Chapter 3.1
Development Patterns and Infill

• ALL
• Remove Code Barriers
• Create Incentives
• Fill Regulatory Gaps

Pedestrian Mobility to Adjacent Zones

INTRODUCTION

When new developments are built, one of the last things considered is pedestrian and cyclist connectivity between the site and adjacent areas.[1] Even when local governments consider pedestrian and cyclist mobility within districts, it is often overlooked how the new mobility network will connect in areas where zoning transitions occur. When local ordinances are silent on pedestrian and cyclist mobility between districts, such as employment centers and neighborhoods, the result is a fractured and disconnected mobility system. Traditional transition design includes things such as back-to-back building design, or fences and walls that create barriers to pedestrians and cyclists.[2] Failing to address transition areas such as these can hinder walking or cycling in or through the zone.[3]

The walkability of a community directly impacts how frequently people choose to walk.[4] Thus, the barriers created by the lack of connectivity in transition areas can negatively impact the amount of people choosing to walk or bike in the community.[5] This burden affects people walking or biking to work, as they may not live in the same area as their place of employment.[6] Furthermore, the lack of connectivity impacts the poor disproportionately, as they are affected more by commuting costs.[7]

Some local governments are beginning to address connectivity through ordinances that require developers to address pedestrian and cyclist transitions between zones.[8] The requirements often focus on ensuring proper connections in the transition areas through design and building requirements.[9] Some local governments may require developers to provide connections if the design of the transition they use is not conducive to pedestrians and cyclists.[10] Another option some local governments use is to require developers to identify and consider pedestrian and cyclist entrance points to the site.[11] Some ordinances are more exacting, requiring developers to provide connections to any residential developments or shopping centers.[12] Ensuring boundary sidewalks are properly connected to walkways throughout the development site may also aid in creating walkable transitions.[13]

Whether through general or specific language, by requiring developers to consider the surrounding zones, pedestrian mobility can be greatly improved by connecting adjacent zones.

EFFECTS

A significant benefit of increasing walkability of a community is the health benefits physical activity can provide. Increased physical activity correlates with areas that have high amounts of connectivity.[14] Adults who live in more pedestrian friendly areas walk around 30 minutes more per week than those who live in less pedestrian friendly areas.[15] By encouraging walking as opposed to driving, these ordinances can help reduce the risk of a number of health problems, such as heart attacks, obesity, stroke, heart disease and high blood pressure.[16]

Promoting walking can also have large environmental benefits. A significant amount of air pollution in more urbanized areas comes from motor vehicles.[17] For example, if a person were to walk 1.5 miles, it “would generate less than a quarter of the GHG [greenhouse gas] that would be emitted if the person drove the same distance.”[18] Implementing connectivity ordinances that allow better walkability allows local governments to reduce emissions benefitting citizen health and the environment.[19]

One benefit more specific to transition walkability is the economic benefit provided to workers.  Commuting costs can often be a big detriment or obstacle to employment.  These costs often affect low-skilled and poor workers the most, as they are more likely to be impacted by commuting costs and spatial barriers to employment.[20] More walkable communities can reduce transportation costs by increasing a person’s “proximity to employment, density, and transit systems.”[21]

EXAMPLES

Sterling, IL

Sterling focuses their efforts on improving pedestrian mobility in transition areas through their Design Guidelines and Regulations section of the code.[22] Within this section, the code highlights the importance of a development project’s designs and their relationship to surrounding development.[23] The primary purpose of this section is to ensure convenient pedestrian and vehicle access to adjacent land uses.[24]

The City again addresses mobility in the “pedestrian access design requirements” portion of the code.[25] This section requires developers to provide pedestrian connections throughout the development.[26] To ensure proper mobility between land use zones, the code requires a connection to “any sidewalks or walkways on adjacent properties that extend to the boundaries shared with the commercial development.”[27] Another example of required connections are to adjacent land uses and developments.[28] Including any residential developments, retail shopping centers, office buildings, and restaurants but can apply to any land use when the City deems it appropriate.[29] By requiring all of these connections, as well as highlighting the importance of developments considering surrounding areas, the code helps to ensure proper pedestrian mobility even in transition areas.

To view the provisions, see Sterling, IL Code of Ordinances § 102-501(D) (2015).

Brighton, CO

Brighton attempts to increase pedestrian mobility in transition zones in part through their mixed-use district design standards.[30] The City applies the transition design standards specifically to developments with a more intense land use than neighboring developments.[31] By structuring the code this way, the City places the burden to connect the zones on the development with the more intense land uses.[32]

The code also points out that traditional transition solutions such as back-to-back building orientations or fences and walls often come with drawbacks.[33] One of the drawbacks the City focuses on is the interference these designs can have on pedestrian and vehicle connections.[34] While the City proposes a number of design alternatives, one of the most notable is using natural features for transitions.[35] However, some natural features may still provide barriers to pedestrian mobility. In this case, the City may require that the developer provide pedestrian connections to the adjacent land uses in order to ensure good mobility.[36] This type of design ensures that new mixed-use developments are properly connected to adjacent developments.

To view the provisions, see Brighton, CO Municipal Code § 17-50-170 (2008).

ADDITIONAL EXAMPLES

Longmont, CO Code of Ordinances § 15.03.150(F)(4)(a) (2015) (requiring mixed-use development plans to be integrated with the surrounding area, including addressing pedestrian and bicycle connections).

Surprise, AZ Code of Ordinances § 122-55(e)(4)(a)(2)(2009) (requiring mixed-use centers to consider pedestrian and bicycle entry points and connections to off-site destinations).

Cibolo, TX Code of Ordinances 4.7.4.3(K)(4) (2018) (requiring mixed use developments to occasionally provide pedestrian connections to adjacent land uses in open space transition areas).

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Jamie F. Chriqui et. al., Communities on the Move:  Pedestrian-Oriented Zoning as a Facilitator of Adult Active Travel to Work in the United States, frontier in Public Health (April 18, 2016), https://perma.cc/S88F-FU33.