IOP Con e ence Se ies: Ea h and En i onmen al Science
PAPER • OPEN ACCESS
De elopmen o a Measu ing Tool o Walkabili y
in he S ee Scale - he case s udy o Hambu g
To ci e his a icle: Nasimeh Fallah anjba e al 2019 IOP Con . Se .: Ea h En i on. Sci. 297 012047
View he a icle online o upda es and enhancemen s.
You may also like
Compa a i e S udy o So -scape Elemen
Signi icance in Imp o ing he Walkabili y o
U ban Co ido
Fi ie Aisyah and Nadiya Rahmah
-
Ci y o All Ages: Elde ly Residen s’
Pe cep ions o Walkabili y A ibu es in
Residen ial A eas
Yang Ye
-
Walkabili y index o eal es a e housing in
Makassa
M A i in, A R Rasyid and W W Osman
-
This con en was downloaded om IP add ess 194.95.79.15 on 24/10/2022 a 08:50
Con en om his wo k may be used unde he e ms o heC ea i eCommonsA ibu ion 3.0 licence. Any u he dis ibu ion
o his wo k mus main ain a ibu ion o he au ho (s) and he i le o he wo k, jou nal ci a ion and DOI.
Published unde licence by IOP Publishing L d
SBE 19 - Eme ging Concep s o Sus ainable Buil En i onmen
IOP Con . Se ies: Ea h and En i onmen al Science 297 (2019) 012047
IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1755-1315/297/1/012047
1
De elopmen o a Measu ing Tool o Walkabili y in he
S ee Scale - he case s udy o Hambu g
Nasimeh Fallah anjba , Udo Die ich, Joe g Pohlan
Ha enCi y Uni e si y, Hambu g.
Nasimeh. allah anjba @hcu-hambu g.de
Abs ac . The humanis ic app oach is a key p inciple o any u ban de elopmen wi h he aim o
u ban quali y imp o emen . A heal hy en i onmen is undamen ally associa ed wi h walkable
communi ies. Acco ding o a s udy in 2016 om he Cen e o Die and Ac i i y Resea ch
(CEDAR) and he Medical Resea ch Council Epidemiology Uni a he Uni e si y o Camb idge,
he heal h bene i s o walking and cycling o e ide he nega i e impac s o ai pollu ion on heal h
e en in highly pollu ed ci ies. Addi ionally, planning walkable ci ies p omo e low ca bon
emission de elopmen s. Measu ing walkabili y o he s ee s makes i possible o he planne s
and expe s o add ess he quali y o he buil en i onmen . This pape epo s a p ac ical
assessmen ool, de eloped in a mas e hesis, based on decisi e walkabili y ea u es by applying
a weigh ing sys em o sco e hose ea u es in o de o achie e a angible ou come. Fo his eason,
an examined weigh ing sys em om a p e ious s udy led by he Ins i u e o U ban Planning and
he Uni e si y o Duisbu g-Essen is op imized. A e wa d, he p oposed ool is applied o
measu ing he walkabili y in a selec ion o di e en s ee s in Hambu g, in o de o answe he
ques ions o how hese Hambu g’s s ee s di e in hei deg ee o walkabili y and how hei
walkabili y can be imp o ed.
1. In oduc ion
As John Gehl once said, ci ies should be gi en back o hei people [1]. This means conside ing he
human scale and ha human needs should become a p io i y in e e y u ban de elopmen . Walking is
he p ima y human ansi mode and embeds he in e ac ion be ween pedes ians and hei su ounding
buil en i onmen . Walkabili y is no necessa ily ela ed o he amoun o walking o how ib an a s ee
is bu is a p econdi ion o a posi i e co ela ion be ween walking and he daily pu sui s [2]. The ac i i y
o walking can be conside ed as necessa y ( o shopping and commu ing), op ional ( o sigh -seeing o
pleasu e) and social (combined wi h si ing, eading, o alking). A li able u ban en i onmen is a place
ha also p o ides acili ies ela ed o ac i i ies such as si ing, alking o enjoying public a [3]. The
li e a u e o humanizing u ban design began in he 60s in he US when la ge-scaled and ca -o ien ed
ci ies had aken away he u ban li e om hei inhabi an s. Li able s ee s and neighbo hoods wi h
sa e y, cleanness, and secu i y we e men ioned o be one o he mos impo an cha ac e is ics o a
li able u ban en i onmen [4]. A e decades, li able s ee s and walkabili y a e s ill he mos impo an
solu ions encoun e ing new p oblems like ai pollu ion, conce ns abou ossil uels and public heal h
issues. Obesi y has ipled in WHO Eu opean Region since he 1980s [5]. Imp o ing walkabili y can
imp o e bo h he buil en i onmen and public heal h. This would happen h ough imp o ing he
“sidewalk oom”, conside ed as he essen ial elemen o u ban space. The analysis o he deg ee o
walkabili y a he s ee scale is ocused on he spa ial quali y o a sidewalk, de ined h ough i s ou
SBE 19 - Eme ging Concep s o Sus ainable Buil En i onmen
IOP Con . Se ies: Ea h and En i onmen al Science 297 (2019) 012047
IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1755-1315/297/1/012047
2
edges [6] and how i can a ec he walkabili y ea u es. A s udy on measu ing and eco ding walkabili y
in mixed-use s ee s o he ci y o Essen has been ca ied ou by he Ins i u e o U ban Planning and he
Uni e si y o Duisbu g-Essen in 2017 (“Essen epo ”, [7]). I s me hodology uses indexes, e e ing o
di e en walkabili y ea u es, and a weigh ing sys em o calcula e he inal sco e (see able 2). I is based
on p e ious s udies in Ame ican ci ies (see [7]) and was adap ed o Eu opean ci ies, which a e ypically
pa o an old u ban sys em om middle ages whe e he sys em o pedes ian a eas, cycling pa hs and
la ge public anspo a ion has emained o e he ime despi e sp awling [8]. The p oposed ool in his
pape is de eloped by u he op imizing he me hodology o he Essen´s epo , in o de o achie e a
mo e comp ehensi e and applicable measu ing ool o walkabili y in he s ee scale.
2. Walkabili y ea u es
In p e ious s udies, a ious physical ea u es and pe cep ual quali ies o walkabili y ha e been
iden i ied. They di e om being mo e objec i e o mo e subjec i e ( e lec ed by indi idual eac ions
o a place) [9]. Exis ing me hodologies o en solely e e o (di ec ly measu able) objec i e c i e ia o
co e indexes ela ed o pe cep ual quali ies, wi hou p esen ing and o de ing hem in a deepe ela ion.
Consequen ly, he e is a isk ha he me hodology does no desc ibe all aspec s o he phenomenon o
walkabili y enough and ha co ela ions be ween he di e en used ea u es emain in isible.
Fo his eason, he e i is p oposed o ela e i s o he human needs, like in Max-Nee ’s human needs
cha [10], and how a e hey a e ouched by walking h ough a ci y. Tha allows de ining a g oup o
cen al ea u es desc ibing he con ex and o b ing hem in o an o de whe e he p io one is a
p econdi ion o he ollowing one (see able 1). The ea u es o connec i i y and secu i y a e he
essen ials o walkabili y, ope a ing in pa allel. No connec i i y means an access is missing. Howe e ,
one would no choose o use a pa h i no physical secu i y is gua an eed, e en when he access p o ided.
The scale o analysis o connec i i y is he neighbo hood scale, in which he connec ion be ween
di e en nodes can be s udied. Rega ding his scale, connec i i y is no included in his pape . Apa
om secu i y, pedes ians also need o eel ha hemsel es and hei belongings a e sa e while walking
on he sidewalks, which a e addi ionally s able, well main ained and secu e [11]. The e o e, sa e y
becomes ano he decisi e ea u e. Acco ding o Jan Gehl’s quali y c i e ia o good design o public
spaces [12], o he ea u es ha e e o p o ec ion and com o come nex . The eupon, he i s h ee
essen ial p e equisi es o walkabili y in s ee scale a e he eeling o secu i y, sa e y, and com o .
O he a ailable ea u es e e o he u ban quali y, which mos essen ial ones in he s ee scale a e
iden i y, a ac i eness, and in i ingness ( he s a e o being in i ing o ga he people oge he ).
Table 1. Table o ea u es and index classi ica ion.
Fea u e
Index (ex ac ed om he Essen’s epo )
D i en om
he human
need cha
[9]
and quali y
design
c i e ia
Feeling o secu i y
S ee hie a chy ype / S ee a ic ype / Pa ked ca s / Bu e
Physical
indexes
Feeling o sa e y
Sidewalk wid h and s ee wid h a io / T ee canopy
Feeling o com o
Sidewalk wid h / Obs acle / Hind ance / Ba ie eeness /
Accessibili y /U ban u ni u e / Ac i e am o bus line on he
s ee / Public anspo a ion s a ions / O he g eene y
Iden i y
Landma ks
In i ingness
Numbe o gas onomy uni s / Numbe o gas onomy uni s wi h
ou doo se ing / Numbe o e ail s o es/ Supe ma ke s along he
sidewalk / P esence o public places / P esence o acancy
A ac i eness
Façade main enance condi ion / S ee cleanness condi ion / S ee
açades complexi y / P esence o a wo k
Pe cep ional
indexes
SBE 19 - Eme ging Concep s o Sus ainable Buil En i onmen
IOP Con . Se ies: Ea h and En i onmen al Science 297 (2019) 012047
IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1755-1315/297/1/012047
3
Each walkabili y ea u e can be iden i ied h ough special g oups o indexes. The alue o a ea u e
can be measu ed h ough he alue o i s indexes. The indexes in he able a e ex ac ed om he Essen´s
epo , which is b ie ly explained in he nex chap e .
3. Tool de elopmen
Table 1 is he basis o he p oposed ool in his s udy. An app op ia e sco ing sys em is equi ed in o de
o a ain a angible deg ee o walkabili y in he s ee scale. The weigh ing sys em om he Essen’s
epo ac s as a e e ence o his ool. In he Essen’s epo , walkabili y indexes a e in es iga ed in a
di e en classi ica ion which is ega dless o he walkabili y ea u es (see able 2). The e o e, in a s ee
analysis, i would be impossible o igu e ou which ea u es need o be imp o ed o which pe o m
sa is ac o ily. Wha makes his s udy dis inguished is a weigh ing sys em used o sco e each ca ego y o
he men ioned classi ica ion. Acco ding o his s udy, each index has a di e en weigh in he o al alue.
The weigh ing sys em was achie ed by an in e disciplina y expe panel. The expe s ha e weigh ed
independen ly and hen he a e age o weigh s was de e mined (see ables 2 and 3).
Table 2. A segmen o physical ea u es index om he Essen’s epo (see [7]).
Index g oup
Index
Ca ego y
Sco e
Ca ego y weigh
1. Sidewalk
(c i e ia weigh = 30%)
Sidewalk wid h
No sidewalk
1
24.40 %
< 1.5 m
2
1.5m -2.5m
3
2.5m -5m
4
>5m
5
Bu e
None / only cu b
3
20 %
Pa ked ca s
3
Bicycle pa h
4
Flowe boxes
4
G een pa
5
Obs acle / hind ance
Ve y dis u bing
1
17.50 %
Dis u bing
2
None / no dis u bing
5
Ba ie eeness / Accessibili y
Yes
5
13.10 %
Pa ly
3
No
1
Sidewalk wid h and s ee wid h a io
>70%
5
25 %
61-70%
4
60%
3
50-59%
2
<50%
1
2. S ee
(c i e ia weigh = 35%)
S ee ype
Local s ee
5
21.40 %
Collec o s ee
4
Sub a e ial oad
3
A e ial oad
2
O he
1
One-way s ee
No, pedes ian zone
5
7.70 %
No
3
Yes
4
Table 3. A segmen o u ban quali y index om he Essen’s epo (see
[7]).
Index
Ca ego y
Sco e
Weigh 0-9
Landma ks
1
5
6.5
0
3
S ee space condi ion
Bad condi ion
1
5.9
High pollu ion
2
Ve y high pollu ion
3
Low pollu ion
4
SBE 19 - Eme ging Concep s o Sus ainable Buil En i onmen
IOP Con . Se ies: Ea h and En i onmen al Science 297 (2019) 012047
IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1755-1315/297/1/012047
4
The ables in he Essen’s epo uses s ep weigh ac o s o each calcula ion in a se o o mulas.
Howe e , he ables abo e ha e di e en o al weigh ac o s. Fo able 2 i is 100; while o able 3 wi h
weigh ing om 0-9, he o al is 64.7. By simply mul iplying each weigh ac o o he ela ed sco e ac o
and hen di iding by he o al weigh , a single weigh ac o would be assigned o e e y single index.
This single weigh ac o is, in ac , he inal sco e calcula ed o each index. This will make he new
a angemen o indexes (see able 1, plus able 1 in he appendix) possible. As an example om he
second index g oup in able 2: he index “S ee ype” has a weigh ac o o 21.40%, and belongs o he
index g oup “S ee ” which has a weigh ac o o 35%. I a ca ego y in “S ee ype” index has he sco e
ac o o 5, hen he inal sco e o his ca ego y will be:
Ca ego y ‘s inal sco e = (5 x 21.4)/100 x 35/100 = 0.3745
By using his me hod, a new weigh ing sys em can be achie ed in which e e y single ca ego y o he
index g oups has independen weigh . A simila me hod is used o each he single weigh o he
ca ego ies om u ban quali y index able in he Essen’s epo (see able 3). The wo inalized ables:
S ee Physical Index (SPI) plus he S ee Quali y Index (SQI) (see ables in he appendix), ha e been
p o ided in a sp eadshee so wa e wi h he new single weigh ac o s and new index a angemen , in a
way ha hey would be easily applied by clicking on he desi ed ca ego y. A e clicking, he inal sco e
ac o will appea as well as he sum o hese sco e ac o s will be au oma ically calcula ed. To check
he alidi y o he new ables, he sum o all sco es om he whole ca ego ies should be 5 when selec ing
he maximum a e in e e y case. The co esponding maximum sco e ac o o each index is di ec ly
shown in he ables. This maximum sco e ac o adap s o o he co esponding sco e ac o s. Fo
example, in he s ee hie a chy ype index, he maximum sco e ac o is 5 and he inal sco e o an
a e ial oad is 2. This can be calcula ed wi h his o mula: 2/5 x 0.3745 = 0.1498.
Finally, he ela ionship be ween he physical cha ac e is ics and he u ban quali ies, men ioned as
he In eg a ed Walkabili y Index (IWI) in he Essen’s epo and as walkabili y deg ee in his pape , is
calcula ed wi h he weigh ac o s shown in he o mula below. By implying he inal sco es in o he
new ables, he walkabili y deg ee will be be ween 2.1-5:
Walkabili y Deg ee = (SPI x 52.85) + (SQI x 47.15) / 100
Fu he mo e, he desc ip ion o a ew indexes om he Essen’s epo needed o be adap ed in o de
o imp o e comp ehensibili y. Fo ins ance, in he index o sidewalk wid h and s ee wid h a io (see
able 2) he e is no possibili y o choose be ween 60-61% and 59-60%, he e o e he ca ego y is changed
acco dingly o co e all possible numbe s. Ano he example is he index s ee acades complexi y ha
has he ca ego y o he e ogeneous wi h he highes sco e and homogeneous wi h he leas sco e. Whils
in he opic o s ee scale, i is impo an i a acade is pleasan o wa ch o no . A açade can be
homogeneous and a he same ime pleasan o wa ch. The e o e, he new ca ego y is changed o s ee
acades complexi y: “a pleasu e o wa ch” o “bo ing”. Addi ionally, in his ool, he co esponding
s ee leng h se o e e y index is 250 me e s excep o he indexes e e ing o he numbe o
gas onomy uni s, which equi e a di e en e e ence leng h. Wo ld’s g ea s ee s such as Regen S ee
in London, Les Champs-Elysées and Boule a d S . Michel in Pa is ha e an a e age o one new public
unc ion a leas in e e y 15 me e s, which means 6-8 uni s in e e y 100 me e s [13]. The e o e, mo e
han 5 gas onomy uni s in 100 me e s ecei e he highes sco e (while in he Essen’s epo , mo e han
one uni is conside ed adequa e o ecei e he maximum sco e). This ool has been applied o measu e
walkabili y in some s ee s in he ci y o Hambu g by collec ing da a h ough obse a ion. The e migh
be unce ain ies when applying his ool. Fo ins ance, bo h sidewalks o a s ee may no ha e he same
condi ion. Fo he sco ing pu poses, bo h sidewalks should be checked, and he highes sco e should be
selec ed. In he ollowing chap e s, some o he applica ion esul s a e b ie ly desc ibed.
4. Walkabili y in Hambu g s ee s

SBE 19 - Eme ging Concep s o Sus ainable Buil En i onmen
IOP Con . Se ies: Ea h and En i onmen al Science 297 (2019) 012047
IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1755-1315/297/1/012047
5
Hambu g is a ypical Eu opean ci y wi h he co esponding qui e dense s ee g id. Some s ee s a e
always p e e ed by walking people and some o he s a e no . By applying his ool, i will be possible
o unde s and i a s ee is as walkable as i looks and wha ein o ces o de e io a es i s walkabili y. Six
s ee s we e selec ed o his s udy. Some o hem a e well known as being walkable and some o he s
a e usually desola ed. One a e ial oad was selec ed in o de o ob ain low sco es and o be e
comp ehend he meaning o he walkabili y deg ee, sco ed be ween 2.1 - 5. A i s sigh , wo o he six
in es iga ed s ee s seemed o ha e comple ely di e en po en ial o walkabili y, bu a e he assessmen
was done, hei walkabili y deg ees esul ed qui e alike. These s ee s a e b ie ly desc ibed and compa ed
as ollows.
4.1. Muehlenkamp
This s ee is he main s ee o a sub-cen e and pe cei ed as one o he ib an s ee s o Hambu g wi h
many gas onomy uni s, suppo ing comme cial and se ice uni s. Muehlenkamp is a wo-way collec o
s ee wi h pa ly mo e han wo lanes. The bu e be ween he s ee and he sidewalk is a bicycle pa h
and he e is a ow o ees in he sidewalk. The sidewalk wid h a ies om 2.5m - 5 m and he s ee
wid h (building edge o building edge) is 20 m. The sidewalk wid h a io (one sidewalk wid h di ided
by he o al wid h o he s ee ) is less han 50%. The wid h o he oo way is no ixed h ough he s ee
and in na ow pa s he e a e some dis u bing obs acles like p oduc shel es in on o some shopping
uni , while no e e y pa o he sidewalk can be eely accessed. The sidewalks and he acades, wi h
buildings o a ound 1900, can be sco ed as wi h “low di iness”.
Figu e 1. Pic u es o Muehlenkamp. Sou ce: au ho .
4.2. Shanghaiallee
Shanghaiallee is pa o he newly buil Ha enCi y neighbo hood wi h new and clean buildings. Less ib ancy
and usually emp y sidewalks make i dis inguishably di e en om Muehlenkamp. Howe e , he s uc u al
cha ac e is ics o his s ee which de ine he eeling o secu i y a e he same as Muehlenkamp. Also,
Shanghaiallee has sidewalks ee o ba ie s bu wi h less g eene y.
Figu e 2. Pic u es o Shanghaiallee. Sou ce: au ho .
SBE 19 - Eme ging Concep s o Sus ainable Buil En i onmen
IOP Con . Se ies: Ea h and En i onmen al Science 297 (2019) 012047
IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1755-1315/297/1/012047
6
4.3. Fea u e sco e compa ison
A e isi ing he wo men ioned s ee s, i can be pe cei ed ha Muehlenkamp is much mo e ib an
han Shanghaiallee, since i s sidewalks a e ull o people and some imes e en c owded.
Table 4. Fea u e sco e compa ison om wo in es iga ed s ee s
S ee name
Feeling o
secu i y
Feeling o
sa e y
Feeling o
com o
Iden i y
A ac i eness
In i ingness
Walkabili y
deg ee
Muehlenkamp
1.15
0.63
1.74
0.3
1.20
2.55
3.77
Shanghaiallee
1.15
0.52
1.90
0.3
1.40
2.05
3.64
Howe e , by calcula ing he walkabili y deg ee, he e is a mino di e ence be ween hese wo s ee s
(see able 4). This shows ha Shanghaiallee is nea ly as walkable as Muehlenkamp and has all
p econdi ions o become ib an . Shanghaiallee has well-main ained açades, spo less sidewalks, ull
accessibili y, and no hind ance, which p e en s a d op in he walkabili y deg ee. S ill, he weak
in i ingness leads o emp y sidewalks.
Figu e 3. Index compa ison cha , Muehlenkamp & Shanghaiallee.
Inc easing he gas onomy uni s and o he uni s wi h suppo ing public unc ions can e ec ually
imp o e walkabili y in his s ee . S ee analysis by e alua ing each index as well as index
compa ison among s ee s a e possible h ough his ool. Figu e 3 illus a es he index compa isons
o he wo men ioned s ee s.
5. Tool esul s analysis
Va ious s ee s om absolu e ca -o ien ed o ca - ee ones we e selec ed o be assessed by his ool. This
pe mi ed o each a angible ange o walkabili y’s deg ees o he inal assessmen (see igu e 5). The
p oposed ool gi es he possibili y o analyze s ee s in se e al e ms: ega ding hei ea u es, he
indexes o he walkabili y deg ee. Fo ins ance, among six in es iga ed s ee s, he lowes deg ee (2.82)
applies o an a e ial oad wi h ca -o ien ed design, while he wo highes deg ees belong o ela i ely
ca - ee s ee s, wi h and wi hou an ac i e bus line (see igu e 4).
SBE 19 - Eme ging Concep s o Sus ainable Buil En i onmen
IOP Con . Se ies: Ea h and En i onmen al Science 297 (2019) 012047
IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1755-1315/297/1/012047
7
Figu e 4. Walkabili y deg ee in analyzed s ee s.
Acco ding o he esul s, he deg ees can be in e p e ed as ollows:
Figu e 5. Ra ing o walkabili y deg ees (2.1 – 5).
The lowes possible deg ee ha can be achie ed by his ool is 2.1 and he highes is 5. The
walkabili y si ua ion o he in es iga ed s ee s o Hambu g, he e o e, can also be in e p e ed besides
he numbe s. In o he wo ds, he s ee s no.1 and 2 ha e e y good walkabili y. S ee s no.3 and 4 can
be classi ied as good while no.5 is sa is ying, and no.6 is bad. Ano he way o analyze he d i en da a is
o compa e he s ee s acco ding o hei ea u es (see igu e 6). In his way, he ea u es ha need o be
imp o ed would be dis inguished. Fo ins ance, s ee no. 5 is a sub-a e ial whe e he walkabili y needs
o be enhanced. As shown in igu e 6, he eeling o sa e y and secu i y is low in his case. Any
in e en ion ha s eng hens hese ea u es, such as adding g een a eas as a bu e o c ea e a ee canopy,
can imp o e he o al sco e. The s ee no.4 has an equal le el o sa e y as he s ee no.5 bu highe
sco es in com o and in i ingness, which con ibu es o achie ing a good g ade o walkabili y.
Figu e 6. Fea u e sco e compa ison in analyzed s ee s
SBE 19 - Eme ging Concep s o Sus ainable Buil En i onmen
IOP Con . Se ies: Ea h and En i onmen al Science 297 (2019) 012047
IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1755-1315/297/1/012047
8
6. Conclusion
Walkabili y is a as opic, con aining nume ous a iables and indica o s. The p oposed ool includes
all essen ial indica o s o walkabili y. I o e s a ious possibili ies o analyze a s ee and deli e s
angible esul s in acco dance wi h expec a ions. An impo an da a d i en om his ool is he
walkabili y deg ee be ween 2.1-5. Assessing pe cep ibly walkable as well as non-walkable s ee s
allowed o de ine a a ed scale o walkabili y deg ees.
This ool can also be applied ou side Eu ope wi h small adap a ions. In he i s able o he appendix
(SPI) he indexes e e o physical and s uc u al p econdi ions o a walkable s ee , hus hey a e always
alid ega dless o he cul u e o clima e excep o one index e e ing o public anspo a ion: ac i e
am o bus line can be eplaced by any o he local public ansi mode. In he second able o he
appendix (SQI), indexes ega ding gas onomy uni s migh need o be ailo ed. Fo example, in a coun y
like Malaysia, s ee ood s ands cha ac e ize he s ee s and a ac people, he eason why he numbe
o ood s ands should be conside ed in he index o gas onomy uni s.
In ac , i a s ee is ce ainly walkable o no depends on how a pedes ian pe cei es i . One can
assess he same s ee di e en ly depending on he pe son’s mood o backg ound. People’s age, gende ,
na ionali y, being a ou is o no e c. can a ec he pe cep ion as well. This is nea ly unmeasu able and
makes he limi a ion o any measu ing ool o walkabili y. Fo his eason, i is always ecommended
o in e iew di e en people and inhabi an s in di e se ime ames o achie e a highe le el o
comp ehension abou walkabili y.
Fo a deepe in es iga ion, his ool can be applied sepa a ely o each sidewalk o a s ee . Index
sco es always e e o he bes exis ing condi ion e en i i is no he same along he sidewalk. The e o e,
a checklis ecognizing po en ials imp o emen can also be a ached o he ool o he cases ha
sidewalk segmen s di e in e ms o sco ing.
Acknowledgmen s
Au ho s wishing o acknowledge Cla isa Mazza a o cons uc i e c i icism o he manusc ip .
Re e ences
[1] Gehl J 2010 Ci ies o people (Island p ess)
[2] Ng S, Lau W, B own F, Tam E, Lao M and Boo h V 2012 Walkable Ci y, Li ing S ee s
www.ci ic-exchange.o g
[3] Gehl J 2004 Towa ds a ine ci y o people (T anspo o London & Cen al London Pa ne ship)
[4] Jacobs A & Appleya d D 1987 Towa d an U ban Design Mani es o APA Jou nal
www.seman icschola .o g
[5] Wo ld Heal h O ganiza ion 2018 Obesi y, h p://www.eu o.who.in /en/heal h-
opics/noncommunicable-diseases/obesi y
[6] NYC (Ci y o New Yo k) 2013 Ac i e design. Shaping he sidewalk expe ience (E-book)
e ie ed om h ps://www1.nyc.go /asse s/planning/download/pd /plans-s udies/ac i e-
design-sidewalk/ac i e_design.pd
[7] Ins i u ü S ad planung und S äd ebau, Uni e si ä Duisbu g-Essen 2017 Messung Und
E assung De Fussgänge eundlichkei Von S ad äumen (PDF) e ie ed om
h ps://www.uni-due.de/impe ia/md/con en /s aed ebau
[8] Le Gales P 2007 Ci ies a e back in own: he US/Eu ope compa ison (PDF) Sciences Po
h p://blogs.sciences-po. / eche che- illes/ iles/2010/01/cahie ille0606.pd
[9] Ewing R & Clemen e O 2013 Measu ing u ban design, me ics o li able places (Island P ess)
[10] Max-Nee M 1991 Human Scale De elopmen (New Yo k: The Apex P ess) p 32
[11] Depa men o T anspo 2011 Walkabili y Audi Tool (Wes e n Aus alia: Depa men o
T anspo ) p 2
[12] h ps://gehlins i u e.o g/wp-con en /uploads/2017/08/quali y-c i e ia- inal.pd
[13] Ka ssenbe g H La en J Glase M & Ho M 2015 The ci y a eye le el, lessons o s ee plin hs-
Hans Ka ssenbe g (PDF) Ebu on