面向未来的连续人行道:将可持续转型嵌入主动交通基础设施的设计历程
关键词:
连续人行道; 行人; 城市设计治理; 可持续转型摘要
街道是城市肌理的根基。随着把既有车行道改造为兼有主动交通与机动车分离空间的多模式通行走廊的努力不断加快,街道设计将在这一转型中扮演关键角色。本研究聚焦连续人行道——一种在支路口赋予步行者优于驾驶人的通行优先权的设计干预,旨在考察格拉斯哥一条当代街道上两处连续人行道在概念构思与设计过程中所发生的种种情形,并检视其设计对使用者的影响。研究提出了一套分析支路处通行行为的新方法,并将其纳入基于社会技术转型理论改造而成的框架中加以把握。结果表明,连续人行道在初始设计与建成设计之间发生了变更,其部分原因在于道路工程师对拟议设计感到不安而采取的约束性行动。行人在连续人行道处一定程度上改变了自身行为,但驾驶人仍然按照自己拥有优先权的方式行事。把各类设计主体的行动置于社会技术转型理论的语境中加以审视,可以揭示出在未来街道更新项目中管理设计治理过程的新型「体制自觉」路径。Abstract
Streets are the foundation of a city's urban fabric. As efforts to adapt existing carriageways into multi-modal movement corridors with segregated space for active travel modes and vehicles gather pace, street design will play a critical role in this transition. This research focuses on continuous footways, a design intervention at side roads that gives priority for people walking, over those who are driving. It aims to investigate the processes taking place during the conceptualisation and design of two continuous footways in a contemporary street in Glasgow, and to examine the implications of their design for people using them. A novel methodology is presented to analyse movement behaviour at side roads, captured more broadly within an adapted framework based on socio-technical transition theory (STT). The results indicate that the continuous footways were altered between the initial design and the constructed design due, in part, to the constraining actions of roads engineers who were uncomfortable with the proposed design. Pedestrians are altering their behaviour to some extent at the continuous footways; however, drivers are continuing to behave as if they have priority. Framing the actions of the various design actors within the context of STT illuminates new 'regime-aware' approaches to managing the design governance process during future street regeneration projects.References
[1] Leach JM, Braithwaite PA, Lee SE, et al. The Liveable Cities Method: establishing the case for transformative change for a UK metro. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Engineering Sustainability, 2019, 173(1): 8-19.
[2] Scottish Government. National Planning Framework 4. Edinburgh: Scottish Government, 2023.
[3] Jacobs J. The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House, 1961.
[4] Gehl J. Life between buildings: using public space. 6th ed. Washington DC: Island Press, 2010.
[5] Aldred R, Goodman A, Woodcock J. Impacts of active travel interventions on travel behaviour and health: results from a five-year longitudinal travel survey in Outer London. Journal of Transport & Health, 2024, 35: 101771.
[6] 赵鹏军, 高浩歌. 基于心理健康视角的城市交通规划与建成环境研究. 地理科学进展, 2024(12).
[7] 刘圣灵, 周颖. 基于空间句法与空间向量的城市街道网络活力测度及优化策略研究——以简·雅各布斯“城市多样性”理论为视角. 城市建筑, 2024, 21(13): 22-30.
[8] 史锦月. 既有居住区老化问题的设计研究. 大连理工大学, 2013.
[9] 房冠儒, 邢汉发, 张焕雪. 路网形态与城市活力的多尺度空间关系研究——以广州市中心城区为例. 西安理工大学学报, 2024, 40(2): 160-172.
[10] 朱丽芳, 潘海霞, 林华, 等. 超大城市总规评估与动态维护协同推进的理念、方法与实践探索——以上海为例. 城市规划学刊, 2024.