Pedestrian Traffic Planning with TOPSIS: Case Study Urdesa Norte, Guayaquil, Ecuador

  • Andrea Perez LopezEmail author
  • Maikel Leyva Vazquez
  • Jesús Rafael Hechavarría Hernández
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1253)


The article focuses on proposing sustainable solutions for pedestrians that give continuity in its path and make the place attractive to walk, contemplate or take a break including green infrastructure around it to increase the amount of green area per inhabitant which It is lacking. The general objective proposes to develop a plan for pedestrian and cycle path mobility with a green area to improve the connectivity of the study sector. The study methodology is developed in four steps in which the quality of pedestrian infrastructure is identified, the quantity and quality of demand for pedestrian mobility is determined and the designs of the proposal for pedestrian mobility (road cycle) and the proposal of green areas through a database of Question Pro being evaluated in the TOPSIS platform to determine the guidelines of the proposal design of the two focus groups of the study.


Pedestrian mobility Green infrastructure Road cycle Green areas Pedestrian infrastructure 


  1. 1.
    Bongiorno, C., Santucci, D., Kon, F., Santi, P., Ratti, C.: Comparing bicycling and pedestrian mobility: patterns of non-motorized human mobility in Greater Boston. J. Transp. Geogr. 80 (2019)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jeong, D.Y., Kwahk, J., Han, S.H., Park, J., Lee, M., Jang, H.: A pedestrian experience framework to help identify impediments to walking by mobility-challenged pedestrians. J. Transp. Heal. 10, 334–349 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gamble, J., Snizek, B., Nielsen, T.S.: From people to cycling indicators: documenting and understanding the urban context of cyclists’ experiences in Quito, Ecuador. J. Transp. Geogr. 60, 167–177 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Franco Puga, J., Colorado Pástor, B., Hechavarría Hernández, J.R., Leyva, M.: Design criteria in vernacular architecture as a proposal for low-income dwelling for urban parishes of the Babahoyo canton, Ecuador, pp. 1164–1170 (2020)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Delso, J., Martín, B., Ortega, E.: A new procedure using network analysis and kernel density estimations to evaluate the effect of urban configurations on pedestrian mobility. The case study of Vitoria –Gasteiz. J. Transp. Geogr. 67, 61–72 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Planificación, I.D.E., Urbano, Y.D., Promover, P.: Redalyc. Instrumentos de planificación y diseño urbano para promover al peatón en las ciudades. Un estudio comparado entre Chile y Alemania (2016)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Awasthi, A., Omrani, H., Gerber, P.: Investigating ideal-solution based multicriteria decision making techniques for sustainability evaluation of urban mobility projects. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 116, 247–259 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nasseri, M.: Book review. System 72, 241–243 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bottin-Rousseau, S., Perrut, M., Picard, C., Akamatsu, S., Faivre, G.: An experimental method for the in situ observation of eutectic growth patterns in bulk samples of transparent alloys. J. Cryst. Growth 306(2), 465–472 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Falcón, H.S., Tacoronte, D.V., Santana, A.G.: La movilidad urbana sostenible y su incidencia en el desarrollo turístico Sustainable urban mobility and its impact on tourism development 19(1), 48–63 (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Huete Nieves, R., Mantecón Terán, A.: Más allá del turismo: movilidad residencial europea y nuevos núcleos urbanos. Boletín la Asoc. Geógrafos Españoles, no. 56, pp. 111–128 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maya, E.: Métodos y técnicas de investigación Una propuesta ágil para la presentación de trabajos científicos en las áreas de arquitectura, urbanismo y disciplinas afines (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Base de Datos – Censo de Población y Vivienda. Accessed 13 Feb 2020
  14. 14.
    Proyectos — Fundación Ecológica Proyecta Verde. Accessed 13 Feb 2020
  15. 15.
    López-Sánchez, M.P., Alberich, T., Aviñó, D., Francés García, F., Ruiz-Azarola, A., Villasante, T.: Participatory tools and methods for community action. SESPAS Report 2018. Gaceta Sanitaria 32, 32–40 (2018). Ediciones Doyma, S.LGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Valero Fajardo, C.L., Hechavarría Hernández, J.R.: PEST analysis based on fuzzy decision maps for the ordering of risk factors in territorial planning of the Vinces Canton, Ecuador, pp. 1190–1194 (2020)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Perez Lopez
    • 1
    Email author
  • Maikel Leyva Vazquez
    • 2
  • Jesús Rafael Hechavarría Hernández
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Architecture and UrbanismUniversity of GuayaquilGuayaquilEcuador
  2. 2.University Politecnica SalesianaGuayaquilEcuador

Personalised recommendations