban design qualities

1

2

3

4

B-4 W-15

B-7 W-12

Imageability proportion of historic buildings courtyards/plazas/parks buildings with non-rectangular silhouettes major landscape features buildings with identifiers Enclosure proportion street wall—same side proportion street wall—opposite side proportion sky across long sight lines proportion sky ahead Human Scale all street furniture and other street items small planters proportion first floor with windows Transparency proportion first floor with windows proportion active uses proportion street wall—same side Complexity outdoor dining public art dominant building colours accent colours Black (B) being ‘high coherence’ White (W) being ‘low coherence’

B-4 W-15

B-14 W-5

29

Table 1.5 Observation spots Spot 1 (Mixing 15 parts of black to 4 parts of white)

‘Shades of Black’ analysis

Resultant color after mixing portion of black and white

Spot 2 (Mixing 5 parts of black to 14 parts of white) Resultant color after mixing portion of black and white

Spot 3 (Mixing 15 parts of black to 4 parts of white) Resultant color after mixing portion of black and white

Spot 3 (Mixing 7 parts of black to 12 parts of white) Resultant color after mixing portion of black and white

Measuring walkability Colour mixing source: www.trycolors.com

4.5 Observation study: Results and analysis The mapping technique (Rollo & Barker, n.d.) provides the information about the quantitative presence of the significant physical features co-related with urban design qualities, informing influencing factors for walking activity and behaviour. The high coverage as on observation spot 2 (table 1.3), of all of the 5 urban design qualities, likely inform the suitability in walking for pedestrians, as oppose to the lower coverage result of other observation spots. This could inform the necessity of inclusion of more significant physical features and approach to enrich the urban design qualities, that could further enrich the perception of the people providing good experience, and hence encourage them to walk and experience more within the setting of an urban environment. This method could be done without the necessity of mass engagement of people for surveys and interviews.

30

The ‘shades of black’ analysis technique whereas involve with the measurement of perception and feeling of people about how connected they feel with the overall setting of an urban environment. Perception was recorded in individual approach by assessing individual physical features, and a holistic analysis was obtained. In this result as well, observation spot 2 ranked higher in terms of range of walkability. And other spots relatively on the lower side of the walkability, matching the result with the quantitative evaluation performed with mapping method.

31

Chapter 5: Discussion and Conclusion

5.1 Discussion The degree of walkability is largely affected by urban design factors like land-use diversity, density and connectivity in broader context, however, it appears addressing only these factors in an urban environment doesn't guarantee the improvement in walking condition. Subjective response human beings evoke to several factors of a built environment should be taken into account as well, in terms of, having deeper understanding of the nature of walkability.

Shay, Spoon and Khattak (2003) implies that there is lack of clear understanding of the term walkability and the elements that defines its form and functions. It appears the term walkability is related with range of features and variety of settings. The authors say there is general acceptance that the inclusion of sidewalk could improve the walkability, but there could be numerous features such as quality of the floor, safety features, width, connectivity, lighting etc that may be significant. "Physical features individually may not tell us much about the experience of walking down a particular street" (Ewing & Handy, 2009). Urban infrastructures may not be alone the contributing factor to improve walkability, as many have arguments on this topic. Perpetual qualities, and other fields such as architecture, landscape architecture, park planning environmental psychology; and preferable visual preference may affect the walking environment (Ewing & Handy 2009).

The strength of this research is reaching to the existing knowledge about subjective response and behaviour of people being influenced by surrounding built environment.

Through literature reviews, this knowledge of possibility of recording the perceptions in objective manner was further opened up and studied. The qualitative and quantitative evaluation of the same design qualities co-related with consideration of surrounding physical elements, and finding the outcome coming through the processes, to inform about the walking behaviour of people, is positive outcome of this research.

32

In regard with the multidimensional nature of walkability, as expected, this research has areas which were difficult to get covered in holistic way, the limitations, therefore, are many. As observation study is performed within commercial streets, there is no mentioning of the assessment and analysis of other types of built environment and urban form.

The study of walkability is complex, because of the complex interactions between the environment and human beings’ behaviour. The researches done within the definition of walkability is incomplete or needs more refinement. There will be strong need of deep understanding of the correlates of walking activity, walking behaviour, intervening variables, mediating variables etc in comprehensive understanding for the built environment's influences over walking behaviour. The understanding of micro and macro scale variables, and co-relation among each other, is another future need in research area, to explore more about influencing factors of walkability.

5.2 Conclusions The study of walkable environments is given more attention lately, for the reasons, it has numerous benefits in health, sustainability, economy and social sectors. These benefits it offers is one thing, another reason it is given more priority might be is “it is a simple, practical-minded solution to a host of complex problems that we face as a society" (Speck, 2012). The concept of walkability is not mere a nice, idealistic idea, but more holistic approach of solving problems.

The study in this research investigates into insights of the physical characteristic of an urban environment, their role and contribution for shaping urban design qualities, the perception they induce and the influence they create to human behaviour.

In consideration with the major objectives of this research, the investigation in various areas done here covers the understanding of the determinants that affect walkability in micro and macro scale, the understanding of the influence of built environment with the people's behaviour and the refinement of used methods and techniques procured from already existed knowledge.

The observation study derived from the method of conceptual framework for the influence of walking behaviour (Ewing & Handy, 2009) was performed for better insight of the condition of built environment, and also for the study of the amount of coverage certain urban design qualities occupy. The qualitative and quantitative evaluation within the periphery for informing about probable influence over walking behaviour by urban design qualities was studied. The findings for both qualitative and quantitative approach showed some common characteristics in terms of walkability. Further exploration and study about the co-relation between the qualitative and quantitative findings might open and suggest new knowledge in the field of relation between built environment and walking behaviour.

33

Bibliography Gehl, J 2010, Cities for people, Island press, London, Washington, Covelo Speck, J 2018, Walkable city rules, 101 Steps to making better places, Island press, London, Washington, Covelo Speck, J 2012, Walkable city: How downtown can save America one step at a time, North Point Press, New York Jacobs, J 1961, The death and life of great American Cities, Random House, New York, pp. 338-317 Arup 2016, Cities Alive: Towards a walking world, Arupâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Foresight + Research + Innovation, Transport Consulting and Urban Design teams, London, viewed 7 April 2020, https://www.arup.com/perspectives/publications/research/section/cities-alivetowards-a-walking-world Shay, E, Spoon, S & Khattak ,A 2003, Walk, Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Walk: A Resource for Planners and Engineers, Southeastern Transportation Center, Tennessee, viewed 6 April 2020, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228954384_Walkable_Environments_and_ Walking_Activity Choi, E 2012, Walkability as an Urban Design Problem: Understanding the activity of walking in the urban environment, Architecture and the Built Environment, School of Architecture, Sweden, viewed 6 April 2020, <http://kth.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:551283/FULLTEXT01.pdf> Singh, R 2015, Factors affecting walkability of neighborhoods, Sushant School of Art and Architecture, Gurgaon, Haryana, India, viewed 2 April 2020, <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187704281506228X> Boyce, C 2010, Walkability, Social Inclusion and Social Isolation and Street Redesign, BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 4, viewed 5 April 2020, <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263145395_Walkability_Social_Inclusion _and_Social_Isolation_and_Street_Redesign > U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 2016, Creating Walkable and bikeable communities, KTU+A Planning and Landscape Architecture, viewed 6 April 2020, <https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/Creating-WalkableBikeable-Communities.pdf>

34

City of Melbourne 2015, Places for people, Establishing a platform of Evidence to shape Melbourne’s future, City of Melbourne, viewed 9 April 2020, <https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/places-for-people2015.pdf> Revitalising Central Geelong, 2016, Malop Street Green Spine, Part of the Malop to Myers revitalisation project,City of Greater Geelong, Victoria Government, viewed 4 April 2020, <https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/common/public/documents/8d4be2e7fa85b3eRCG_GreenSpine_JUNE17_web.pdf> Hunn, P & Wong, E 2020, 'Retrogade, Appalling waste’: AILA National AwardWinning project to be trashed, Landscape Australia, Design Urbanism and planning, viewed 10 April 2020, <https://landscapeaustralia.com/articles/aila-national-awardwinning-project-to-be-trashed/> Jeremy 2017, Malop Street Green Spine, viewed 9 April 2020, <https://hillstart.me/executiveblog/malop-street-green-spine/> Dovey, K & Pafka, E 2018, What is walkability? The urban DMA, Vol. 57(1) 93–108, viewed April 30 2020, <https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0042098018819727> Ewing, R & Handy, S 2009, Measuring the Unmeasurable: Urban Design Qualities Related to Walkability, Journal of Urban Design, vol. 14:1, 65-84, viewed May 10 2020, <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13574800802451155> Southworth, M 2005, Designing the walkable city, Journal of Urban Planning and Development, Vol. 131, No. 4, viewed April 26 2020, <https://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%290733Forsyth, A 2015, What is a walkable place? The walkability debate in urban design,Urban Design International 20, no.4: 274-292, viewed April 30 2020, <https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/29663388/Forsyth_walkablity_082415 _final.pdf?sequence=1> Shamsuddin, S, Hassan, N & Bilyamin, S 2012, Walkable Environment in Increasing the Liveability of a City, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, no 50: 167 – 178, viewed May 20 2020, <https://pdf.sciencedirectassets.com//277811/1-s2.0S1877042812X00211/1-s2.0-S1877042812031631/main.pdf>

35

City of Greater Geelong 2010, Sustainable Communities, Infrastructures Development Guidelines, City of Greater Geelong, viewed April 19 2020, <https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/planning/article/item/8cd5dcceb16b656.aspx> Asian Development Bank 2011, Walkability and Pedestrian Facilities in Asian Cities:State and Issues, Asian Development Bank, no.17, viewed May 30 2020 <https://www.adb.org/publications/walkability-and-pedestrian-facilities-asian-citiesstate-and-issues> Jung Kim, E, Kim, J & Kim, H 2020, Does Environmental Walkability Matter? The Role of Walkable Environment in Active Commuting, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Public Health ,no. 17, viewed April 19 2020 <https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/4/1261> Bahrainy, H, Khosravi, H, Aliakbari, F & Khosravi, F 2015, The Impact of Built Environment on Walkability, Case Study: North-West of Shiraz, Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, 8(14), 105-117, Spring Summer, viewed June 1 2020 <http://www.armanshahrjournal.com/article_32802_a3ce1f955fc9d6de2347235dfbfea 7cd.pdf> Silva, OH, Pitilin, TR, Gobbo, CAR, Caxambu, MG, Sanches ,SP & Neto, GA 2019, Accessibility index for urban walkable spaces, Acta Scientiarum. Technology, v. 42, viewed April 1 2020 < http://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciTechnol/article/view/45181> Lewyn, M 2009, Why pedestrian-friendly street design is not negligent, University of Louiseville law review, vol. 47. pp. 340-370, viewed May 20 2020, <https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1427&context=sch olarlyworks> Australian Government 2011, Creating places for people: An urban design protocol for Australian cities, Australian Government, viewed May 26 2020 < https://urbandesign.org.au/content/uploads/2015/08/INFRA1219_MCU_R_SQUA RE_URBAN_PROTOCOLS_1111_WEB_FA2.pdf>

Hofferber, N 2016, Recipes for walking in an urban landscape, UWIRE Text, p. 1. Gale Academic OneFile, viewed May 21 2020 <https://link-galecom.ezproxyf.deakin.edu.au/apps/doc/A467670474/AONE?u=deakin&sid=AONE&x id=80ea71ad> 36

Matan, A 2011, Gehl and new visions for walkable Australian cities, Curtin University Sustainability Policy (CUSP) Institute, Western Australia, viewed June 2 2020, <https://espace.curtin.edu.au/bitstream/handle/20.500.11937/9921/191158_71520_ PN_WTPP.4.pdf?sequence=2> Zuniga-Teran, AA, Stoker, P, Gimblett, RH, Orr, BJ, Marsh, SE, Guertin, DP, Chalfoun NV 2019, Exploring the influence of neighborhood walkability on the frequency of use of greenspace, Landscape and Urban Planning vol.190, viewed May 20 2020 < https://naaee.org/eepro/research/database/exploring-influence-neighborhood> Cullen, G. (1961). Townscape, The Architectural Press, London Central Geelong 2008, Urban Design Guidelines, Central Geelong, viewed April 14 2020, <https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/ehq-productionaustralia/5a9c41eae74a460fa312aeb1f8a1814f24c609bf/documents/attachments/000/ 011/280/original/Central_Geelong_UDG.pdf?1397547460> Central Geelon Taskforce 2013, Central Geelong Action Plan, City of Greater Geelong, viewed April 20 2020, <https://www.geelongaustralia.com.au/common/public/documents/amendments/8d2 d0901dd9c6bb-CentralGeelongActionPlan.pdf> Rollo, J & Estaban, Y 2019, 'The promise of vision-making a city: a perpetual journey’, in Jones, DS & Roos PB (eds.), Geelong’s Changing Landscape, CSIRO publishing, Clayton South, pp. 269-292 Rollo, J & Barker , S (n.d.), Perceptions of Place – Evaluating Experiential Qualities of Streetscapes, School of Architecture and Built Environment, Deakin University How to blend colors? <www. trycolors.com> Nearmap n.d., nearmap online map, viewed April 25 2020, <https://apps.nearmap.com/maps/#/@38.1485300,144.3601800,15.00z,0d/V/20200 328> Ehardt, J 2008, Great streets: opportunities for sustainable change, AWPA Congress and Exposition, viewed May 13 2020, <http://www2.apwa.net/documents/meetings/congress/2008/handouts/4431.pdf> Linda n.d., Top five pedestrian streets of Paris, viewed May 26 2020 <http://blog.lodgis.com/en/top-5-pedestrian-streets-paris/>

37

Brashear, P & Khawarzad, A 2011, What is walkability? How do you measure it? Takeaways from this yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s TRB meeting, viewed May 26 2020, <https://www.pps.org/article/what-is-walkability-how-do-you-measure-it-take-aways-fromthis-years-trb-meeting>

38

List of figures and tables Figure 1.1 Methodology Flowchart Figure 2.1 Open Space Structure linking core regions in central Geelong Figure 2.2 Green link, from Cunningham pier to Johnstone Park Figure 2.3 A section of Malop street green spine Figure 4.1 Conceptual framework for the influence on walking behaviour (Ewing & Handy, 2009) Figure 4.2 Central Geelong map Figure 4.3 Observation spot images Table 1.1 Urban design qualities related to walkability (Ewing & Handy, 2009) Table 1.2 Colour mapping of urban design qualities Figure 2.4 Observation spot 2 (Urban design qualities) Table 1.3 Result of quantitative analysis Table 1.4 Qualitative evaluation 'shades of blackâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; analysis Table 1.5 Measuring walkability

9 15 15 17 22 24 25 25 26 27 28 29 30

List of abbreviation UNESCO WHO CBD GRPA COGG DMA

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation World Health Organisation Central Business District Geelong Regional Planning Authority City of Greater Geelong Density, Mix, Access

39