%2c_Montreal_2005-10-21.JPG)
Inurban planning,walkability is the accessibility of amenities within a reasonable walking distance.[1] This concept is based on the idea that urban spaces should serve purposes beyond mere transport corridors designed for maximum vehicle throughput. Instead, the objective should be to create relatively complete, livable spaces that serve a variety of uses, users, and transportation modes, thereby reducing the need for cars for travel. The first of the ten principles ofNew Urbanism is walkability.[2]
In a 1961 book,The Death and Life of Great American Cities,Jane Jacobs proposed radically new principles for rebuilding cities by increasing urban diversity, density, and dynamism, or in effect:to crowd people and activities together in a jumping, joyous urban jumble.[3] While her seminal book never used the term walkability, aNew Urbanism was launched.
To bring Jacob’s vision into the urban planning mainstream, empirical research was needed. In 1994,Lawrence D. Frank and Gary Pivo provided some of the earliest and frequently cited quantification on the link between urban design and walking.[4][5] In 2001, Frank and Engelke published a frequently cited review of evidence for the claim that urban design can increase walking and biking and improve public health.[6][7]
In 2003, the term walkability was repeatedly used in a frequently cited academic article:Environmental Correlates of Walking and Cycling. Based on a comprehensive literature review the authors concluded that high density urban design, walking, and public health were empirically interrelated. They also called for the creation of a walkability index.[8][9]
In 2004, another highly cited article,Obesity Relationships with Community Design, Physical Activity, and Time Spent in Cars, quantitatively linked walkability toobesity.[10][11] A 2026 commentary by Margaret B. Nolan refers to the article asremarkably prescient.[12]
The term walkability became popular because of its health, economic, and environmental benefits.[13] It is an essential concept ofsustainableurban design.[14] Factors influencing walkability include the presence or absence and quality offootpaths,sidewalks or other pedestrianrights-of-way, traffic and road conditions, land use patterns, building accessibility, and safety, among others.[15]
One proposed definition for walkability is: "The extent to which the built environment is friendly to the presence of people living, shopping, visiting, enjoying or spending time in an area".[16] A study attempted to comprehensively and objectively measure subjective qualities of the urban street environment. Using ratings from an expert panel, it was possible to measure five urban design qualities in terms of physical characteristics of streets and their edges:imageability, enclosure,human scale, transparency and complexity.[17]Walkability relies on the interdependencies between density, mix, and access in synergy. The urban DMA (Density, Mix, Access) is a set of synergies between the ways cities concentrate people and buildings, how they mix different people and activities, and the access networks used to navigate through them.[18]
These factors cannot be taken singularly. Rather than an ideal functional mix, there is a mix of mixes and interdependencies between formal, social, and functional mixes. Likewise, walkable access cannot be reduced to any singular measure of connectivity,permeability, or catchment but is dependent on destinations and geared tometropolitan access through public transit nodes. While DMA is based on walkability measures, popular "walk score" or "rate my street" websites offer more metrics to connect urban morphology with better environmental and health outcomes.
Density is an interrelated assemblage of buildings, populations, and street life. It is a crucial property of walkability because it concentrates more people and places within walkable distances.[19] There is difficulty determining density due to populations oscillating from the suburbs to the urban center.[18] Moreover, measures of density can differ dramatically for differentmorphologies and buildingtypologies. Density may be conflated with building height, contributing to the confusion.
The ratio between the floor area and the site area is generally known as theFloor Area Ratio (FAR, also called Plot Ratio and Floor Space Index). For example, a ten-story building on 10% of the site has the same floor area as a single-story building with 100% site coverage.[18] Secondly, the measure of dwellings/hectare is common but particularly blunt. It depends on the functional mix, household size, and dwelling size in relation to building or population densities. Larger houses will produce higher building densities for the same population, and larger households will lead to higher populations for the same number of dwellings. In functionally mixed neighborhoods, housing will be just one component of the mix and therefore not a measure of building or population density. Thecensus-based density of residents/hectare is another common measure, but it does not include those who work there.
When each neighbourhood has a mixture of homes, schools, work and other places people want to visit, the distances between these places are shortened. This makes it more attractive for people to walk. The idea of a functional mix contrasts with the early 20th centurymodernist vision, which was that each zone in a city should have a single function.[18] This mix is sometimes visualised with the "home, work, visit" triangle.[20][18] The extremes of the triangle represent zones where one can only work, or visit, or live. A walkable city has few of these zones. Instead, there are places where when can combine at least two of the three functions. When a town or city has smallerplot sizes, it is easier to create a multi-functional neighbourhood.[18]
Theaccess networks of a city enable and constrain pedestrian flows; it is the capacity or possibility to walk. Like density and mix, these are properties embodied in urban form and facilitate more efficient pedestrian flows. Access networks are alsomulti-modal and need to be understood from the perspective of those who choose between modes ofwalking, cycling, public transport, and cars. Public transport trips are generally coupled with walkable access to the transit stop. Walking will primarily be chosen for up to 10 minutes if it is the fastest mode and other factors are equal. Walking has the advantage that it is a much more predictable trip time than public transport or cars, where we have to allow for delays caused by poor service, congestion, and parking.[21]
Majorinfrastructural factors include access tomass transit, presence and quality offootpaths, buffers to moving traffic (planter strips, on-streetparking orbike lanes) andpedestrian crossings,aesthetics, nearby local destinations, air quality, shade or sun in appropriate seasons,street furniture, traffic volume and speed,[15][22] and wind conditions. Walkability is also examined based on the surroundingbuilt environment. Reid Ewing andRobert Cervero's five D's of the built environment—density, diversity, design, destination accessibility, and distance to transit—heavily influence an area's walkability.[23] Combinations of these factors influence an individual's decision to walk.[24]
Before cars and bicycles were mass-produced, walking was the main way to travel.[25] In the 1920s, economic growth led to increased automobile manufacturing. Cars were also becoming more affordable, leading to the rise of the automobile during thePost–World War II economic expansion.[26]
Jane Jacobs' classic bookThe Death and Life of Great American Cities[27] remains one of the most influential books in the history of American city planning, especially concerning the future developments of the walkability concept. She coined the terms "social capital", "mixed primary uses", and "eyes on the street", which were adopted professionally in urban design, sociology, and many other fields.
While there has been a push towards better walkability in cities in recent years, there are still many obstacles that need to be cleared to achieve more complete and cohesive communities where residents won't have to travel as far to get to where they need to go. For example, the average time it has taken American commuters to get to work has actually increased from 25 minutes in 2006 to 27.6 minutes in 2019,[28] so much is still to be done if walkability is to be realized and a lessened reliance on cars comes into fruition.
Walkability indices have been found to correlate with both lowerBody Mass Index (BMI) and high levels of physical activity of local populations.[29][30] Physical activity can prevent chronic diseases, such ascardiovascular disease,diabetes,hypertension,obesity,depression, andosteoporosis.[31] Thus for instance, an increase in neighborhoodWalk Score has linked with both betterCardio metabolic risk profiles[32] and a decreased risk ofheart-attacks.[33] TheWorld Cancer Research Fund andAmerican Institute for Cancer Research released a report that new developments should be designed to encourage walking, on the grounds that walking contributes to a reduction of cancer.[34] A further justification for walkability is founded upon evolutionary and philosophical grounds, contending thatgait is important to thecerebral development in humans.[35]
In addition, walkable neighborhoods have been linked to higher levels of happiness, health, trust, and social connections in comparison with more car-oriented places.[36]
In contrast to walkable environments, less walkable environments are associated with higher BMIs and higher rates of obesity. This is particularly true for the more car-dependent environments of US suburban sprawl.[37] Compared to walking and biking, driving as a commuting option is associated with higher levels of obesity.[38] There are well-established links between the design of an urban area (including its walkability and land use policy) and health outcomes for that community.[39]
A 2025 study, using the smartphone data of more than two million users, found that individuals who move to more walkable cities substantially increase their physical activity, "For example, moving from a less walkable (25th percentile) city to a more walkable city (75th percentile) increased walking by 1,100 daily steps, on average. These changes hold across different genders, ages and body mass index values, and are sustained over 3 months. The added activity is predominantly composed of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, which is linked to an array of associated health benefits."[40]
Walkability has also been found to have many socioeconomic benefits, including accessibility, cost savings both to individuals and to the public,[41]student transport (which can includewalking buses), increased efficiency of land use, increased livability, economic benefits from improved public health, and economic development, among others.[42][43] The benefits of walkability are best guaranteed if the entire system of public corridors is walkable - not limited to certain specialized routes. More sidewalks and increased walkability can promote tourism and increase property value.[44]
In recent years, the demand for housing in a walkable urban context has increased. The term "Missing Middle Housing" as coined by Daniel Parolek of Opticos Design, Inc.,[45] refers to multi-unit housing types (such as duplexes, fourplexes, bungalow courts, and mansion apartments not bigger than a large house), which are integrated throughout most walkable Pre-1940s neighborhoods, but became much less common after World War II, hence the term "missing". These housing types are often integrated into blocks with primarily single-family homes, to provide diverse housing choices and generate enough density to support transit and locally-serving commercial amenities.
Auto-focused street design diminishes walking and needed "eyes on the street"[27]: 35 provided by the steady presence of people in an area. Walkability increases social interaction, mixing of populations, the average number of friends and associates where people live, reduced crime (with more people walking and watching over neighborhoods, open space and main streets), increased sense of pride, and increased volunteerism.
Socioeconomic factors contribute to willingness to choose walking over driving. Income, age, race, ethnicity, education, household status, and having children in a household all influence walking travel.[46]
One of benefits of improving walkability is the decrease of the automobile footprint in the community.Carbon emissions can be reduced if more people choose to walk rather than drive or use public transportation, so proponents of walkable cities describe improving walkability as an important tool foradapting cities to climate change. The benefits of less emissions include improved health conditions and quality of life, lesssmog, and less of a contribution toglobal climate change.[47]
Further, cities that developed under guiding philosophies like walkability typically see lower levels of noise pollution in their neighborhoods. This goes beyond just making quieter communities to live, less noise pollution can also mean greater biodiversity. Studies have shown that noise pollution can disrupt certain senses that animals rely on to find food, reproduce, avoid predators, etc. which can weaken ecosystems in an already human dominated environment.[48][49] Society depends on these ecosystem for many ecological services such as provisioning, regulation, cultural/tourism, and supporting services[50] and any degradation of these services can go beyond just affecting the aesthetic of a neighborhood or community but can have serious implications for livability and wellbeing on entire regions.
Cities that have a relatively high walkability score also tend to have a higher concentration of green spaces which facilitate a more walkable city. These green spaces can assist in regulatory ecological services such as flooding, improving the quality of both air and water, carbon sequestration, etc. all while also improving the attractiveness of the city or town in which it's implemented in.[51]
Many communities have embracedpedestrian mobility as an alternative to older building practices that favor automobiles. This shift includes a belief thatdependency on cars is ecologically unsustainable. Automobile-oriented environments engender dangerous conditions for motorists and pedestrians and are generally bereft of aesthetics.[54] A type of zoning calledForm-based coding is a tool that some American cities, likeCincinnati, are employing to improve walkability.[55][56] The COVID-19 pandemic gave birth to proposals for radical change in the organization of the city, in particular in Barcelona with the publication of the Manifesto for the Reorganisation of the city -written by architecture theorist Massimo Paolini- in which the elimination of the car and the consequent pedestrianization of the whole city is one of the critical elements, as well as the proposed inversion of the concept ofthe sidewalk.[57][58][59]
There are several ways to make a community more walkable:
One way of assessing and measuring walkability is to undertake awalking audit. An established and widely used walking audit tool is PERS (Pedestrian Environment Review System) which has been used extensively in the UK.[64]
A simple way to determine the walkability of a block, corridor or neighborhood is to count the number of people walking, lingering and engaging in optional activities within a space.[65] This process is a vast improvement upon pedestrian level of service (LOS) indicators, recommended within theHighway Capacity Manual.[66] However it may not translate well to non-Western locations where the idea of "optional" activities may be different.[67] In any case, the diversity of people, and especially the presence of children, seniors and people with disabilities, denotes the quality, completeness and health of a walkable space.[54]
A number of commercial walkability scores also exist:
A newly developing concept is the transit time map (sometimes called a transit shed map), which is a type ofisochrone map.[71] These are maps (often online and interactive) that display the areas of a metropolis which can be reached from a given starting point, in a given amount of travel time. Such maps are useful for evaluating how well-connected a given address is to other possible urban destinations, or conversely, how large a territory can quickly get to a given address. The calculation of transit time maps iscomputationally intensive, and considerable work is being done on more efficientalgorithms for quickly producing such maps.[72]
To be useful, the production of a transit time map must take into considerationdetailed transit schedules,service frequency, time of day, and day of week.[73][74][75][76][77] Moreover, the recent development of computer vision and street view imagery has provided significant potential to automatically assess spaces for pedestrians from the ground level.[78]
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)...there is zero net cost to the economy of switching from cars to walking and cycling .... as the cost of provision of improved walking and cycling infrastructure is expected to be substantially outweighed by the benefits through reduced cost of travel, better air quality, lower congestion and improved health and wellbeing.