Walkability assessment in Indian cities

Walkability Assessment in Cities

1

Walkability  Walkability is a measure of how friendly an area is to walking.  To measure the connectivity and quality of walkways, footpaths or sidewalks.

 Reflects the built environment health, economics and overall livability of the area.  Now became a guiding framework to design vibrant and healthy communities through urban planning interventions.  An alternative form of urban mobility.

 Walkability is not just having footpaths all along the city roads.  It is a combination of various aspects • Availability and usability of footpaths

• Safe at-grade crossings • Safety • Amenities – Lighting, Shade, Benches • Respect from motorists. https://www.thebetterindia.co m/106016/bengalurustmarksroad-road

2

Why Walkability Concept is being promoted?

• Indian cities were built for walking and cycling.

• However, The constant development of technology and the desire to move more quickly have led to the creation of vehicular traffic in cities with an automobile oriented development led to decrease in non-motorised trip share.

• As road is meant for both motorists and pedestrians, but pedestrians are forced to corner with inadequate facilities.

• The attempt to solve these problems have been compelled to reflect on whom the city is for.

• It has been acknowledged that transport should be good not just for drivers, but also other people and their public health, as well as for the environment and the economy. As such, it is connected with sustainable transport policies.

• One idea to realize the goals of sustainable transport has focus to create urbanfriendly cities that led to the phenomenon known as ‘walkable cities’

3

Trip Mode share in Indian Cities Table: Trip mode shares in Indian cities City Category

Population

1A

<0.5 million (Plain Terrain)

Walk

Cycle

2-wheeler

Car

Public

IPT

Aerage Trip Length in Km.

34

3

26

5

27

5

2.4

1B

<0.5 million (Hilly 57 Terrain)

1

6

8

28

0

2.5

2

0.5-1 million

32

20

24

9

12

3

3.5

3

1-2 million

24

19

24

13

12

8

4.7

4

2-4 million

25

18

29

10

12

6

5.7

5

4-8 million

25

11

26

21

10

7

7.2

6

>8 million

22

8

9

44

10

7

10.4

28

11

16

27

13

6

7.7

National

Trip Mode Share

Intermediate Public Transport (IPT) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; modes that fill the gap between private and formal public transport such as share autos, cabs Source: Ministry of Urban Development. May, 2008. Study on Traffic and Transportation Policies and Strategies in Urban Areas in India

4

Factors that impact walkability

Figure: Conceptual relations of factors influencing walking behavior Source: Schmid J. 2006. The relationship between the built environment and physical activity in the form of walking trips.

5 Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Thesis, Uniersity of Lusanne.

Factors that impact walkability Physical or Built

Personal

• Block or Neighbourhood size

• Trip – Purpose

• Residential density

• Walking time & distance

• Land use

• Spatial familiarity & adaptation

• Network proximity to amenities

• Routines & needs

• Traffic safety infrastructure

• Shopping choice

• Pleasurability along the walk

• Socio-economics

- Trees for shade & Benches for rest Social

Utility Factor

Climate

• Safety

• Amenities

• Temperature

• Social isolation

• Street segments

• Rainfall Characteristics

• Behaviour norms of system users

• intersections

• Humidity 6

Role of social factors Walkability conceptually adjusted to include social factors shaping the travel behaviour.

• To more precisely account for travel behaviour in the city.

• To maximise the number of potential opportunities for residents to meet their needs on foot – voluntarily and satisfactorily, regardless of their socio-economic constraints.

Source: Geoffrey A Battista, Kevin Manaugh. 2018. Stores and mores: Toward socializing walkability. Journal of Transport Geography. 67, 53–60

Needs of Walkability • • • • •

Pleasurability Comfort Safety Accessibility Feasibility 7

What makes a Neighbourhood Walkable Center Density

Parks and public spaces On street parallel parking

shopping district, public space acts a center. compact enough for flourishing local businesses & frequent run public transportation. housing is provided for everyone – young & old, singles & families, rich & poor. Workplaces and residences are located near to each other. to gather & play acts as a buffer of protection

Pedestrian – centric design Nearby schools and workplaces Narrow streets

buildings are placed close to street to cater foot traffic. located close enough that most residents can walk from their homes low speeds

Mixed income & land use

 High walkable friendly neighbourhoods has their amenities within 5 minutes walk i.e.

400-600m  Neighbourhoods with amenities away about 30 minutes walk (2-2.5km)are considered less friendly 8

Advantages of Walkability  Promotes sustainable transport development  Physical Activity  Improves environmental outcomes  Fuel economic development

 It provides information on current pedestrian infrastructure and addresses the problems & factors that are to be considered for development and helps in  Renovating or redesign of pedestrian network.  sets as a example / Benchmark while making new developments walkable friendly.

 Benchmarking walkability parameters to improve walkability.  Prioritizing non-motorised transport with public transport allows people to enjoy better access, mobility and quality of life.

9

Walkability Assessment  To improve walkability, we need a method to accurately and objectively measure it, so that it is possible to better determine what exactly needs to be changed.  Several methodologies or tools exist to assess walkability  They vary with regard to emphasis on qualitative or quantitative assessment, components or parameters, sampling and scoring.  Walkability assessment comprises of 3 surveys

1. Field Walkability survey 2. Pedestrian survey 3. Assessment of Policy and institutional guidelines

To rate the parameters on the street stretches based on availability, condition & maintenance Interviews conducted to understand travel & social characteristics, views & preferences of pedestrians.

Review of administrative role in policies, guidelines and allocation of financial resources.

Note: Field and pedestrian surveys are conducted during peak hours to capture the peak-hour pedestrian movement

Source: Luis Neto. 2015. The Walkability Index. School of Environment, Education & Development

10

Field survey Methodology  Time of Survey Objective of walkability is to compare streets and cities, surveys are to be done during peak hours (morning or evening). Evening 3pm - 8pm gives best results as they tend to be busier than morning.  Route Selection the surveys are to be carried out in major usage areas in a city.

• Commercial area

– 5km of interconnected roads within a 1km radius

• Public transport terminal

– 2km of pedestrian facilities within a 1km radius

• Educational area

– 4km of pedestrian facilities within a 1km radius

• Residential area

– 2km of length, investigate route taken by residents from home to access public transport (further classified based on socio-economic characters)  Field Survey Parameters  The details like gender, age, occupation and annual household income of the pedestrian will help in subjective and qualitative perceptions of the user.

11

Parameters Used for Assessing 1. Walking path modal conflict

10. Disability infrastructure

19. Walking time

2. Pedestrian count or volume

11. Obstructions

20. De-Tour factors

3. Availability of walking paths

12. Encroachments

4. Footpath width

13. Walk environment

5. Footpath continuity

14. Comfort

6. Availability of crossings

15. Security form crime

7. Grade crossing safety

16. Maintenance & cleanliness

8. Motorist behaviour

17. Footpath surface

9. Amenities

18. Length of surface

 These parameters are rated on the scale of 1-5 or 1-10 for each area in a city.  The rating of an area is taken as average of all the parameters are translated into a rating system from 0 (lowest score) to 100 (highest score).  City walkability rating is taken average of all the ratings in different areas.

12

Path conflicts of different users at crossings Source: ITDP Manual / Problems at crossings

Wide footpaths with dedicated seating spaces at ITI road, Pune Source: Smart city/ Pune street program/ footpaths

Improper maintenance of footpaths Source: Deccan chronicle / 03 Sept 2018/ Bangalore / garbage on foot paths

Encroachments on footpaths Source: INS News/ 28 Dec 2017/ Jammu/ JMC / Encroachments 13

Rating or Scores for Parameters Parameter

Rating 1

2

3

4

5

Walking path modal conflict

Conflict that makes impossible

Conflict that makes walking possible but inconvenient

Some conflict

Minimal conflict

No conflict with other modes

Availability of walking paths

required but not available

Available but highly congested

Available, needs maintenance

Available, sometimes congested

Not required, people an safely walk on roads

Availability of crossings

@ >500m & avg. speed is high

@ 300-500m & avg. speed is 40kmph

@ 200-300m & @ 100-200m & avg. avg. speed is 20- speed is 20-40kmph 40kmph

Grade crossing safety

Very high Dangerous- some risk of Difficult to safe probability of being hurt ascertain danger accidents & crossing time

Very safe

Amenities (benches, light, toilets, trees)

No amenities

Little at some locations

Good amenities for major length

Excellent amenities making pleasant experience

Obstructions

Completely blocked by permanent obstructions

Inconvenience, effective Mildly width <1m inconvenience, Temporary obstacles

Minor inconvenience, Temporary obstacles , Effective width >1m

No obstructions

Security & Crime

Very dangerous

Feels dangerous

Secure â&#x20AC;&#x201C; min. criminal risk

Very secure â&#x20AC;&#x201C; no risk of crime

Limited no. provisions

Difficult to ascertain security

No need, pedestrians are safe to cross

14

Assessment Methodology

Commercial, Public Transport Terminal, Educational, Residential

Source: Ministry of Urban Development. May, 2008. Study on Traffic and Transportation Policies and Strategies in Urban Areas in India

15

Walkability Assessment Tools Tools

Objectives

Walkability Score

Assesses based on distance to amenities and footpaths quality

Walkability Index

Assesses availability of footpaths and rating of pedestrian facilities

Global Walkability Index

Assesses Qualitative & Quantitative of footpaths and pedestrian behaviour

Active living research – Neighbourhood Environment Walkability Scale(NEWS)

Assesses the perception of neighbourhood design features related to physical activity

Walking and Bicycling Suitability Assessment (WABSA)

Assesses suitability of sidewalks and cycle tracks in local streets – to identify design problems than suitability score

Living Communities – Sidewalks & street Survey

Assesses how safer the communities for walking

PEAT(Path Environment Audit Tool)

Assesses physical characteristics of community paths and trails that are used for physical activities

WSAF(Walking Suitability Assessment Form)

Assesses walking suitability of sidewalks and cycle tracks

Analytic Audit Tool

To determine links between streets and rates of physical activity

I-M (Irvine Minnesota) Inventory

Measures wide range of built environment characteristics that are linked to active living

Active Neighborhood Checklist

Street level characteristics that are linked to physical activity behavior

PEDS(Pedestrian Environment Data Scan)

Collect info. About walking environments and measure environmental characteristics that influence walking

MAPS(Micro scale Audit of Pedestrian Streetscape)

To collect audit data on pedestrian environment and walkability in neighborhoods

16

Comparison of Walkability Assessment Tools Assessment Tool

Scale

Assessing Methodology

Data Collection

Limitations

Walkability index (Qualitative & Quantitative)

Macro & Micro

Availability of footpaths and rating of pedestrian facilities

Field study – rating of pedestrian Difficult to asses which infrastructure parameter needs improvement

Walk Score (Quantitative)

Macro

Walk time to amenities, density, block length, intersection density.

Data from Online open street maps (google maps)

Qualitative assessment of pedestrian facilities (width, design, traffic & crime safety)

Global Walkability Index (Qualitative & Quantitative)

Macro & Micro

Pedestrian count, Walking conditions including Safety, security & convenience

Field study , Interviews from pedestrians, & policies by administrative institutions GIS for processing spatial data

Difficult to asses which parameter needs improvement Considers only footpaths with >1.2m wide.

Neighbourhood Environment Walkability Scale

Micro

Participants to estimate the frequency and duration of time spent walking in past 7 days using Physical Activity Questionnaire

Field study , Interviews from pedestrians, GIS processing

The modest sample size and the non-probability nature of the sample may reduce generalizability of findings.

Walking and Bicycling Suitability Assessment

Micro

Volume, speed, width, surface quality, curb ramps

Field study

Small sample of road segments are taken => unstable conclusions.

Living Communities – Sidewalks & street Survey

Micro

width, surface quality, maintenance, usage

Field study

Even unused footpaths are considered as good.

Path Environment Audit Tool(PEAT)

Macro & Micro

physical characteristics of community paths used for physical activities

Field study – manual & digital

Require complex training and/or scoring procedures because they were designed for research. Complexity, burden & high auditing17cost

Walkability Assessment in India  In India, MOUD(National level) & Municipal corporations(Local level) are the institutions responsible for improving walkability.  MOUD uses Walkability Index - function based on availability of footpaths and rating of pedestrian facilities. It ranges between 0 to 1.  The national average index in 2008 was 0.52 (CSE, 2009)  MOUD also developed ‘Urban Transport Benchmarking Tool’ that uses only 3 indicators to calculate pedestrian facility rating • Signalized intersection delay/pedestrian • Street lighting

• % of city covered with footpaths wider than 1.2m  Pedestrian infrastructure and demand for walking of different cities can be compared using a standard survey methodology and generating a walkability index.

Source: Ministry of Urban Development. May, 2008. Study on Traffic and Transportation Policies and Strategies in Urban Areas in India

Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). 2009. Footfalls: Obstacle Course to Livable Cities. New Delhi, India. July 2009.

18

Walkability Index Walkability index = [(w₁ x availability of footpath) + (w₂ x pedestrian facility ratings)] • w₁ & w₂ are weights (assumed 50% for each) i.e. w₁ = w₂ = 0.5

• availability of foot paths =

Foot path length / Length of major roads in the city

• Pedestrian facility rating = i.e. walkability score

Average score estimated based on parameters on available pedestrian facilities / 100

 The practice of Indian Design Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities (IRC 103-1998) in the current scenario effecting the walkability index as population, vehicular traffic in cities has increased.

Source: Ministry of Urban Development. May, 2008. Study on Traffic and Transportation Policies and Strategies in Urban Areas in India

19

Walkability Score  A walk score is a number between 0 to 100.  Calculated by adding all the scores of the parameters on 0-10 scale and total is made relative to 100.  Points are awarded based on the distance to nearby amenities – stores, schools, parks.  It measures pedestrian friendliness by analysing population density and road metrics such as block length and intersection density.  Walkable friendly Neighbourhoods / cities are classified based on its walk score.

Walk score classification

Remarks

90-100

walkers paradise

most errands can be accomplished on foot without owning a vehicle

70-89

Very walkable

Possible without owning a vehicle

50-69

Some what walkable

Store & amenities may be within walkable distance, but many everyday trips require vehicular transportation.

25-49

Vehicular-Dependent

Only few destinations are with in walking range. But for most errands driving or public transportation is must

0-24

Only Vehicular-Dependent

No neighbourhood destinations are within walking range.

Source: walkscore methodology. Retrieved from walkscore.com: https://www.walkscore.com/methodology.shtml

20

Other Tools Data Analysis

Source: Pallavi C Nath. 2016. Validating Walakbility Parameters in Urban India.

Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Thesis, SPA Delhi

21

Walkability Economics  Walking means to solve many social ills such as global warming, traffic congestion, oil dependency and other health issues.  The importance of urban planning for sustainable development is important.

 Quality of air we breathe and water we drink all comes under the issue of planning and development.  Consequences on: climate-change, biodiversity, transportation development pattern.  Challenges to build green communities and their objectives are: 1. Better scientific community

2. Relief from high petrol prices 3. Reduction in green house gas emissions

4. Rely on energy efficient buildings 5. Reduce distances from origin to destination 6. Reduce the need for costly roads and infrastructure 22

Walkability in Different Indian Cities ď&#x201A;§ Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities(CAI-Asia) Center conducted walakability assessment in Indian cities â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Pune, Bhubaneswar, Chennai, Bangalore

People using grade crossing than subways at Chennai central station https://walkabilityasia.org/Chennai-india

Parking on footpaths in front of commercial area https://www.telegraphindia.com/states/odisha/squattersback-on-janpath

Hawkers on footpath opposite to Pune railway station https://www.hindustantimes.com/pune-news/punekars forced to walk on roads

No footpaths & grade crossings, no proper bus stops at silk road junction https://www.lequirk.com/016/07/KR-Puram-Traffic

23

Population

Pune

Bhubaneshwar

Bangalore

Chennai

34 Lakhs

8.38 Lakhs

123 Lakhs

70.9 Lakhs

0.50

0.46

0.40

(As per Census 2011)

Walkability Index 0.54 Key Parameters with major problems Problems Identified

Paths and Infrastructure Foot paths & crossings, Motorist Behavior (50% of Grade crossings, foot at residential & transport infrastructure 900 avg. road accidents path width & continuity terminals are pedestrians) 1. Frontage at railway station 2. Damaged foot paths 3. Obstructions by vendors and displays 4. Grade crossing time & lack of safety at signals 5. Cleanliness & odor from adjacent drainages

1. Lack of clear footpaths at transport terminals 2. Lack of pedestrian amenities 3. Crossing on roads with high speeds 4. Obstruction by Parking in commercial areas 5. Trash disposal on foot paths

1. Min. or no space to cross at zebra crossing as vehicles stopping on it.

2. Vehicles driven on footpaths.

3. Disable un-friendly 4. Wide roads with high speed vehicles (mainly airport road)

1. Lack of clear footpaths at transport terminals 2. Uneven & discontinuous paths 3. Not opting of subways & overhead crossings, not secure at night 4. Exposure to air pollution 5. Obstacles & cleaning

Rectifications Proposed

1. Overhead crossings & subways are proposed 2. Up-gradation of public transport 3. Barricades on roads at transit terminals.

1. Safe at grade crossings 2. marked Parking provisions along commercial street

1. Yellow zigzag lines at junctions are provided.

1. Escalators for 20 overhead crossings 2. Width = 1.5m(residential)& 3m(major roads)

24

Conclusion  Walkability should be treated as an ongoing phenomenon along with the development of the urban area.  Planners and policy makers should work with a broad base of partners to improve access to amenities within walking distance, through physical and social projects.

While deeply exploring the user circumstances to interventions which 1. Allow more people to safely and comfortably access more opportunities.

2. People participation to the design of urban spaces.  Indian Design Guidelines (IRC 103-1998), for Pedestrians have to be modified considering aspiring future.  Pedestrian facilities need more attention for separate walking paths, amenities & universal design.  Providing footpaths where not required leads to encroachments / occupancy by homeless people, so the provision has to be done after assessing the link.

25

References 1. Ministry of Urban Development (MOUD), India. May, 2008. Study on traffic and transportation policies and strategies in urban areas in India 2. Richa Singh. 2016. Factors affecting walkability of neighborhoods. Urban Planning and Architecture Design for Sustainable Development. Social and Behavioral science. Vol-216, Pg.643-654 3. Geoffrey A Battista, Kevin Manaugh. 2018. Stores and mores: Toward socializing walkability. Journal of Transport Geography. Vol-67, Pg.53–60 4. Luis Neto. 2015. The Walkability Index. School of Environment, Education & Development 5. Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). July, 2009 Footfalls: Obstacle Course to Livable Cities. New Delhi, India.

6. Pragia Minhas, Arunava Poddar. 2017. Walkability index by global walkability index method. International research journal of engineering and technology(IRJET). ISSN:2395, Pg.56-72 7. Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities(CAI-Asia) Center. 2011. Walkability in Indian cities. Pasig City, Philippines 8. Schmid J. 2006. The relationship between the built environment and physical activity in the form of walking trips.

Master’s Thesis, Uniersity of Lusanne.

9. Pallavi C Nath. 2016. Validating Walakbility Parameters in Urban India, Establishing a Relationship between walkability and the built environment. Master’s Thesis, SPA Delhi.

10. walkscore methodology. Retrieved from walkscore.com: https://www.walkscore.com/methodology.shtml

11. Walkability Asia. Retrieved from walkabilityasia.org: https://www.walkability asia.org/India

26

THANK YOU

Prepared by KOLLI RAJESH B. Architecture (2013-2018) M. City Planning (MCP) (2018-2020) Dept. of Architecture & Regional Planning IIT Kharagpur kollirajesh888@gmail.com

27