A study finds that more intersections per mile (i.e. smaller blocks) best correlates more with walkability than population density or other factors:
http://pedshed.net/?p=574
QuoteOf all the built environment measurements, intersection density has the largest effect on walking â€" more than population density, distance to a store, distance to a transit stop, or jobs within one mile.
yes...there's also something called the connectivity index...the more intersections you have, the higher the score
finehoe...........much thanks for the heads up! After reading this, I have come to the conclusion that the connectivity index for both vehicles and pedestrians, here in Jacksonville stinks! What is going to happen when we add BRT to the mix? Right now, bus's stop in the middle of the traffic lanes to take on and discharge riders! Somehow I don't think this is efficient for either the bus or the traffic stopped behind it.
um CS...BRT and traffic have nothing to do with it...the issue is how good is your grid...I would argue that it is quite good in neighborhoods like Springfield and Riverside
Try reading about connectivity and the index
http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm116.htm
^Good link.
tufsu.............smaller blocks equals greater walkability is the essence of connectivity is it not? As you point out, Springfield and Riverside is good! I would add San Marco and possibly Ortega to that list......why? Simple, all mentioned are older neighborhoods and from what I remember about their history......all just happened to have "Trolley" that connected them but that's another story.......older layouts appear to be more walker friendly since their blocks are shorter....or as you put it.......how good is your grid? Downtown is not traffic friendly nor is it walker friendly and to change it to something that was, would require tearing it all down and starting over! That is not cost effective nor something reasonable to expect! So I guess the question should be ....what the hell happened with downtown? Evidently the planners for downtown failed in their "Grid" planning......of course money had a factor to play in that, but I won't go there!
yes CS...small blocks is what it is about...but you were talking about BRT and buses stopping in traffic.
as for downtown, it is actually quite walkable (check www.walkscore.com)...partially because of the grid and the relatively small block size
tufsu..........walkability is one small slice of the mass transit pie is it not? Your right ....I did mention BRT and bus's and here is why- walkability and traffic,be it BRT or bus all have their own issues and that is compounded by integrating vehicular and bike traffic. BRT, by its very nature, is bus rapid transit, therefore few stops and continuous movement and if there is just one BRT lane only, that detracts from vehicular and bike traffic using the same lanes! Unless downtown is going to be totally revamped, the only way I see it happening is changing streets to one way only, which means the maze downtown will become more of a maze. Then you integrate foot traffic with vehicular traffic and add lights, timed to maintain traffic flow in a continuous movement, then foot traffic is slowed waiting to cross, so walkabilty is reduced,so it appears at first glance to be a no win situation! Once again there are options, but at a cost either to the city or the taxpayer or both!
Quote from: CS Foltz on June 10, 2010, 09:07:11 PM
...changing streets to one way only...
I think this was already tried in the 70s downtown to "facilitate traffic movement". It's always about the cars, don't you know.