Car-free day in Seoul

Car-free day, or 차없는날, was held last year on September 10. There is a translation of a short news article on the event here. I took the afternoon to walk down the length of Jongno (종로) and witness it firsthand.

Map image

Jongno is one of the busiest streets in Korea, with three to four traffic lanes in each direction, hundreds of small stores and restaurants (usually chain establishments), major transit nodes, and a dozen bus routes running along its length. Its width owes to a historical use as a processional for royalty in old Seoul. Along with Euljiro and Cheonggyecheon, it is one of the major east-west connectors in downtown Seoul, and during business hours is invariably hectic with cars, buses, taxis, scooters, and pedestrians elbowing for space. Unfortunately, pedestrians make up the bottom of the pecking order, and are squeezed into narrow sidewalks and forced to wait minutes for crosswalk signals. In some parts of Jongno, the only safe way to cross between the north and south sidewalks is an underground arcade or subway station (these, too, are crammed with merchants).

jongno looking east from sejongnoSuch is life on Jongno. Car-free day was a one-day demonstration of what life could be if traffic was limited to buses (and a few brazen scooter riders), and most of the street opened up to pedestrians.

A quick list of what the city changed:

  • Used traffic cones and barricades to narrow the street to two center lanes: one bus lane for each direction.
  • Set up traffic cops at each intersection to prevent any vehicle that was not a public transit bus from entering the street.
  • Added signs and more public servants to guide foot traffic at intersections and provide information.
  • Closed parking lots to public institutions to encourage transit use.
  • Allowed free use of buses during early morning rush hour.
  • IMG_4634Added information kiosks on environmental issues, "green technology" (including a fuel cell bus), bicycle options, city planning, etc.
  • IMG_4629 Created a grassy (thin layer of turf) area in front of Jongak hosting public performances, mostly elementary school kids in shrill song-and-dance numbers.

So, was it a success? If anything, it demonstrated how accustomed people have become to automobile-centered design. IMG_4639Except for areas where kiosks beckoned curious people to step onto the asphalt roadway, most pedestrians remained on the sidewalk, content to observe. Street vendors also stayed on the sidewalk facing away from the road, maintaining the narrower corridors that people were used to. It didn't help that the street trees were too small to offer much shade beyond the sidewalks. As a result, the view of the street was mostly desolate, with few citizens taking advantage of the extra width of walking area.

IMG_4632One amusing example of this was watching people catch the bus.  Since buses were restricted to the middle lanes of the road, they also had to stop in those lanes to pick up passengers. Despite knowing this, people opted to wait for their buses at the usual spots on the sidewalk, and made a mad dash to the center when their bus arrived. A similar problem occurred at crosswalks; people waited for the walk signal at the sidewalk, instead of stepping in close to the actual vehicle lanes in use.

This illustrates a major oversight by the event planners: the timing of lights and walk signals remained the same, and people had to wait just as long to cross the street, whether across the two bus lanes on Jongno or any of the intersections along its length. The heavy traffic at cross-streets and the fast-moving buses necessitated traffic police at every point, but their presence discouraged people from crossing anywhere other than designated crosswalks, and at any time other than during walk signals. The walking environment felt just as restricted and formal as it did with the car traffic.

IMG_4628

What does this imply for a universally accessible Seoul? First, pedestrians are very mindful of remaining within their designated boundaries, their behavior reinforced by physical barriers, plantings, painted lines, traffic behavior, and the presence of authority. There was little sense of "taking back the street", in the way that they took back Cheonggyecheon from exclusively automobile use. It is unlikely that Jongno will ever be car-free on a regular basis, so to improve accessibility and comfort in the long-term, the city will need to explore widening the sidewalks at the expense of car lanes. Car-free day shows that traffic in Seoul still circulates well without Jongno available, so perhaps there is room to reduce its capacity.

Second, it is nice to be able to cross the street aboveground for most of its length, and having ample time to do so. It is much easier to cross two lanes than six, especially if you have trouble moving as quickly as the signals demand, and to avoid the stairs leading in and out of underground walkways.

Lastly, no matter how much space you create for pedestrians, they will not use it if it is uncomfortable or uninteresting. In absence of shade, street commerce, or civic engagement, there was little incentive to leave the sidewalk for hot, open asphalt. Removing the cars from Jongno reveals the fundamental difficulty in creating a comfortable, attractive walking environment in such a wide street.

First thoughts

With the new year comes a new blog. I will be using this space to record ideas, link articles, and keep track of my experiences researching urban design in Seoul. My primary focus is on urban design for elderly and disabled citizens, including the ongoing movement towards a “barrier-free city” (장애물 없는 도시) and the spread of universal design. However, anything urban planning or design-related in Seoul is fair game!

When I tell people that I studied urban planning in college, one of the first questions I usually get is “So, what do you think of Seoul?” The best I can reply in my awkward Korean is that Seoul is a huge, busy city with some nice areas. After living in Seoul for the past few months (and, admittedly, not being especially brave in exploring the city) I think I can elaborate a bit further. These are some first impressions on the urban form of Seoul:

  • Seoul is a very, very large city, and the best way to describe its form is “dense sprawl.” The problems faced by housing experts, transportation planners, environmentalists, and designers go well beyond the problems of American cities. People are accustomed to living in multi-unit housing, relying on (and expecting) quality public transportation, and certainly do not take any open space for granted. Unfortunately, even with a vast public transit network and numerous high-capacity roads (8 lanes in both directions, anyone?) congestion remains a perennial problem. Space, rather than distance or sprawl, is a primary constraint here.
  • Because of this density, Seoul is a vertical city, with a variety of uses within each building. Mixed-use is the norm, with small commercial use occupying most ground-level and underground spaces, and offices and residences dominating the higher floors. In neighborhoods developed in the mid-20th century, most everyday amenities like grocery shopping and pharmacies are within walking distance from the home. However, high-rise housing developments and large, enclosed shopping centers continue to replace older neighborhoods. Some of these newer buildings contain a variety of uses within (e.g. office space, medical care, restaurants, grocery shopping, hair salons) but are also much less permeable to pedestrians from the outside. Access is instead oriented to automobiles.
  • Speaking of which, automobiles continue to dominate the landscape, despite recent efforts to create pedestrian-friendly streets. Major arterial roads are very wide, wait-times for pedestrian walk signals average several minutes, and drivers assume right-of-way in most situations. Crossing the street can be dangerous, particularly if you do not walk at the pace of a healthy adult. An abundance of engineered solutions to pedestrian safety issues (bridges, underground walkways, guardrails along sidewalks, bollards to block car entry to sidewalks, etc.) is gradually giving way to more traditional crosswalks and traffic-calming techniques, which is great news for the mobility-challenged, or really, anyone who enjoys a safe walking environment.
    • On a brighter note, car parking is relegated to underground lots or strictly controlled short-term curbside spaces. The premium on above-ground real estate means one rarely has to brave a quarter-mile of parking lot on their way to the store.
  • Seoul is hilly! In addition to the numerous mountains that bound and define the edges of the city, the hilly terrain that covers most of the city requires the average citizen to develop a strong set of legs (If the History Channel’s Human Weapon is to be believed, this is what prompted the development of kicking-focused Taekwondo). Housing and college campuses tend to be on the sides of hills, some quite steep, and there seems to be little enthusiasm for the kind of terraforming that flattened most of the original Boston peninsula in the 18th and 19th centuries. This allows for a variety of street configurations, variable architecture, and some spectacular views, but also presents barriers to mobility. Stairs are ubiquitous, and old, steep stairways carry personal significance and charm, but their shortcomings are evident on a blazing-hot day while you’re battling a knee injury.
  • As in most non-American cities, street addresses are not arranged in a Cartesian scheme, and houses are often numbered in order of construction rather than spatial order. Navigating to new places requires directions based on visible landmarks, rather than a street map and address. The overall readability of the city is thus very important, and Seoul is both blessed and cursed by form. Narrow and curvy neighborhood streets have a lot of character, making them easier to remember; they also block view of taller regional landmarks and disorient those traveling through. High-rise apartment blocks require names and numbers printed boldly on the side of each building to be remotely navigable. Citizens understand Seoul as a collection of districts, rather than a system of paths and nodes, and their images of the city are quite patchy as a result.

More than anything, Seoul is a city in rapid flux. Entire neighborhoods are disappearing as large residential and commercial developments stake their territory in older parts of the city. A new generation of planners is trying to embrace multiple images of Seoul’s future: business center, design mecca, high-tech capital, transportation hub, green city, tourist attraction, etc. The impulse to specialize and create identities fragments the city and threatens that which makes any city compelling: spontaneous order, connection with the past, local idiosyncrasies, healthy counterculture.