The Importance of Walkability in our Urban-world

From the historically persevering settlements of Damascus to the meticulously neat grids of Mohenjo-Daro, the “City” has, for thousands of years, been a staple of human civilization. From the very first agrarian settlements, the organic development of cities was not an unforeseeable milestone. As culture evolved alongside a settled lifestyle, the meaning of the city itself also underwent significant transformation. It came more to be defined by the interplay of life it hosted more so than the space it occupied. As this line of progress marched onward, it thus became necessary to plan out these same spaces to orient them better around the lives of its inhabitants.

This juncture is where the discipline of urban planning was first conceived. Over the long span of years since, cities have undergone several metamorphoses to best reflect the times they existed within. The dedication of sacred spaces in Ancient Greek and Roman cities reflected the seamless blend of religion and daily life. The focus on fortifications and defensive measures prevalent in the age of feudalism spoke to a practical measure that held the constant threat of invasion at bay. The airy and harmonious urban spaces of the Baroque style in Europe best embodied the newly-revived neoclassical spirit, and its profound appreciation of beauty.

The one common strand that wove through the multi-dimensional fabric of urban design consistently, for a major part of its existence, was the planner’s effort to incorporate walkability into their cities. Historically the primary mode of commute for short distances, the ease of pedestrian traffic ultimately dictated the ease of commute within a metropolis.

Or at least, this was the case before the era of rapid change that we have now termed the Industrial Revolution. Among the many wondrous products of the coal-and-steel revolution came the locomotive. Born out of the convenience of the locomotive and the hyper-individualism pervasive during the birth of large-scale capitalism was the Car. Convenient, compact and contemporary, it was only a matter of time before the car went from a status symbol exclusive to the wealthiest to a household necessity. These mechanical wonders were bridging distances that would have been cumbersome to travel before, redefining the idea of nearness itself.

At the juncture that often accompanies an invention this brilliant came another decision; the redefining of the existing infrastructure. Cars, in all their convenient glory, required occasional refueling and maintenance. They also required extensive roads that existing networks simply were not capable of providing. And so, the Metropol underwent its newest metamorphosis to accommodate this newcomer. Eventually, the mass-production and acquisition of personal vehicles overtook expectations, requiring the construction of infrastructure with the central goal of facilitating private vehicle usage – a phenomenon often referred to as car-centrism. This was the birth of the cities as we know them today, with several lanes of traffic, multiple entry and exit points, and facades existing to complement the extensive and never-ending roads.

As convenience and novelty shone as driving virtues, older modes of commute – such as walking or cycling – began to be viewed as slow and cumbersome. As such, the space allotted for these activities within an urban landscape decreased in proportion with their importance. The old Greek acropolis, with its walkable streets functioning as the lifeblood connecting its vital organs, was now the modern city with its dynamic life and equally fast-paced commute.

The pushback against car-centric models happened primarily on two fronts. The first was, naturally, the concern that increased car usage had taken away from an activity that used to keep a majority of the population non-sedentary; walking. The physical exertion that had initially made it undesirable also had significant health benefits, which were reaped less and less as more people transitioned to private vehicle usage, even for the shortest of trips. The second reason was the impact that carbon emissions – a primary byproduct of vehicular usage – and the decreasing tree cover had on the environment. Ecologically, car-centrism and the concentration of car-only spaces was beginning to account for a substantial amount of the emissions that emerged as a concern of global proportions, particularly from the late twentieth century.

As a result of this two-pronged revelation, city planners and governments started waking up to the need to revive walkability in their cities. Reviving walkability inevitably pointed towards giving people more incentives to want to walk anywhere; in car-centric, concrete-and-steel spaces, walking short distances to get all your necessities – or even just to engage in your community – was not a very popular choice. As such, urban planning found itself face-to-face with another reimagination – one which once again centered the inhabitants themselves. 

The true importance of walkability in urban planning can only be recognized once one examines the context which must make it possible. The reintroduction of green, community-oriented spaces is one such idea. Spaces like this, historically, promote leisure and a healthy community life for inhabitants. Secondly, the introduction of pedestrian- or cycle-friendly roads is another necessity. This would, once again, require rethinking existing commute networks. Thirdly, the conceptualization of ideas such as the 15-Minute City by Carlos Moreno provide an alternative model to the radial, centralized cities that we have come to know as the standard today. The construction of self-sufficient neighborhood units with basic necessities accounted for within a 10- or 15-minute walk is a great incentive for an individual to not retrieve their car keys for a grocery run.

If implemented methodically, improved walkability in urban spaces can promote better health for its inhabitants, cut down on carbon emissions, and convert the cities from monotonous facades to a community-oriented, enriched living space. Historically, walkability has always been a core concern of urban planners from the earliest of planned cities. While commuting itself was a major part of this concern, the fact of the matter is that walkability promoted several other values that provided cohesiveness to the urban space. In this era where car-centric metropolis and the culture they represent undergo scrutiny, perhaps it is time for a further integration. At this new juncture of city planning, the facet of walkability is thus one that requires consideration, and, (hoping for your agreement, readers) implementation.