Qualitative Evaluation of Comfort Needs in Urban Walkways in Major Activity Centers

November 2002

Sheila Sarkar
California Institute of Transportation Safety
Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering
San Diego State University
5500 Campanile Drive
San Diego CA 92182-1324

Phone: (619) 594 0164

Fax: (619) 594 0175
Email: msarkar@mail.sdsu.edu

Key words: major activity centers, pedestrian circulation systems, comfort, pedestrians,
urban networks

Call for papers : Committee on Major Activity Center Circulation Systems - A1E11

Word count: 8564

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 2

ABSTRACT
The objective of this paper is to offer some theoretical guidelines for qualitative evaluation of the
levels of comfort offered along walkways in major activity centers. Walkways facilitate movement
of people, and for this paper a sidewalk includes any type of dedicated passage for pedestrian
oriented activities. Healthy street circulation systems should offer choices, particularly for the
green modes, i.e. walking and bicycling. A pedestrian circulation system within the street
network with comfort as the focus is presented in this paper. Major activity centers are defined
here as those urban areas which have become destinations owing to higher density mixed-use
developments.
A comfortable environment makes the journey by foot pleasant and enjoyable. What are the
attributes of comfort in a pedestrian circulation system? This paper conducts qualitative
explorations by drawing on existing literature along with examples of comfortable pedestrian
spaces in the US and in Europe. Although there are other issues that are equally important for
pedestrians, such as safety, security and convenience, only the key attributes of comfort are
used to qualitatively grade the physical, physiological, and psychological comfort levels of
walkways. Research from urban design, environmental psychology, landscape architecture and
urban planning are used to develop the method. This method involves two separate evaluations:
(1) Service Levels which give standards for the overall desirable and undesirable comfort
conditions at the macro level; and (2) Quality Levels which look at the micro level finer details of
comfort of pedestrians.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 3

INTRODUCTION
Walking is by far the most important mode of transport, as it not only acts as a crucial link in the
intermodal transfers in major activity centers, but also helps to fulfill recreational and utilitarian
trips. While designing circulation systems, it is important to recognize that walking is not only an
integral part of the network, but also that this mode can fulfill many activities in an
environmentally sensitive way.
While drivers can control their environment (sound/noise, pollution, extreme conditions)
using the controls in the car; pedestrians can only marginally adapt to the circulation facilities
provided for them. In order to maximize walking as a useful element to the circulation system, it
is important to provide comfortable conditions. The theoretical principles outlined in this paper
have been influenced by Slater’s definition of comfort as "a pleasant state of physiological,
psychological and physical harmony between a human being and the environment" (1, p. 4).
Although mathematical formulas to determine the optimal levels of comfort sought by
pedestrians have not been developed, surveys and research by environmental psychologists
have shown that a comfortable environment improves the quality of experience of a journey by
foot. In most instances, comfort is one of the decisive factors in determining the distance
walked. Perception of comfort varies culturally and by the quality of social interaction, influencing
the distance walked (2-5). Studies on environmental preference and route choices show that
pedestrians prefer certain routes because of their environmental qualities, such as relative
quietness (minimal vehicular noise) and greenery (6).
Unfortunately in the past few decades the importance of walking has been neglected and
the circulation systems have been designed or redesigned to serve those who drive. Pedestrian
circulation systems in major activity centers which facilitate movement and interaction with the
environment will have certain distinct attributes.

Importance of Comfort
Fruin’s landmark book (7) in 1971 made planners and engineers rethink the needs of
pedestrians. In Pedestrian Planning and Design, Fruin stressed that the primary objectives for
pedestrian improvement programs are safety, security, convenience, continuity, comfort,
system coherence and attractiveness. Comfort as a right was introduced by the first section of
the European Charter of Pedestrians' Rights (adopted by the European Parliament in 1988),
which states (8, p. xvi):

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 4

The pedestrian has the right to live in a healthy environment and to freely enjoy the
amenities offered by public areas under conditions that adequately safeguard his physical
and psychological well being.

According to Slater, there are three different types of comfort: physical, psychological,
and physiological (1). They are inter-related and overall satisfaction depends on a good mix of all
these components. The author has defined components of pedestrian comfort somewhat
differently from Slater and used them to assess the level of comfort experienced in urban
walkways.

Comfort and Walking (TABLE 1)

Physical comfort is achieved when the effort needed to conduct pedestrian activities is
minimized. The facilitators of physical comfort (adequate walkway, continuous links, stopping
places) are listed in TABLE 1. In order to alleviate physical exhaustion, attention needs to be
given to the vulnerable pedestrians (FIGURE 1a-b). Studies have shown that level of effort
increases with age and other disabilities of the pedestrians (8). Under facilitating physical
conditions -- adequate walkway, seating, protection from the elements -- physical exhaustion
can be alleviated, making walking and other associated activities pleasurable (3,4,9-12). FIGURE
2a depicts uncomfortable conditions encountered by pedestrians that increase physical exertion
and compromise their safety; while FIGURE 2b offers improved walking opportunity.
Psychological comfort offers mental satisfaction of using the circulation system
(walkways). Users acquire positive experiences and mental images while walking, and
sidewalks allow pedestrians to maintain their desired level of walking speed. There are no
numerical standards that need to be achieved as studies have shown that (a) walking speeds
vary with gender, age, cultural differences, time of day, size of the city; type of activity, and day
of week (FIGURE 1); (2-6;13,14) and (b) pedestrians do not necessarily continue walking at the
same speed throughout their journey; so when pedestrians are not in a hurry, the walking speed
may vary (10, p. 66).
Physiological comfort is associated with absence of stressful conditions. On streets
and walkways, the two most common contributors to stressful conditions are noise and
pollution.
(i) Noise: Braun and Roddin have defined noise as "any sound that is undesired by the recipient"
(15, p. 71). Research on physiological effects of noise has shown that it increases heart rate,

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 5

blood pressure and blood sugar levels, and causes respiratory problems, nervous tension,
metabolic changes, nausea, headaches and other functional problems (15).
(ii) Air Pollution: Pollution is another deterrent to outdoor pedestrian activities, with children and
the elderly being the most sensitive to air pollutants (16).
Physical comfort provided by attractive and comfort enhanced outdoor circulation
systems (shady trees, seating, adequate walkway) and physiological comfort (lower vehicular
noise and pollution) affords psychological comfort (general feeling of well-being) attracting a
variety of activities (5,11,17). Lack of physical amenities (no seating, inadequate walkway, no
curb ramps, discontinuity) evokes negative images and psychological reluctance to use the
sidewalks. Attractive and comfortable integration of the pedestrian mode with other modes in
major activity centers is often neglected. FIGURE 3 exemplify unsafe or uncomfortable
conditions which discourage walking to transit.

THE EVALUATION METHOD

Given the flexibility of pedestrian movement and the richness of streetscape environment, it is
difficult to rigidly classify all the expected activities on the walkways and provide space for them.
Instead, it is important to visualize the walkways as dynamic environments where a variety of
activities can occur when physiological, psychological and physical comforts are provided. The
evaluation method (FIGURE 4) has been designed to assess how well physical, psychological,
and physiological components enhance comfort and desired levels of pedestrian activities in
major activity centers. This evaluation method for pedestrian comfort on urban streets has
drawn extensively on existing research and findings on pedestrians' requirements and comfort
needs (1-30). The qualitative standards and the acceptable designs for the service levels have
been influenced by the needs of the most vulnerable groups - the elderly, children, and people
with disabilities. The qualitative approach has been taken because the attributes selected cannot
be adequately quantified as the spatial design of sidewalks varies considerably. Also the types of
users and usage vary temporally and spatially. Acceptable comfort levels for someone walking
through during peak hours would be much different from those of persons strolling around in the
evening. Also, the author wanted to encourage planners and designers to use their personal
interpretation of the scholarly work done by researchers such as Rudofsky (2); Hall (4); Whyte
(9) to interpret the Service Levels. Quantification of pedestrian needs has been addressed by
Fruin (7); Whyte (10); Pushkarev and Zupan (14); Braun and Roddin (15); Khisty (24).

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 6

The method involves two separate evaluations: (1) Service Levels, which give standards
for the overall desirable and undesirable comfort conditions at the macro level; and (2) Quality
Levels which look at the micro level finer details of improving the comfort of pedestrians.
The Service and Quality Levels proposed here each have five grades from A to F. Since
culturally, grade “F” is associated with failing conditions, and to emphasize the same in the
grading system proposed here, Level F has been used rather than “E”.

Estimation of Service Levels A-F for Pedestrians' Comfort

The proposed Service Levels A-F in TABLE 2 have used the principles, concepts and ideas in
the existing literature on comfort needs of pedestrians. The Service Levels for comfort are based
on general physical and psychological attributes that reduce physical exhaustion (provision of
adequate walkway free of impediments, provision of shortcuts, and ability to walk at ease), and
ensure psychological requirements (ability to maintain desired walking speed or participate in
pedestrian activities). The evaluation also explains the design criteria that make urban sidewalks
most and least comfortable to the disadvantaged users.

Estimation of Quality Levels A-F for Pedestrians' Comfort

Apart from a general level of comfort described in the Service Levels, there are different micro
level attributes that enhance comfort on walkways. The micro conditions discussed here are
protection from inclement weather, adequate buffer from noise and air pollution, and adequate
resting (stopping) places. These micro level components that contribute to the comfort levels are
discrete entities, and they (stopping places, protection from inclement weather, noise and air
pollution) form the Quality Levels.

I. Provision of stopping places and secondary seating. Walking requires more energy and
effort than other modes, particularly for the vulnerable groups. Some pedestrians prefer to take a
rest when they are tired (2-5; 22-24). The comfort level along a walkway can be enhanced
significantly when well designed, spacious stopping places are provided along with secondary
seating (FIGURE 5). The quality of seating determines the level of comfort experienced by
pedestrians, as shown in TABLE 3.
II. Protection from adverse weather conditions. Pedestrians are sensitive to adverse
weather conditions. They prefer protection from rain, snow, sleet, and extremely high and low
temperatures. Walkways should be designed to provide reasonable protection from adverse

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 7

weather conditions (2-5,12,22-27) while allowing pedestrians to experience the seasonal

variations. Walkway designs for weather protection, however, depend to a large extent on the
local climate (FIGURES 6a,7). The Quality Levels proposed here are for regions with very low
winter temperatures (average temperature is below freezing without wind chill), or very high
summer temperatures (90-120ºF or 32-48º C). Quality Levels are shown in TABLE 4.
III. Level of noise. Noise has an adverse effect on physiological and physical comfort.
Walkways next to busy roads are particularly susceptible to high noise levels (2,7,9-12,14,15,
17-21,29). Diverse design solutions have been proposed by researchers to reduce the levels of
noise experienced on walkways -- such as separating the walkways from the road with
landscaping, restricting vehicles, reducing the number of lanes and so on (2-5,9,10,14,16,17).
The proposed Quality Levels have been developed using these design solutions, or the lack of
them (TABLE 5).
IV. Level of air pollution. The type and duration of outdoor activities along walkways vary with
the level of pollution (16-17; 19). The quality of the air and the level of pollution generated by
vehicular traffic is of primary concern in this paper. The layout of the buildings, the width of the
streets and traffic volumes can influence the levels of pollution. Common problems suffered due
to pollution are itchy eyes, wheezing, coughing, general discomfort and so on. Children are most
susceptible to these problems because of their faster breathing rate. In urban areas where
sidewalks offer the most easily accessible play spaces, efforts must be made to reduce the
levels of pollution on the walkways to protect the youngest and most vulnerable users. This
might mean restricting vehicles and encouraging green modes such as walking and bicycling.
Other possible solutions are shown with the Quality Levels in TABLE 6.

Methodological Process
Grades assigned using Service or Quality Levels require six steps. The process starts with a
detailed survey of the site, examining the macro and micro level comfort features of the
sidewalks. Using the guidelines provided in TABLES 2-6, survey check lists need to be designed.
The second step is to ensure systematic itemization of all the information on the site collected
during the survey. The third step involves an item-by-item comparison of the characteristics of
the site to the Service Level standards. This leads to the fourth step of selection of the Service
and Quality Levels that meet most of the characteristics observed at the site. In some
instances, as shown in TABLE 7 and FIGURE 8, a block may receive a combination grade such
as, “B-C”, if it meets an equal number of characteristics for two grade levels. Steps one through
four are repeated for each block on the street. In the fifth step, the grades assigned to each block

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 8

are shown together in a matrix to assess the degree of variation in the comfort conditions for the
street (TABLE 7). The sixth step involves assignment of a grade for the entire stretch of the
sidewalk based on the principle of systems evaluation, "minimum capacity defines the capacity
of a line". Using this principle, the street that was surveyed will be assigned an overall grade
based on the lowest grade received on any section or block. Grades are assigned separately for
each side of the street, so each street will have two grades.

Assessment of the Method

The method was tested in several streets in Philadelphia and modified for assessment of the
micro and macro level comfort attributes of sidewalks. TABLE 7 summarizes the evaluation
results of the comfort conditions on the north side of Chestnut Street transit mall (between 15th
and 18th Streets).
Once the grades are compiled for all the sections of the streets evaluated, they can be
summarized in the format shown in TABLE 8. Information provided in this manner is ideal for
qualitative comparison among streets and also useful for making decisions on where to make
improvements. According to the hypothetical grades shown in TABLE 8 and FIGURE 9, Walnut
Street needs immediate attention to improve seating, followed by the other two streets. In the
category of protection from adverse weather, both Walnut and Chestnut Streets require attention
before Locust Street. For noise and pollution levels, Walnut Street should receive attention.

Overview of the Method

1. Provides analysis of the macro and micro level comfort conditions on the walkways.
Evaluation at macro and micro levels would enable planners and designers to get a more
comprehensive picture of the comfort levels along walkways. The Service Level grades will
indicate the general level of comfort for pedestrians, such as the ability to maintain walking
speed and distance between users, while the Quality Level grades will look at the finer nuances
of comfort such as protection from adverse weather, or reduction of noise and pollution.
2. Enables professionals to assign priority for renovation and redesign of the surveyed
streets. The tabulation of the overall street grade helps in prioritizing work on those streets
showing greatest need. The detailed sets of information permit professionals to make faster
decisions on what needs to be done in each case. An inventory of the strengths and
weaknesses of the surveyed walkways on each block will enable professionals to:
(a) identify which streets are lagging behind others in their provision of comfort.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 9

(b) identify the sections or blocks that require immediate attention. For example, based on the
information provided in TABLE 7, one can easily identify that the availability of seating needs to
be improved on Walnut Street.
(c) decide on spending for improvements based on the level of pedestrian traffic and the
potential for growth. A street with higher pedestrian traffic (FIGURE 10a) would be able to serve
many more with enhanced comfort levels, and thus should be given priority over other streets
with those which have lesser prospects (FIGURE 10b). However, success stories for areas with
limited prospects (Church Street Station in Orlando, Florida; waterfront areas in Baltimore, San
Diego and many others) testify that design can create demand.
3. Information available through this type of evaluation is extremely useful to transit
agencies. Pedestrians generally walk at least 500 to 1,000 ft (166-333 m), depending on age
and circumstances, to reach a transit stop. This journey to use transit should be attractive and
be enhanced by comforts such as seating, weather protection, comfortable walking surface,
drinking fountains and so on (FIGURES 5-7). FIGURE 3 shows some unattractive transit stops
that would negatively affect the physical and psychological comfort of transit users. It is to the
advantage of transit agencies to use the surveyed information gainfully for improving overall
quality of service of the riders.

4. GIS maps can be generated and the information on the walkways could be spatially
and visually digitized. Detailed statistical data and audio-visual conditions for each block could
be shown for any section of the city. There are several advantages of such a system. First,
professionals can get a visual overview of the sidewalk conditions of the entire city. Second, with
the help of overlay maps, different types of relevant information can be shown, such as land
uses adjacent to the walkways, population densities, traffic volumes and so on. All this
information when viewed together would assist in prioritizing renovation and redesign.

Limitations of the Method

The proposed method has some weaknesses, which are summarized here:
1. The method requires considerable financial commitment and human resources.
The block-by block survey for large sections of the city using the Service and Quality Levels
requires skilled personnel and several visits to each site. The involvement of a large number of
evaluators is needed to complete the survey in a timely manner. After the survey, grades for the
locations must be systematically ascertained and compiled, and summarized. Unfortunately, all
these processes depend heavily on the availability of skilled survey personnel and sufficient
finances. One way of alleviating costs would be to survey smaller sections of the city’s
circulation system which are frequently traversed by pedestrians, have major transit routes, or

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 10

contain at least one major origin/destination point (such as a university campus, museum or
shopping center).

2. The method involves some reliance on subjective judgments by survey personnel.

The assigned grades may be influenced by the personal bias of the surveyors. The problem of
subjectivity can be mitigated to some extent by sending different persons to the same site to
gather the necessary information. This would not entail additional work, because the evaluation
of Quality Levels (which are most prone to subjectivity) requires several site visits to record
seasonal variations. Cities engaged in such evaluations should consider involving students of
city planning, landscape architecture, and urban design from their local universities in the
surveys.

CONCLUSIONS
The author’s work in this area and understanding of the existing research shaped the
proposed Service Levels and Quality Levels. These levels, based on physical, physiological, and
psychological comfort, have a distinct qualitative approach compared to existing methods
(13,21). The basic principle in forming this classification system was to offer directness and
clarity in defining the proposed Service and Quality Levels, so that they can be easily used by a
wide variety of groups from professionals to community and neighborhood organizations. But, it
is important to remember that the Service and Quality Levels provided here are by no means
comprehensive. Comfort requirements vary spatially and culturally, and they can never be
completely addressed; however, the author hopes that the method and processes described
here will offer a useful framework to assess comfort requirements in order to augment efficient
use of the pedestrian circulation systems in major activity centers. The directness of the path is
an extremely important component in design if walking is to be accepted as a mode to fulfill trips.
Pedestrian networks can offer well needed relief from the congested vehicular networks, once
drivers are convinced that walking as a mode is comfortable. There are many other attributes in
addition to comfort that make pedestrian circulation systems effective, and the author has
addressed some of the these issues in other papers (30-32).

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 11

REFERENCES
1. Slater, K. 1985. Human comfort. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

2. Rudofsky, B. 1969. Streets for people. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Co. Inc.

3. Hall, E.T.1966. Hidden dimension. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Co. Inc.

4. Untermann, R.K. 1984. Accommodating the pedestrian. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold Co.

5. Jacobs, A.B. 1993. Great streets. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

6. Blivice, S. 1974. Pedestrian route choice: a study of walking to work in Munich, Ph.D.
Diss. University of Michigan, quoted by Hill, M.R. 1984. Walking, crossing streets, and
choosing pedestrian routes. Lincoln, NE: University of Lincoln.

7. Fruin, J.J. 1971. Pedestrian: planning and design. Metropolitan Association of Urban
Designers and Environmental Planners, Inc., New York.

8. Tolley, R. 1990. European Charter of Pedestrians Rights in The greening of urban

transport: planning for walking and cycling in western cities. London: Bellhaven Press.

9. Knoblauch, R., Nitzburg, M., Dewar, R., Templer, J., Pietrucha, M. 1995. Older
pedestrian characteristics for use in highway design, FHWA-RD-93-177.

10. Whyte, W.H. 1980. City: rediscovering the center. New York: Doubleday.

11. Phillips, D.W. 1988, Planning with winter climate in mind, Cities designed for winter. ed.
Manty, J., Pressman, N. Helsinki: Building Book Ltd.

12. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 1985. Traffic safety
of elderly road users. Paris: OECD.

13. Pressman, N. 1988. Introduction and winter policies, plans, and designs: the Canadian
experience. Cities designed for winter. ed. Manty, J., Pressman, N. Helsinki: Building
Book Ltd.

14. Pushkarev, B., Zupan, J. 1969. Urban space for pedestrians. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

15. Braun, R.R. and Roddin, M.F. 1978. Quantifying benefits for separating pedestrians and
vehicles, N.C.H.R. P. Report 189, Washington, DC, Transportation Research Board.

16. Welch B.L., Welch, A.S. 1970. Physiological effects of noise. New York: Plenum Press.

17. Gehl, J. 1987. Life between buildings. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.

18. Westin, A.F. 1967. Privacy and freedom. New York: Atheneum.

19. Prosanksy, H.M., Ittelson, W.H., Rivlin, L.G. 1970. Freedom of choice and behavior
setting in Environmental psychology: man and his physical setting. New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston, Inc.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 12

20. Vernez-Moudon, A. 1991. Introduction, Public streets for public use. New York: Columbia
U. Press.

21. Arnold, H.F. 1993. Trees in urban design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.

22. Kane, D.N. 1976. Bad air for children. Environment 18, 26-34. quoted by Evans, G.W.,
Jacobs, S.V., Frager, N.B. 1982. Behavioral responses to air pollution. Advances on
Environmental Psychology 4, ed. Baum, A., Singer, J.E.

23. Bach, B., Pressman, N. 1992. Climate sensitive urban space. Delft, The Netherlands:
Publicatieburo, Fac. Bk.

24. Khisty, C.J. 1994. Evaluation of pedestrian facilities: beyond the level-of-service concept.
Transportation Research Record 1438.

25. Sucher, D. 1995. City comforts - how to build an urban village. Seattle: City Comforts
Press.

26. Brambilla, R., Longo, G. 1977. For pedestrians only. New York: Whitney Library of
Design.

27. Shibata, K. 1988. Winter city planning: Sapporo’s long-term perspectives and major
projects in Cities designed for winter. ed. Manty, J., Pressman, N. Helsinki: Building Book
Ltd.

28. Lu, W. 1988. Towards an ideal winter city, Cities designed for winter. ed. Manty, J.,
Pressman, N. Helsinki: Building Book Ltd.

29. Luz Lopez, G. 1995. Summer pedestrian comfort in Lima. Dissertation: Berkeley: U.C.
Berkeley.

30. Moughton, C., Oc, T., Tiesdell, S. 1995. Urban design ornament and decoration. Oxford,
U.K.: Butterworth Architecture.

31. Sarkar, S. 1995. Evaluation of different pedestrian-vehicle separation designs.

Transportation Research Record 1502, 83-95.

32. Sarkar, S. 1995. Macro level and micro level evaluation of pedestrian networks.
Transportation Research Record 1502, 105-118.

33. Sarkar, S. 1993. Determination of service levels for pedestrians using European
examples. Transportation Research Record 1405, 35-42.

34. Appleyard, D. 1981. Livable streets. Berkeley, CA: U. of California Press.

35. Spirn, A.W. 1991. Better quality at street level: strategies for urban design, Table 26-1, in
Public streets for public use, ed. Vernez-Moudon, A. New York: Columbia U. Press.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 13

TABLES AND FIGURES

TABLE 1. Evaluation criteria for comfort levels for pedestrian circulation in urban networks.
TABLE 2. Service Levels A-F for pedestrian comfort: physical and psychological components.
TABLE 3. Quality Levels A-F on seating.
TABLE 4. Quality Levels A-F on comfort from adverse weather conditions.
TABLE 5. Quality Levels A-F for noise levels on walkways.
TABLE 6. Quality Levels A-F for air pollution on walkways.
TABLE 7. Comfort assessments on Chestnut Street between 15th and 18th Street (north side).
TABLE 8. Micro-level conditions with respect to comfort in the surveyed sections of the streets
(15th-18th Street; east side).

FIGURE 1. Variation in walking speeds.

FIGURE 2. Selection of walking speeds.
FIGURE 3. Conditions around transit stops.
FIGURE 4. Summary of the evaluation method.
FIGURE 5. Seating choices.
FIGURE 6. Amenities for pedestrians.
FIGURE 7. Moderation of weather conditions for pedestrians.
FIGURE 8. Comfort assessments on Chestnut Street between 15th and 18th Street.
FIGURE 9. Micro-level conditions with respect to comfort in the surveyed sections of the
streets.
FIGURE 10. Sidewalks with high potential use should be given priority for improvements.
.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 14

TABLE 1. Evaluation criteria for comfort levels for pedestrian circulation in urban networks.
Comfort Types Attributes
• adequate walkway. There are no standard widths. The American Disabilities Act (ADA) 1990
Physical states that width of walkways should be 1.22 m (4 ft) although 1.83 m (6 ft) is preferred, and
minimum width should be 0.9 m (3 ft), however, walkways need to be designed in a way to offer
opportunities for diverse usage (FIGURES 1,2,5). Whyte (10) cautioned against the pitfalls of
treating pedestrians as transportation units without looking at the social component. Formulas
based on the pedestrian transportation unit are most applicable to transportation situations,
such as getting from concourse exit A to gate B. But pedestrians are social beings.
Sometimes they stop and chat with someone, cluster in doorways and pause to look at a shop
window. In a word, they self congest.
• continuous sidewalk. Missing sidewalks force pedestrians to walk on the streets. While laws
recommend that pedestrians walk facing the traffic (FIGURE 3a), this may not be the most
comfortable and safe choice.
• comfortable for vulnerable users (physically challenged, elderly). The American Disabilities
Act (ADA) 1990 has led to more inclusionary designs; however theoretical principles may not
always work in favor of individuals who need accommodation.
• walkway free of impediments. Walkways cluttered with signs and street furniture can be
difficult to use.
• comfortable walking surface. Neglected sidewalk surfaces can be uncomfortable. Potholes,
cracks, caved in surfaces may lead to tripping and falls; additionally strollers and wheelchairs
cannot negotiate uneven sidewalks.
• seating Physical effort associated with walking requires pedestrians to rest. High temperatures
can tire pedestrians; also care needs to be given to older pedestrians and those with young
children who need to rest more frequently (5) (FIGURE 5).
• protection from extreme weather conditions. To promote walking as a year-round mode in
the circulation network efforts need to be address the micro-climate issues. Extremely windy
or sunny conditions need to be tempered by some moderating influences (FIGURES 6,7).
Psychological • ability to maintain desired walking speed. Circulation systems for pedestrians have to take
into account that walking speeds vary. The success of a pedestrian circulation system in a
major retail activity center would depend on how many pedestrian were able to slow down, look
and shop. Concurrently, the walkways should have space for those pedestrians who are
passing through. (FIGURES 1,5)
• ability to participate in various pedestrian activities. Pedestrians expect different levels of
social activities in urban walkways. Workers in adjacent office buildings may eat lunch, read or
enjoy the outside. Young adults like to see and be seen. Studies (11,17) have shown that
people watching, entertaining, trading, reading, observing and a host of other activities can be
observed. (FIGURE 5)
Physiological • noise. Surveys undertaken in pedestrian environments have indicated pedestrian displeasure
and annoyance towards noise. Appleyard's study (34) showed that 61 percent were annoyed
by noise. Pedestrian circulation systems next to vehicular traffic will be affected by noise,
however efforts can be made to diffuse the effect. Designs vary from widening sidewalks and
creating a landscape buffer to restricting vehicular traffic.
• pollution TABLE 1b is based on a study done by Spirn (35) identifying the parts of pedestrian
circulation systems that could adversely affect comfortable usage. Protection of pollution
sensitive users is not often given priority while assessing the comfort levels in pedestrian
walkways. More efforts need to be made address this issue since increasing vehicular
congestion in the street segments could adversely affect the air quality.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 15

TABLE 1b. Street spaces prone to air pollution. source: (35)

Sources of pollution Locations prone Locations with poor air Locations sensitive to
to pollution circulation pollution
• Major street or • Median strip Winds • Elderly or convalescent
highway • Traffic island • Wind shadows at lee-ward base • Outdoor cafes
• Busy intersections • Curbside of the buildings • Bus stops
• Taxi stand • Urban districts with narrow • Building entrances and
• Parking garage irregular street patterns intake vents
entrance and • Long street canyons
exhaust vents perpendicular to buildings
Spatial Enclosure
• Streetside arcade
• Bus shelter
• Interior atrium
• High, narrow street canyons

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 TABLE 2. Service Levels A-F for pedestrian comfort: physical and psychological components.
Physical effort minimized for
Service encumbered pedestrians and Pedestrian activities
Levels Physical effort minimized those with special needs accommodated
A ? The walkway has been designed to enable ? Encumbered pedestrians and ? Diverse pedestrian activities are
pedestrians to choose and maintain desired walking those with special needs have more accommodated.
speed with great ease. than adequate space to move about
? Effort has been made to add shortcuts or minimize unconstrained.*
conflicts with other modes and street furniture.
B ? Able to choose and maintain desired speed with ? Encumbered pedestrians and ? Diverse pedestrian activities are
ease. (lower quality walkway than Level A). those with special needs have more accommodated.
than adequate space to move about
unconstrained.*
C ? Pedestrians have to adjust or maneuver to use the ? Encumbered pedestrians and ? Diverse pedestrian flows and
walkway because street furniture and other objects those with special needs encounter movements and activities require
have been improperly placed. difficulties using the sidewalk. cooperation and maneuvering.
? Walkway configuration and width is inadequate for
high pedestrian usage.
D ? Pedestrians encounter obstacles and impediments ? Encumbered pedestrians and ? Walkways unable to support normal
that increase their physical efforts. those with special needs cannot pedestrian movements. Pedestrians
? Illegally parked cars, signs, and other objects use the walkways because of the walk in single file, step on the road,
incompatible with pedestrian use clutter sidewalks. poor walking surfaces or lack of etc.
? Cars in driveways block sidewalk. ramps.
F ? Walkways are unusable due to poor walking ? Encumbered pedestrians and ? Sidewalks non-existent or unusable.
surface, water-logging, icy conditions. those with special needs are
? There are no sidewalks; pedestrians use the exposed to vehicular traffic as they
streets. are forced to use the roadway.
*Historic districts are excluded.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
Sarkar 17

TABLE 3. Quality Levels A-F on seating per 500 feet (150 m)

Stopping places* Other Seating Secondary Seating

Buffered Protection Setback from No. of

Quality Comfortable from traffic from effective stopping
Levels Dimensions to use noise elements walkway places** Benches Street Furniture Other

Specially designed
flat-topped bollards,
Very Completely planters, base of
Spacious, comfortable (Vehicles are Well More than At least street lights offer Low walls, green
A seating area seating banned) protected adequate one Yes seating. areas, and steps
Adequately
protected by
canopies,
Spacious, Comfortable trees, arcades Specially
B seating seating etc. Adequate At least one Yes designed. Low walls, steps

some of the street

Well designed furniture can be used Low walls, steps
C None None None None None None benches for seating (optional)

None have been

designed to be used Low walls or steps
D None None None None None None Average as secondary seating (FIGURE 5c)

None; design (high

Poor/Vandalized/ walls, fences etc.)
F None None None None None None Non-existent None discourages sitting
*Suggested guidelines can be scaled down or modified by the user based on the land use and activities.
**Stopping places are defined as seating enclaves that are specially designed as spaces for pedestrians to sit down
and indulge in activities (FIGURE 5b).

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
Sarkar 18

TABLE 4. Quality Levels A-F on comfort from adverse weather conditions (every 500 ft
or 150m)
Quality Wind gusts during Drinking
Levels Protection from weather winter Protection at transit stops fountains Other amenities
A Offered choices: climate Mild to none Well protected with seating. Available Beverage vending
controlled, arcades with machines, vendors
shady trees, special cooling
features (FIGURES 6,7)

B Adequate protection Mild to none Adequate protection is Available Vendors or

provided by arcades and provided in transit shelters with beverage vending
canopies and trees seating. machines
C Partial - shady trees line Moderate wind Adequate protection is None None
the walk (FIGURE 7a), gusts provided in transit shelters
canopies are intermittently (FIGURE 7b). Transit shelters
observed do not have seating.
D Inadequate - shady trees Strong Transit stops have no shelters, None None
are placed randomly. but may have seating.

F No protection Very strong and There is no shelter or seating None None

extremely (FIGURE 3c,e). Transit stop is
uncomfortable. on the travel lane (FIGURE
3a).

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
Sarkar 19

TABLE 5. Quality Levels A-F for noise levels on walkways.

Conversation at
Quality Methods used for noise reduction/reasons for social distances
Levels Noise levels inadequate noise reduction (1-1.5 m) Outdoor activities*
A • Very low throughout the • Banning Vehicles • Possible • Very high:
day and night • Walkways are enclosed completely Users are observed to
• Below 50 dba be sitting, watching, and
playing
B • Low throughout the day • Regulating the volume of traffic through traffic • Possible • High:
and night management Users are observed to
• 50-65 dba • Designing wide walkways with landscaping or berms be sitting, watching, and
• Designing semi-enclosed arcades/landscaping playing
C • Moderately loud during • Noise level has been partially reduced by the following • Easier when • Moderate:
day (>65 but <75dba) methods: voices are raised There are very few users
• Low during night (a) the vehicular traffic volume has been controlled by slightly sitting, watching or
converting into (i) one-way streets with one-lane and playing
parking/traffic calming; (ii) two-way streets with one
lane each way, and parking.
(b) (b) enforcing the speed limit 50-55 kmph or 30-35 mph.
D • Moderately loud to loud • Noise level has not been reduced because of the • Difficult • Low:
throughout the day following reasons (All these conditions): Outdoor activities,
(>65-90 dba) (a) the streets have (i) multi-lane one-way streets or (ii) playing, sitting, are non-
• Moderately loud multi-lane two-way streets. existent. Very few users
intermittently during the (b) the walkways are not buffered from traffic noise. are observed
night (c) observed speed is greater than 55 kmph or 35 mph.
F • Moderately loud to loud • Noise has not been reduced because of the following • Impossible • None.
throughout the day and reasons (any five of these):
night (65-90 dba) (a) the streets have (i) multi-lane one-way streets or (ii)
multi-lane two-way streets.
(b) the walkways are not buffered from traffic noise through
landscaping or wide sidewalks.
(c) observed speed is greater than 55 kmph or 35 mph.
(d) frequency of heavy vehicles on road is high.
(e) vehicles frequently use their horns
* Studies done by Appleyard (34) indicate that outdoor activities flourish with lower traffic volumes and less noise.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
Sarkar 20

TABLE 6. Quality Levels A-F for air pollution on walkways.

Quality
Levels Pollution Reduction Methods or lack thereof
A • Vehicular traffic banned.
• Walking and bicycling have been promoted through design.
• There is excellent air circulation.
• Walkways are well landscaped.
B • Regulation of the volume of vehicular traffic.
• Facilitation of green modes through design.
• Steady air circulation does not allow impurities to concentrate.
• Layered arrangement of plants along the walkways.
• Special designs such as berms or walls that separate walkways from vehicular traffic.

C • Air circulation is average, and does not allow the pollutants from vehicular traffic to disperse.
• Building heights vary and do not form street canyons.
• Trees are planted along the walkways that partially control the particulate matter in the air.

D • Air circulation is poor, and is unable to disperse all the pollutants resulting from heavy to
moderately heavy traffic.
• There are very few trees planted along the walkways. Or,
• There are no special designs that separate the walkways from the vehicular traffic, nor restrictions on
traffic during certain hours of the day.

F • Traffic congestion occurs most of the time. There are heavy traffic volumes.
• Auto fumes and other emissions are noticeable and physically uncomfortable. Pedestrians
are observed wearing masks or other protection.
• Air circulation is very poor because of the street width and building alignment.
• There are very few trees planted along the walkways. Or,
• There are no special designs that separate the walkways from the vehicular traffic, nor restrictions on
traffic during certain hours of the day.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 TABLE 7. Comfort assessments on Chestnut Street between 15th and 18th Street (north side).

Blocks 15th-16th 16th-17th 17th-18th Quality Level

Elements Grade
Stopping places & secondary D D D D
seating
Protection from adverse B-C C C C
weather
Noise level B B B B
Pollution level B B B B

Blocks Service Level

15th-16th 16th-17th 17th-18th
Elements Grade
Physical & psychological B B B B
comfort, accommodation of
special pedestrian needs

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 22

TABLE 8. Micro-level conditions with respect to comfort in the surveyed sections of the streets
(15th-18th Street; east side).

Stopping places and Protection from adverse Noise levels Pollution levels
Quality Levels secondary seating weather
A
A-B
B Locust Chestnut; Locust Chestnut; Locust
B-C
C Locust; Chestnut Walnut; Chestnut Walnut
C-D Walnut
D
D-F
F Walnut

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 23

Walking speed varies considerably depending on the age (left: FIGURE 1a). Luggage laden pedestrians
(right: FIGURE 1b) are slower than unencumbered ones. Such activi ties should be allowed and
encouraged if walking is accepted as a mode.

FIGURE 1c. Desired walking speed is lower in sidewalk markets (Italian Market, Philadelphia)

FIGURE 1. Variation in walking speeds.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 24

FIGURE 2b. Wide sidewalk in the business district facilitates choice

of walking speed. The walkway here affords more space for pedestrian
activities. The quality of the walkway could be upgraded with comfort
amenities (seating areas, shady trees).
FIGURE 2a. Ability to attain speed is restricted
due to inadequate walkway width.

FIGURE 2. Selection of walking speeds.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 25

FIGURE 3a. Unsafe and uncomfortable conditions FIGURE 3b. Inter-modal connections within major
experienced by this family with children near a activity centers should be comfortable. Waiting for a
transit hub in South Florida. bus can be tiring experience for this elderly pedestrian
would be pleasant if seating was available.

FIGURE 3c. No curb ramps and seating at this FIGURE 3d. Icy access route to a major trolley
transit stop. stop.

FIGURE 3e. Transit passengers are not

adequately accommodated with bus shelters and
walkways. The conditions may be even less
comfortable and safe in the evenings due to
inadequate lighting.

FIGURE 3. Conditions around transit stops.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 26

Evaluation of Comfort Requirements in urban sidewalks

Physical
Psychological
Physiological

Special needs of the most

vulnerable users must be
accommodated

Macro conditions Micro conditions

Service Levels (A-F) Quality Levels (A-F)

1. Physical effort minimized 1. Provision of stopping places

2. Positive psychological 2. Adverse weather protection
reinforcement 3. Regulation of vehicular noise
4. Regulation of air pollution

FIGURE 4. Summary of the evaluation method.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 27

FIGURE 5a. Benches set back from the walkway. FIGURE 5b. User-friendly stopping places allow
pedestrians to indulge in different activities
(Toronto, Ontario).

Figure 5c. Secondary seating affords comfort to bus passengers near a hospital in Philadelphia.

FIGURE 5. Seating choices.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 FIGURE 6a. Mist sprayed to keep pedestrians
cool in Las Vegas where summer temperatures
are over 105ºF (40ºc).

FIGURE 6b. Drinking fountain in small town in Colorado.

FIGURE 6. Amenities for pedestrians.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 29

FIGURE 7a. Shady trees offer comfort from FIGURE 7b. Wind protection for pedestrians and transit
heat (Washington, DC). users during winter using clear panels (Rotterdam, The
Netherlands).

FIGURE 7. Moderation of weather conditions for pedestrians.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 30

8.5
8 Stopping places & secondary
seating
7.5 Protection from adverse
weather
7
Noise level
6.5
Pollution level
6
5.5
5 F grade
4.5
4
15th-16th 16th-17th 17th-18th

A=9; B=8; B-C= 7.5; C=7; D=6

FIGURE 8. Comfort assessments on Chestnut Street between 15th and 18th Street.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 31

8.5
8
7.5
7
6.5 Chestnut
6 Walnut
5.5 Locust

5 F grade
4.5
4
Stopping places Protection from Noise levels Pollution levels
and secondary adverse weather
seating

A=9; B=8; B-C= 7.5; C=7; D=6; D-F=5.5; F=5

FIGURE 9. Micro-level conditions with respect to comfort in the surveyed sections

of the streets.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.
 Sarkar 32

FIGURE 10a. Sidewalk along a scenic section frequented by FIGURE 10b. Sidewalk along a
pedestrians could be enhanced (La Jolla, CA). commercial strip would need changes
in land uses to attract pedestrians
(Hampton Roads, Virginia).

FIGURE 10. Sidewalks with high potential use should be given priority for
improvements.

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM Paper revised from original submittal.