The Role of Accessibility for the Success of City Centres 3

ctbuh.org/papers

Title: The Role of Accessibility for the Success of City Centres

Author: Rolf Monheim, University of Bayreuth

Subjects: Social Issues Urban Design

Keywords: Urban Design Urban Planning

Publication Date: 2001

Original Publication: CTBUH 2001 6th World Congress, Melbourne

Paper Type: 1. Book chapter/Part chapter 2. Journal paper 3. Conference proceeding 4. Unpublished conference paper 5. Magazine article 6. Unpublished

World-wide discussions about the success of city centres are focused on their accessibility. Generally, it is understood first of all as the accessibility for driving and parking cars. There prevails the attitude that this demand should be met without any restrictions. Therefore, there is a trend to continuously increase the infrastructure for car traffic. Regularly reoccurring shortages are not understood as a sign of a wrong concept but, to the contrary, a directive to continue the expansion. The common sentence “no parking no business” is misleading because it diverts the attention from the fact that first of all the excellence of a place determines the decision where to drive to. If a city centre is run down, even abundant parking will be unable to revitalise it, as can be seen in the USA. In Germany, in contrast, city centres were able to defend their prime role. This is due to the combination of various public and private measures. The city administration, on one hand, improved accessibility by public transport, because it realised that this was the only means to bring large numbers of visitors to a densely built up area; it also improved attractiveness by a good design of the public open spaces now free from car traffic. The landowners and retailers, on the other hand, made the best use of this chance by investing in a better business and improving city marketing. Nowadays, in Germany even new shopping complexes mainly choose integrated city centre locations!

1 THE ROLE OF ACCESSIBILITY

The discussion of the role of accessibility generally is focused on the access from outside to the city centre, including parking. It underestimates the role of “internal accessibility”, i.e. the walk from the place of arrival to the various activity locations and then back to the place of departure (mostly a public transport stop or off-street car park) (Fig. 1). The main reason for this is the orienta- tion towards the “one-stop-shopping” of a suburban mall and the neglecting of the fact that most city centre visitors, at least in Europe, go to several destina- tions within the centre and like walking to them. The discussion of trafﬁc infrastructure furthermore neglects the fact that it does not necessarily determine travel decisions as such but by the way that it is perceived. As a consequence, the marketing of accessibility is important. Unfortunately, for a long time complaints of retailers on poor car-accessibility have resulted in a negative perception among the citizens. However, surveys show that visitors rate accessibility much better than retailers believe. 238 Urban Systems

External accessibility Internal accessibility Trip from the starting point to the city Trips after the arrival in the city centre centre to all activity locations until leaving the city centre Ð Access roads Ð Parking facilities Ð Pedestrian street Ð Public transport (net, stations and – Trafﬁc calmed / shared street service) (without / with separation of Ð Access for pedestrians and cyclists vehicles and pedestrians) Ð Boulevard Ð Area with speed reduction

Figure 1 Measures for the access to the city centre.

Due to the limited availability of space for the construction of additional road- and parking infrastructure in densely built up areas a distinction has to be made between necessary and less necessary car use. The latter refers especially to commuters. This is because of the long parking duration and the problems of the rush-hour. In Germany, therefore off-street car parks for new ofﬁce buildings in a city centre with good accessibility by public transport are permitted mostly only in a limited number. Instead of this, employees may get tickets for public transport at a reduced fee; this is also less expensive for the employer. The parking needs of visitors now are often served better by guidance-systems that show the availability of parking, as well as by other means of parking management. This requires a cooperation of all parking providers. Trafﬁc calming and pedestrianization often result in a reduction of on- street parking sites. This regularly causes complaints by local shop owners. A survey by the Association of Large and Medium-sized Retailers, however,

Figure 2 Change in customer numbers after change in nearby parking capacity due to trafﬁc calming measures. Monheim – The Role of Accessibility 239 showed that even out of those retailers that had suffered some reduction in nearby parking capacity 59% noticed an increase in customer numbers against only 23% noticing a decrease (Fig. 2). Increases would occur even more often if car-parking were managed more adequately, i.e. if the parking duration would be limited and more effectively controlled (see Monheim, ed., 1989). The “internal accessibility” can be improved ﬁrst of all by pedestrian precincts. Within the last 30 years, in Germany they have expanded enormously up to more than thousand. In the beginnings, they were introduced only in streets with the highest concentration of large shops and pedestrian volumes. It was feared that otherwise people would have to walk too long distances. Later, the great popularity of pedestrian precincts encouraged planners and politicians to expand them step by step, in many cases up to networks of 4Ð9 km streetlength.

2 NUREMBERG AS AN EXAMPLE FOR GOOD URBAN DESIGN

Nuremberg, the centre of the Middle-Franconian conurbation, is a good example (490,000 and 1.2 million residents respectively; for details see Monheim 1996(b), 1997(a) and 2000). The city centre had been almost totally destroyed during World War II and was reconstructed after controversial debate in accordance to the historical pattern. Only a few streets were widened for car traffic. In 1966 for the first time car traffic was banned from a shopping street (Fig. 3). It was a great success. Therefore six years later the city councillors decided to expand the pedestrian precinct to include large parts of the shopping district. Finally, the city centre was divided into five traffic precincts where cars could not drive directly from one to the other. This reduced traffic volumes within the city without endangering accessibility. In 1996, a new conservative city government reopened some small connecting streets; however, car drivers meanwhile had learned that they do not need to drive around so much within the centre and use these connecting streets quite rarely. What were the results? Traffic engineers had warned that the closure of roads with heavy traffic crossing the city centre would provoke chaos. But only 20–30% of the previous volume of traffic showed up on the remaining streets. The parking facilities were left nearly unchanged, but they were better organised in favour of visitors and residents, discouraging commuters. Retailers had warned that the city centre would be cut off from its potential visitors. But their numbers increased clearly; many were attracted from large distances, especially on Saturday. This resulted from several factors. A new subway and parking management improved accessibility from outside and 9 km pedestrian streets improved the internal accessibility. Many new shops opened, the most important ones KARSTADT with 24,100 m2 and a shopping centre with 12,200 m2 (several more are under construction). A good design of public open spaces as well as changing lifestyles encouraged the expansion of street cafés and restaurants. A multiplex-cinema with nearly 5,000 seats and, in addition, restaurants for 1,200 guests added to the entertainment function. A large number of museums, theatres and other cultural institutions strengthened the identity of the city centre. They became connected by a “Culture Mile” and a “Historical Mile”. Their route was advertised through large billboards. A city 240 Urban Systems

Figure 3 Main infrastructure for accessibility in the city centre of Nuremberg. management was introduced in public-private-partnership, supporting the attractivity of the city centre by a great variety of events. This broad mix of shopping, recreation and culture has led to an organically developed urban entertainment centre. This may be seen as a model contrasting with the new urban entertainment centres in the USA as planned and managed by one single developer. The example of Nuremberg demonstrates the necessity to subordinate car trafﬁc according to the needs and capacities of the city centre and to put great emphasis on good public transport. This makes it possible to strengthen the internal accessibility by a sophisticated system of pedestrian streets which connect the various activity areas.

3 ACTIVITIES AND PREFERENCES OF CITY CENTRE VISITORS

Successful urban design depends very much on its suitability for the needs of the city users. Surveys demonstrate how they behave and what they prefer. Each of the ﬁve cities presented in this paper has its own character which modiﬁes the general trend (for more details see Monheim, 1998 and 2000, Monheim et al. 1998). Monheim – The Role of Accessibility 241

Lübeck (217,000 residents, close to the Baltic Sea Coast)) has a large old city located on an island and declared as “World Cultural Heritage”. In 1989 it started a stepwise traffic calming process, limiting for residents access to and parking in large parts of the city centre. Several other streets are accessible for cars only at certain hours, whereas only a few streets give unlimited access. Pedestrian streets, however, have developed to a very small length of 1.6 km. Traffic calming was accompanied by strong complaints of retailers. This was based on their believe that the city centre could not be reached any more by car. However, this was not the case. These controversies provoked a negative marketing effect for the city centre. In addition, deficiencies in the urban design and the small size of the pedestrian precinct caused discontent. In Bremen (540,000 residents, located at the North-Sea) there are also some deficiencies in urban design. Regensburg, in contrast, the smallest among the five cities (142,000 residents, located in Bavaria), is called the “Medieval Wonder”. It has maintained its historical character; many small retail shops and restaurants make the best use of it. Munich, the capital of Bavaria, is considered the most attractive German city (1.2 million residents in the city and 2 million more in the conurbation area). The well designed city centre and pedestrian precinct support this image. Munich together with Frankfurt has the highest pedestrian volumes in Germany with about 15,000 in the peak hour during the week and 20,000Ð27,000 on a Saturday (London: 8,100 and 12,900, New York 7,000 and 4,600, Sydney: 6,400 and 12,000 respectively).

Figure 4 Activities of city centre visitors.

Visitors of German city centres on average have about two different pur- poses for their visit (Fig. 4). Most of them combine shopping and leisure, the latter nearly equalling the share of the former. Looking more in detail at leisure activities we see that visitors often combine several ones, especially strolling and eating (Fig. 5). They are most frequent at Munich and least frequent at Lübeck, with 164 and 65 different leisure activities respectively per hundred persons surveyed. 242 Urban Systems

In addition, many visitors in modern societies consider shopping itself a leisure activity.

Figure 5 Leisure activities of city centre visitors.

Most shoppers visit a large number of shops Ð on Saturday about half of them ﬁve or more. Many do not have a ﬁxed plan of what to buy. Therefore spontaneous purchases are frequent as well as visiting shops without purchasing anything. The walk from one shop to the next, together with strolling as an activity in itself, result in a long duration of the visit. Most visitors stay two or more hours, only a few less than one hour. Again we see a marked contrast according to the attractivity of the city; on Saturday only 11% stay up to one hour in Munich against 49% in Lübeck.

Figure 6 Length of the walk within the city centre. Monheim – The Role of Accessibility 243

The distances walked within the city centre are quite considerable (Figure 6). Only a few visitors estimate to walk up to one km and the majority more than two km. Only in Lübeck, due to its small pedestrian precinct, the longer distances are quite rare (15% against 36Ð42% more than 3 km).

Figure 7 Opinions of the walking experience within the city centre.

A large majority of visitors feel good or even very good about their walk, only very few feel bad. Sometimes they complain only about bad weather (Figure 7). Longer distances are not linked to negative feelings, sometimes even the contrary occurs: those walking a long distance feel better. This, on the other hand, is logical because otherwise they would not have walked so far. Discontent is caused mainly by the hustle and bustle resulting from too high numbers of pedestrians, especially on Saturday. The major risk for large German city centres and their pedestrian precincts nowadays is not a lack in accessibility but an overcrowding, especially during peak hours. This is also the case because shop rents explode so that many old established retailers cannot compete any more with national or international chain stores. Some fear that, as a result, the local identity of the city centre will disappear. At the end of our interviews the visitors were asked what they liked most and what they did not like at all. The percentage of those not liking anything in particular shows a clear trend with Lübeck and Bremen performing weakest and Regensburg the best (Figure 8). In all cities except Munich the historical town- scape is mentioned most frequently (40Ð56%). Shopping is much less important. People and ﬂair have about the same importance. They are connected with the pedestrian precinct as a stage where the visitors can see and be seen. The percentage of those not particularly disliking anything is quite high (33Ð50%), which is a good sign for the city centres (Figure 9). At Bremen and Munich most criticism refers to the overcrowding, especially on Saturdays (21–33%). The Lübeck visitors complain especially about dirt and, a bit less, about accessibility and parking. The latter is the result of a misled publicity. 244 Urban Systems

Notwithstanding the extensive trafﬁc calming, at Lübeck, Munich and particularly at Regensburg there are still complaints about trafﬁc.

Figure 8 Particularly appealing aspects of the city centre.

Figure 9 Particularly unpleasant aspects of the city centre. Monheim – The Role of Accessibility 245

A special question whether city centre visitors would prefer a better car accessibility or less car traffic in the city centre, in all cities shows a clear majority for traffic calming. Retailers in the same centres, on the other hand, vote with great majority for a better car access. These different perceptions can be found also when both groups score car accessibility: visitors, especially those coming by car, give much better marks than retailers. These differences in perception can explain a great deal of the criticism expressed by retailers against planning and politics for the accessibility of city centres. In the opinion of citizens, there is a great desire for traffic calming and no other planning measure has a stronger support than that of pedestrian streets.

4 CONCLUSION

As a conclusion one can state that

1. the importance of the external accessibility to the city centre is overesti- mated and the potential of an adequate parking management policy is underestimated; 2. the importance of the internal accessibility, i.e. the conditions for walking within the city centre, is underestimated, including the beneﬁts of a good urban design (which, however, is considered very important in every planned shopping complex!); 3. the importance of an attractive mix of functions, including leisure and entertainment, corresponding to modern lifestyles, is underestimated as well as the marketing and management of the city centre (again, they are considered important in every planned shopping complex and urban entertainment centre).

Planners should not try just to copy shopping complexes and urban entertainment centres. They should, however, learn some principles to strengthen the competitiveness of traditional city centres. This is best done by working out their identity and uniqueness, whereas there is no chance to successfully compete in respect to car accessibility. To the contrary, only an excellent accessibility by public transport enables the density and mixture of functions required for an attractive urban core to occur. This principle is also applicable to cities outside Europe. The recent development of Melbourne is a good example.

REFERENCES

Bahrenberg, G., Mevenkamp, N. and Monheim, R., 1998 NUTZUNG UND BEWERTUNG VON STADTZENTREN UND NEBENZENTREN IN BREMEN, (Bayreuth: Arbeitsmaterialien zur Raumordnung und Raumplanung, H. 180). 246 Urban Systems

Baier, R. and Schäfer, H., 1998 INNENSTADTVERKEHR UND EINZELHANDEL. HINWEISE ZUR BERÜCKSICHTIGUNG DES EINZELHANDELS BEI DER ENTWICKLUNG VON INTEGRIERTEN INNENSTADTVERKEHRSKONZEPTEN, (Bremerhaven: Berichte der Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen, Verkehrstechnik, H. 52).

FGSV, Forschungsgesellschaft für Straßen- und Verkehrswesen, 1993 „AUTOARME INNENSTÄDTE“ – EINE KOMMENTIERTE BEISPIELSAMMLUNG, (Cologne: FGSV-Arbeitspapier, Nr. 30).

Frehn, M., 1998 WENN DER EINKAUF ZUM ERLEBNIS WIRD. DIE VERKEHRLICHEN UND RAUMSTRUKTURELLEN AUSWIRKUNGEN DES ERLEBNISEINKAUFS IN SHOPPING-MALLS UND INNENSTÄDTEN, (Wuppertal: Wuppertal Papers, 80).

MASSKS, Ministerium für Arbeit, Soziales und Stadtentwicklung, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, 1999 STADTPLANUNG ALS DEAL? URBAN ENTERTAINMENT CENTER UND PRIVATE STADTPLANUNG – BEISPIELE AUS DEN USA UND NORDRHEIN-WESTFALEN, (Düsseldorf: MASSKS 1322).

Monheim, R., 1980 FUSSGÄNGERBEREICHE UND FUSSGÄNGERVERKEHR IN STADTZENTREN IN DER BUNDESREPUBLIK DEUTSCHLAND, (Bonn: Dümmlers Verlag Bonner Geographische Abhandlungen, H. 64).

Monheim, R. (ed.), 1989 PARKRAUMMANAGEMENT UND PARKRAUMMARKETING IN STADTZENTREN, (Bayreuth: Arbeitsmaterialien zur Raumordnung und Raumplanung, H. 75).

Monheim, R., 1992 THE IMPORTANCE OF ACCESSIBILITY FOR DOWNTOWN RETAIL AND ITS PERCEPTION BY RETAILERS AND CUSTOMERS. In The attraction of retail locations, IGU- Symposium, Vol. I, edited by Heinritz, G., (Kallmünz/Regensburg: Verlag M. La§leben), pp. 19Ð46. Monheim – The Role of Accessibility 247

Monheim, R., 1996 a PARKING MANAGEMENT AND PEDESTRIANISATION AS STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESSFUL CITY CENTRES. In Sustainable transport in central and eastern European cities, edited by OECD/ECMT (Paris), pp. 53Ð143.

Monheim, R., 1996 b DIE STADTZENTREN VON MELBOURNE, MÜNCHEN UND NÜRNBERG IM SPIEGEL IHRER BESUCHER. In Stadt und Wirtschaftsraum, edited by Steinecke, A. (Berlin: Berliner Geographische Studien 44), pp. 47Ð65.

Monheim, R. (ed.), 1997 a ‚AUTOFREIE‘ INNENSTÄDTE – GEFAHR ODER CHANCE FÜR DEN HANDEL? Teil A/B, (Bayreuth: Arbeitsmaterialien zur Raumordnung und Raumplanung, H. 134).

Monheim, R., 1997 b THE EVOLUTION FROM PEDESTRIAN AREAS TO‚ CAR-FREE‘ CITY CENTRES IN GERMANY. In The Greening of Urban Transport, edited by Tolley, R., (Chichester: Wiley), pp. 253Ð266.

Monheim, R., 1998 METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF SURVEYING THE VOLUME, STRUCTURE, ACTIVITIES AND PERCEPTIONS OF CITY CENTRE VISITORS, GeoJournal, 45 (4), pp. 273Ð287.

Monheim, R., 2000 FUSSGÄNGERBEREICHE IN DEUTSCHEN INNENSTÄDTEN. ENTWICKLUNGEN UND KONZEPTE ZWISCHEN INTERESSEN, LEITBILDERN UND LEBENSSTILEN, Geographische Rundschau, 52 (7Ð8), pp. 40Ð46.

Monheim, R., Holzwarth, M. and Bachleitner, M., 1998 STRUKTUR UND VERHALTEN DER BESUCHER DER MÜNCHNER CITY, UNTER BESONDERER BERÜCKSICHTIGUNG DER AUSWIRKUNGEN DER NEUEN LADENÖFFNUNGSZEITEN, (Bayreuth: Arbeitsmaterialien zur Raumordnung und Raumplanung, H. 177).

Yencken, D., 1994 CENTRAL MELBOURNE SURVEY 1991 AND 1993. (Melbourne: Faculty of Architecture and Planning. The University of Melbourne).