Book Review: Walkable City
This was my first foray into the world of urban development, and I couldn’t have been happier with my first selection. I really liked this book. Jeff Speck does a great job of giving the reader a little bit of everything without using industry jargon or expecting prior knowledge from the reader. He covers a lot of ground, threading together many different ideas in the urban planning and development space, weaving them together to make a compelling argument why cities should heavily invest in creating walkable urban areas.
I was particularly interested in the changes a city could enact without much infrastructure investment. One example is eliminating free parking outside of storefronts and along the downtown corridor to spur economic activity reenergizing urban blocks and inviting further commerce to the area. This is counter-intuitive - requiring people to pay will encourage them to spend more? Speck provides data that shows the behavior of drivers changes drastically when parking isn’t free. Paid parking encourages more efficient shopping and increases the turnover of parking spaces, allowing a larger number of shoppers to engage with the city block. Another example is to paint large green stripes or other indicators on paved roads that bikes are expected to share the road. Knowing that bikes may be present often makes drivers more cautious and reduces there speeds, encouraging safer urban areas for cars, bikes, and pedestrians.
Speck made me examine and consider aspects of urban areas I hadn’t previously paid much attention to. He spends an entire chapter discussing the effects of parking on downtown areas, highlighting the backwardness of mandatory parking requirements for new construction. He provides the example of the DART (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) system to illustrate how building public transportation is not inherently useful; without careful consideration of where to place stations and how to incentivize riders, a public transit system can become an expensive art installation, stymying all taxpayer interest in future urban-area investment. Speck also dedicates a chapter to the urban tree - it provides pedestrians, increases property value, gives life to a street, and are relatively low-cost compared to alternative improvements.
As for the actual writing of the book, there was some room for improvement. The flow was coarse during the first section, in which Speck builds his claim that walkability provides value beyond aesthetics. While the increased benefits of walkability seem obvious (potentially because I’m the target demographic that gravitates toward walkable city centers), Speck spends a little too much time reinforcing the point, utilizing a broad range of literature to present his case for the few doubters in the back - at points, it seems a bit overkill. The facts are surely presented but they are papier-mâché together, abruptly moving from one point to another. Speck claims mixed-use zoning is a requirement for effective walkability, but he might not want to bring the same to his writing: it’s a mix of anecdotes, footnotes, quotes, and multiple ideas all within a single paragraph. Sorry - that might have been too harsh. The book was quite enjoyable, and the writing really wasn’t that bad.
Speck lays out a coherent, practical formula for creating walkable downtowns and urban areas. He provides an array of different solutions, both big and small, to problems us urban residents see in our communities in varying degrees. I’m excited to pick up other books Speck has authored, and appreciate his inviting tone to amateur urban planners.
My notes while reading this book:
- A General Theory of Walkability
- Useful; aspects of daily life are organized and close
- Safe: pedestrians feel they cannot be hit by cars
- Comfortable: “outdoor living rooms” as opposed to wide-open spaces via buildings and landscape
- Interesting: unique buildings with friendly faces and humanity
- More adults and retirees are moving back into the city rather than staying in their sue urban houses. As baby boomers retire and more to walkable places, we’ll see a seismic shift in city demographics over the next two decades
- Walkable areas need nice “fabric” within an area
- Walkability has profound effects on economic and social trends in the area
- Considerable cost savings that are spent locally
- Social scenes are spawned out of chance encounters rather than invitations (aka, driving somewhere)
- Demographic shifts will increase demand for walkable urban areas (a cultural change)
- Demand for these areas has raised prices and invited businesses to participate
- Transportation costs have skyrocketed, and families living on the outskirts of urban areas pay a hefty premium for vehicles (maintaining, purchasing, refueling, space) while urban areas convert that to savings and local spending
- Investment in building transit vs. highways yields more jobs according to studies (“Estimating the Employment Impacts it Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Road Infrastructure”)
- Higher QOL attracts creative talent
- Health benefits
- Higher obesity levels are correlated with more miles driven
- Automobiles cause pollution
- Automobiles make suburbs more dangerous than the inner city due to car crashes
- Cars are pretty terrible
- Reliance on foreign oil, sending money to Russia and middle eastern countries. Contributes to a bigger military budget
- Cars count for big chunks of carbon emissions
- Electric cars will use coal in the US for electricity, which is still pretty bad for the environment. Need to invest in clean energy
- Moving to electric cars is green vanity - the reduced cost of driving will encourage more driving, wiping away any gains. It’s also statistically irrelevant compared to the changes from an unwalkable to a walkable area
- Step 1: Put cars in their place
- Induced demand makes traffic studies irrelevant. When roads are expanded, their capacity is overwhelmed with new supply, rendering any additional road miles obsolete
- Highway building usually demolished minority neighborhoods
- Commitment to automobility means that roads have infiltrated every nook and cranny of the city
- Cities have been built around automobile accessibility, which diverts funds away from public transport and lowers property values
- Congestion
- Saves fuel - people will find alternate methods when traffic is a constraint
- Correlation with more walkability in the area. 7 of the top ten most congested cities also are on top ten walk score
- Traffic engineers will eradicate a city by attempting to improve traffic flow! The DOT is especially bad and owns most main streets
- Widening roads caused higher traffic and increases risk of unsafe incidents
- One cannot just remove all automobile access. The right mix is adding pedestrian / bike areas and public transit, as well as access to automobiles. Cutting off automobiles to downtown areas will cut the oxygen supply and cripple the area
- Step 2: Mix the uses
- Most cities have downtowns with everything but affordable housing
- Housing needs to be affordable, otherwise you end up with a homogenous, gentrified culture
- Affordable housing can be reached through inclusionary-zoning (think rent-controlled apartments) and accessory dwelling units, which increase affordability by giving a second income stream to homeowners and increase the density of residents
- Demand for downtown housing is about to spike, and cities focusing on providing mixed commercial and residential areas will do well
- Step 3: Get the parking right
- “The cost of all parking in the U.S. exceeds the value of all cars and may even exceed the value of all roads.”
- Free pearling and maintenance permeates throughout the economy, as it’s included in every purchase, restaurant bill, or theater tickets
- All of the six hundred land uses have their own parking requirements, I.e. bowling alleys must have one parking space per employee and 5 per lane
- Required parking reduces housing density, is subsidized by non-drivers, increases the cost of building, and stifles changes in land use of existing buildings
- Cheap curbside parking reduces economic activity (people hold onto spots longer, reducing turnover and new customers), and causes congestion as people search for parking, and scares away potential customers who don’t want to deal with finding a parking spot
- Parking should aim to have around 85% occupancy by adjusting parking rates. This encourages turnover and usage by those who will spend the money to park. Will reduce over congestion due to free parking.
- “If nonresidents pay for curb parking, and the city spends its money to benefit the residents, charging for curb parking can become a popular policy rather than the political third rail it often is today.”
- Step 4: Let transit work
- In almost all cases, using public transit starts and ends with a walk. Walkability is required for good transit
- Public transit may incur higher taxes but reduces the actual transportation cost due to the unnecessary nature of private vehicles
- Good public transit requires local density, and requires a neighborhood-like structure, as the stops must be nodal and pedestrian-friendly
- Why has the DART in Dallas failed?
- Lines don’t pass through the most populated areas; parking is ample downtown; reducing frequency to extend the line; forgetting about neighborhoods
- Transit will only be adopted when it is less costly than driving
- How do you entice drivers to use public transit when driving is too convenient? You might not be able to. But if you want to try you need transit to have
- Urbanity: stops need to be in the middle of the action. Riders should be able to fall into the bus from a stool at a coffee shop
- Clarity: simple routes that allow visualization by potential riders
- Frequency: either provide frequent transit or non at all. People hate both schedules and waiting
- Pleasure: transit is a mobile public space. Make it a beautiful experience, and social (seats looking inward instead of at the back of someone’s head)
- Step 5: Protect the Pedestrian
- Smaller blocks are more pedestrian friendly. Larger blocks mean less roads and intersections, which means faster speeds and more cares, and larger roads
- Road diets - 3 lane roads with a single middle lane for left-hand turns, reduce injuries
- Wider lanes means fast driving. Traffic engineers don’t get this - they want to widen lanes to protect the pedestrian!
- Make streets appear “more dangerous” actually makes them safer, as drivers slow down and are more cautious
- Non-right angle intersections
- Removing street signage
- Mixing the uses of streets for pedestrians, bikers, etc
- Monderman
- “Dedicated cycle” intersections, when pedestrians have to wait for a full cycle of traffic and then get the intersection all to themselves and can cross diagonally, is very inconvenient for pedestrians
- Not all pedestrians routes are north-south or east-west, so when one direction has traffic the walker can continue walking in the other directoon
- Step 6: Welcome Bikes
- Build it and they will come - good biking requires good biking infrastructure
- Biking infrastructure investments have a great ROI than any other transit investments
- Biking safety is tied to driver awareness and “safety in numbers”
- Can adding bike lanes make roads less safe?
- It widens roads, encouraging speeding
- It reduces the cautiousness of drivers
- At the current volume of bikers, bike lanes are the preferred method. Since safety is so dependent on numbers, and lack of bike lanes has reduced the number of cyclists, we need to increase the volume before changing our perspective
- Bike lanes are not needed downtown if they will replace curbside parking. We want Main Street to be a place of reduced speed and shopping, not motion
- Putting green stripes or large biking decals on roads are some of the best low-cost investments. They send a signal to drivers and also highlight the city as a place that cares about urban mobility and alternative transportation
- Biking infrastructure is all about compromise within the system - too often, biker advocates are specialists that may underrepresent the other needs of our transit systems
- Step 7: Shape the Spaces
- Humans need to feel enclosed, and streets with buildings on either side fix that comfort
- Large public spaces don’t need to be that large, and perhaps if a public space is to large it will decrease the usefulness and shape
- In small and medium towns, tall buildings can suck up the development needed for vacant builds or empty lots
- Open spaces (often caused by bad urban architecture) will hamper walkability - people need to have structure and guidance in their walks!
- Step 8: Plant Trees
- Trees provide pedestrian barriers along side walks, increase shade coverage, are associated with higher rates of crimes, provide subconscious yet fundamental comfort to humans, increase property value
- Trees are useful to reduce ambient temperature, capture CO2 emissions, and soak up rainwater to prevent CSOs (combined sewage overflows) in drainage systems
- “A bald head is not comely, neither is a street seemingly which is not well set with trees”
- Step 9: Make Friendly and Unique Faces
- Humans need to be interested and constantly need stimulation
- Storefronts and street-facing portions of buildings should be interesting and welcoming
- For example, can parking garages be hidden with street-facing store fronts, middle ramps (so that the space can be converted later if needed)?
- Porous and deep
- Porous by windows and doors
- Deep by how it blurs the edges between public and private and provides facilities for shelter, sitting and engagement like outdoor dining
- Step 10: Pick Your Winners
- Doing all of these steps everywhere isn’t practical from a financial standpoint
- Need to start small, build momentum, and get small wins
- Find anchor buildings or locations, and map existing streets between anchors as targets for walkability improvements. Only these streets should receive redevelopment funds
- Focus on the downtown! While urban planning and resource allocation is a political game, downtown is an area that belongs to all who inhabit the city, rather than focusing on a particular neighborhood
- The downtown is how people value their city
- The downtown is how outsiders and potential residents evaluate the city
- The downtown will be the rising tide, inviting residents, commercial investment, sand PR
