Assessing Pedestrian Network Continuity: Insights from Panama City’s Context

Abstract

This study evaluates pedestrian continuity in Panama City, analyzing disruptions and the spatial relationship between crossings and transit stations. Using GIS and field validation, pedestrian networks were assessed based on their continuity, defined by well-maintained sidewalks and marked crossings, and discontinuities, caused by absent sidewalks, commercial infrastructure, service stations, and unmarked crossings. Two urban zones with contrasting layouts were analyzed: Zone A, characterized by a regular grid structure, and Zone B, marked by irregular planning. Results indicate that 67.55% of the study network maintains pedestrian continuity. Additionally, 46.79% of the measured distances between bus stops and formal pedestrian crossings exceed 100 m. The average length of continuous paths is 73.37 m in Zone A and 45.60 m in Zone B. Encroachments by businesses are the primary cause of fragmentation, and the study reflects an important impact of car-oriented urban infrastructures on discontinuities, such as service stations. These stations cause average disruptions of 34.69 m per station in Zone B and 27.56 m in Zone A. The research highlights the need for urban planning strategies to ensure pedestrian continuity, particularly in fragmented urban grids, and underscores the importance of an in-depth consideration of continuity in pedestrian network characterization studies.

1. Introduction

The rapid global expansion of cities imposes substantial demands on existing infrastructure, particularly regarding mobility and transportation. As urban populations grow, urban planning strategies must shift towards an organization that fosters sustainable mobility to promote social inclusion [1,2].

Constant traffic congestion in major cities, driven by excessive private vehicle use, places significant strain on transportation networks. Such congestion worsens traffic problems, reduces the efficiency of the mobility system, lowers residents’ quality of life, and has negative environmental impacts [1,2]. In response, urban planning strategies should align interventions with the goal of mitigating the effects of congestion and pollutant emissions resulting from the high volume of daily commutes.

Walking is a fundamental and widely utilized mode of transportation worldwide. Beyond enabling movement, it reduces reliance on motorized transport systems, fostering a more sustainable approach to mobility [3]. It offers pedestrians a sensory engagement shaped by interactions with infrastructure and the surrounding environment [4]. Research on pedestrian mobility examines walking not only as a means of connecting origins and destinations but also as an activity influenced by environmental conditions [5]. This perspective highlights how route characteristics shape the pedestrian experience, addressing both connectivity and spatial interactions throughout the journey [6].

Pedestrian routes should ensure continuity, connectivity, and accessibility through environments that allow uninterrupted movement. Sidewalks, as key components of pedestrian infrastructure, delineate spaces for pedestrians and facilitate mobility, particularly for individuals with reduced mobility, improving their walking experience. Nevertheless, numerous areas lack continuity, complicating the efficient use of public transportation networks. Pedestrian connectivity to public transport depends not only on the presence of continuous sidewalks but also on the availability of pedestrian crossings, which are often informal and lack proper signage [7].

Pedestrian-involved accidents occur most frequently in situations where pedestrians cross the road, particularly at locations such as crosswalks. Pedestrians have the legal right to cross any street, whether at intersection crosswalks or designated mid-block crossings; however, both locations pose potential risks. Studies on pedestrian perception of footbridges have highlighted challenges related to distance and convenience compared to other crossing options, such as crosswalks [8].

In cities with high mobility demands, well-integrated sidewalk networks connect urban spaces [9,10] and facilitate interactions between socioeconomic activities [11]. These networks serve as connectors, reducing physical and social barriers, particularly in cities with significant contrasts in urban development [12,13]. In the case of Panama City, its rapid urban growth, driven by foreign investment and real estate expansion, aligns with its territorial and economic development, heavily influenced by its strategic location and the Panama Canal. Panama City presents a variety of scenarios regarding urban planning and the distribution of urban facilities, especially concerning pedestrian walkability [14]. This growth has created a marked contrast between developed areas and inner-city neighborhoods with disorganized and low-quality urban infrastructure [15]. Despite Panama’s remarkable economic growth over the past century, this development has not translated into adequate street planning and design [16].

This study aims to assess pedestrian continuity in Panama City by analyzing the urban infrastructure in the context of the main pedestrian network and the spatial coverage of urban elements that influence it. Ensuring pedestrian continuity also requires uninterrupted routes to public transport. The objective is to examine the condition of pedestrian continuity and to identify whether significant variations exist based on the configuration of the urban layout. This approach enables the quantification of the proportion of discontinuity attributable to urban functions such as service stations and to describe the spatial distribution of both disruptive elements and those that enhance continuity.

Through this analytical approach, insights are provided for urban planners and authorities to develop policies and projects that foster more continuous pedestrian mobility in rapidly growing urban areas, such as Panama City. While some pedestrian network studies take continuity into account, others tend to overlook it. This work addresses this gap by offering an examination of pedestrian continuity from two urban topology perspectives, emphasizing its role in assessing sidewalk quality and exploring the various types of interruptions that impact it.

Literature Review

Pedestrian continuity refers to the ability of pedestrian networks to provide unbroken, interconnected routes, enabling safe and efficient travel in urban environments [17]. This continuity enhances pedestrian connectivity, which, as indicated in previous studies, refers to the topology of the pedestrian network that facilitates movement from one point to another [9,18,19]. Continuity also contributes to pedestrian accessibility, which means access to essential urban functions [20,21].

Studies on accessibility emphasize the importance of designing sidewalk networks that seamlessly link key destinations, such as residential areas, recreational and commercial zones, and public transportation spaces. Research highlights that well-integrated and continuous pedestrian networks are essential for enabling uninterrupted movement and promoting pedestrian volume [22,23]. This planning and management effort involves identifying and addressing discontinuities in the pedestrian network to ensure that the population has uninterrupted and connected routes. Measuring pedestrian continuity provides essential information for urban planners and policymakers [17].

Topics such as pedestrian accessibility and connectivity have been studied both at the urban scale, encompassing entire cities, and at the neighborhood level. Generally, within these investigations, the characteristics of pedestrian networks are measured through constructed indicators, such as those shown by [24], to assess these concepts on a measurable scale. Previous research highlights that a well-connected sidewalk infrastructure, functioning as an interconnected system, enhances pedestrian volume; however, it also recognizes that the presence of infrastructure is a factor that impacts this pedestrian demand [23]. This study by [23] also recognizes that one of the limitations of their proposed model is that variables associated with the quality of the infrastructure, such as continuity, were not included.

Beyond the previously discussed research, other studies focus on the macro-level measurement of indicators related to pedestrian connectivity and accessibility, aiming to analyze the efficiency of pedestrian networks as systems of connections and spatial distributions in a comprehensive and detailed manner [24,25,26,27]. Conversely, assessing the quality of the pedestrian network often reveals obstacles that disrupt sidewalk continuity, resulting in routes that are unsuitable for pedestrians [17]. An assessment of existing sidewalks reveals that they can be obstructed by businesses that partially or completely encroach on the sidewalk space, or even in instances where sidewalks are converted into parking spaces and occupied by street vendors [3,28]. It also shows clear urban fragmentation that occurs in various locations, with abrupt changes from the presence of a sidewalk to its absence along a pedestrian route [3].

Other studies have considered continuity as one of the criteria used to describe pedestrian networks through the following indicators: “network directness” [9] and “seamless sidewalk continuity” [11]. Measuring continuity has taken various approaches; it has been measured through a bicycle route aimed at achieving a direct connection, with the requirement that the route continue through urban areas, parks, and parking areas [29]. Although this characterization of continuity could be applied to sidewalk areas, its application is impractical in many urban contexts, especially at macro levels of continuity measurement, due to the large extension of the networks [9].

Approaches that have been used most effectively in large-scale continuity studies have included the use of Google Street View (GSV) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to characterize continuity through dichotomous measurements by sidewalk segments detailing whether continuity existed or not [11]. This methodology provides broader results in terms of study coverage, yet it does not address the categorization of the interruptions identified.

Another approach to measuring continuity utilized GIS tools to generate what were termed “graph indicators,” and two of them were used to characterize pedestrian continuity: “average edge length” and “average length per vertex” [9]. Although this study did not explore the categorization of pedestrian continuity types either, its approach allows for the generation of linear entities that model the linear extension of the sidewalk and segregate the sections according to the existence or lack of pedestrian continuity, allowing its adaptability to be oriented towards a study focused on describing pedestrian continuity in a more extensive way.

Panama has limited documented research on pedestrian networks, and existing studies indicate that sidewalk quality is very poor, often obstructed, and, in many areas, even non-existent [30]. As shown by [30], in Panama’s metropolitan urban area, 73.75% of pedestrian path spaces are unfavorable for mobility, reflecting significant deficiencies in comprehensive urban planning and posing a challenge in terms of measuring indicators associated with pedestrian network systems, given the local state of pedestrian continuity.

2. Materials and Methods

GIS-based data collection methods allow for detailed characterizations of variables related to the built environment, making them key tools in pedestrian network studies [31]. This study employs virtual audits alongside physical audits for the construction of the pedestrian network and the identification of urban elements of interest [32]. The research follows the methodological framework outlined below:

(i)

The research divides the study area of Panama City into two zones.

(ii)

The data collection process involves the construction of the pedestrian network, the classification of continuity and discontinuity types, and the mapping of urban elements. This collected information was stored and mapped in GIS.

(iii)

The process includes a physical audit to validate the elements used in the construction and classification of the network, as well as the location of urban elements.

(iv)

Pedestrian continuity and the spatial distribution of urban elements are analyzed using GIS geoprocessing tools and statistical techniques.

2.1. Study Area

The study focuses on a representative sample of Panama City (Figure 1), covering an area of 26.25 km² with a population of approximately 209,305 inhabitants. To address the diversity of urban contexts, the study area was divided into two zones based on contrasting urban typologies (Figure 2): Zone A, representing a dense historic commercial area with a regular grid layout, and Zone B, characterized by fragmented land uses and an irregular street network. This division enables a comprehensive analysis of pedestrian mobility patterns across varied urban scenarios. The outcomes may be significantly impacted by disparities between zones due to variability in urban grid layout, as well as diverse land uses [33].

2.1.1. Zone A

Zone A encompasses a historic and commercial area with a high density of mixed land uses. It is characterized by older infrastructure and a mid-20th-century urbanization pattern, with its grid-like urban layout enhancing connectivity and facilitating pedestrian movement [34,35]. This zone, located partially within the Calidonia township and covering a total area of 1.62 km², includes aging pedestrian pathways and a dense traffic network that influence the mobility pattern.

2.1.2. Zone B

Zone B covers diverse land uses across five main townships: Curundú, Betania, Bella Vista, San Francisco, and Pueblo Nuevo, including dense residential areas [34] as well as commercial, institutional, and industrial zones. It also partially covers the districts of Calidonia and Victoriano Lorenzo. This extensive area, measuring 24.64 km², faces challenges related to the integration of functionally diverse areas in terms of both infrastructure and mobility.

The street network in Zone B is irregular and fragmented, which can lead to detours and longer routes for pedestrians. The irregularity in the layout reduces the efficiency of pedestrian routes, potentially discouraging walking due to the difficulty of finding direct paths, thereby creating barriers that affect accessibility [36,37]. Factors such as unplanned urban growth, uneven zoning, and topographic barriers contribute to this irregular distribution, affecting connectivity and pedestrian mobility in these settings [38,39].

2.2. Data Collection

A geodatabase (GDB) containing information on Panama’s townships was used. Based on these data and the delineation of the study area, polygonal elements were generated to represent the surfaces of the zones analyzed within the GIS environment. Inside this defined section, the pedestrian network was constructed and classified, and information related to urban elements was collected.

2.2.1. Pedestrian Continuity Data Collection

Figure 3 presents a sample of the workflow carried out to characterize pedestrian continuity; Figure 3a depicts a close-up of a specific section, serving as an example of the methodology applied in the entire study area. In Figure 3b, the main streets, represented by yellow lines, were identified and extracted from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowdsourcing practice that enables broad and continuous information gathering through diverse contributions, providing detailed coverage of dynamic urban areas [40].

As observed in Figure 3c, for the construction of the pedestrian network, linear entities were generated along both sides of the main roads, including pedestrian crossings (see points (ii) under pedestrian continuity and (iv) under pedestrian discontinuities). The linear entities were generated in GIS using information from the main roads and Google Earth Pro (GEP) satellite images from the year 2024—shown in Figure 3a—to position them along the central axis of the pedestrian path. A total of 121.78 km of pedestrian paths were documented, including 23.02 km in Zone A and 98.76 km in Zone B.

The pedestrian network was manually segmented within the GIS environment to separate the continuous paths, shown in green, and the discontinuous ones, shown in red, in Figure 3d. The segmentation of the network was conducted by consulting the previously mentioned satellite images, supported by GSV-based inspections through a type of virtual audit [11,32].

Each segment was subsequently categorized into types of pedestrian continuities, as shown in Figure 3e, or pedestrian discontinuities, as shown in Figure 3f, based on predefined criteria, with these categories distinguished by colors in the figures. A detailed view of each type of continuity and discontinuity considered can be observed in Figure 4.

Pedestrian continuity includes those segments where there are the following:

(i)

Sidewalks that are well-maintained and free of abrupt elevation changes or permanent obstructions, allowing a smooth pathway for pedestrians.

(ii)

Marked pedestrian crossings, as described by [7], which are formal crossings within the pedestrian network identified by visible horizontal signage. These crossings guide pedestrian movement using elements such as zebra crossings or pelican crossings; however, the latter is not commonly found in Panama City. Additionally, formal crossings may include those regulated by traffic lights and pedestrian bridges.

(iii)

During the step shown in Figure 3c, these linear entities were constructed by identifying zebra crossings, pedestrian traffic light-regulated intersections, and pedestrian bridges using GEP satellite imagery, as shown in Figure 3a, and then verifying and refining this information through GSV inspections and an existing GDB of formal crossings.

Pedestrian discontinuities, in contrast, refer to obstructions that completely break the continuous pathway. These are subdivided into the following:

(i)

Total absence of sidewalks, forcing pedestrians to walk on the road or in areas not designated for this purpose.

(ii)

Interruptions caused by commercial infrastructure, such as business entrances encroaching on pedestrian space.

(iii)

Service station interruptions, similar to those classified under “caused by commercial infrastructure” but specifically addressing this type of service-oriented establishment. The categorization of these interruptions enables a specific classification and a detailed analysis of their impact on pedestrian continuity.

(iv)

Pedestrian crossings without demarcation, where the lack of horizontal signage leads pedestrians to choose their own crossing points, creating multiple informal crossing zones. According to [7], such crossings usually take place at road intersections lacking formal crossings or when they are situated over 50 m away, subject to specific conditions described in their investigation.

(v)

Under these guidelines, during the stage shown in Figure 3c, potential informal crossings were identified and constructed using GEP satellite images and GSV inspections. Initially, GEP satellite images were used to locate intersections as shown in Figure 3a, followed by GSV inspections to verify the absence or poor visibility of pedestrian markings.

2.2.2. Urban Elements Data Collection

Formal pedestrian crossings and bus stops were analyzed using an existing GDB that represented these features as point entities. A total of 193 at-grade pedestrian crossings, 15 pedestrian bridges, and 234 bus stops were identified within the study area. Service stations, which were not included in the existing GDB, were manually identified and georeferenced using OSM and GEP. A total of 53 service stations were mapped and incorporated into the dataset.

2.3. Data Validation

Field visits were conducted to validate the pedestrian continuity and urban elements identified through the GDB. Visual inspections were performed along predefined study routes, particularly in areas where satellite images from GEP or GSV were obstructed by trees or other elements, capturing photos and videos to document the conditions of the pedestrian environment. The validation process compared the GIS-based data with field observations to ensure consistency and accuracy [32]. Field verification is essential due to the changing nature of sidewalk continuity, especially in dynamic urban areas like Panama City, where factors such as business interruptions or maintenance work can quickly affect conditions [41]. This included verifying the presence, location, and condition of elements such as sidewalks, crossings, and service stations, as well as recording any discrepancies due to changes in the built environment.

2.4. Data Processing

2.4.1. Pedestrian Continuity Data Processing

Descriptive and comparative statistical tests were applied, including measures of central tendency (mean, median) and dispersion (standard deviation, σ), to calculate average continuity lengths and assess variability across segments.

This phase included a 95% confidence interval (α = 0.05) to interpret data dispersion and capture continuity and discontinuity patterns in each urban zone. In studies of pedestrian continuity in fragmented urban areas, a 95% confidence interval allows for accurately capturing variability in segment length (L) and distribution. Research shows how confidence intervals aid in interpreting results in contexts with dispersed data, providing a certainty margin in areas with variable pedestrian infrastructure [42]. Furthermore, non-uniform infrastructure is suggested to impact pedestrian continuity and usage patterns [43].

2.4.2. Urban Elements Data Processing

A spatial analysis of service stations was conducted to assess their impact on pedestrian continuity and their areas of influence. Using GIS distance tools, the minimum and average distances between service stations were calculated to support the data analysis.

The data processing enabled the estimation of pedestrian discontinuities directly caused by the access points of each service station, facilitating the identification of patterns and the impacts of these facilities on urban pedestrian routes.

Buffer analysis was applied with radii ranging from 100 m to 1200 m, in increments of 100 m. The objective of this approach was to provide insights into the cumulative coverage of service stations and to analyze the spatial distribution of pedestrian discontinuities within these buffer zones.

Following the analysis of service stations, a similar approach was applied to other urban elements, including pedestrian crossings and bus stops. A point cloud representing these elements was analyzed using buffer techniques to assess their spatial distribution, while distance tools were used to evaluate proximity. Two key aspects were examined: the proximity between pedestrian crossings and the distance from bus stops to the nearest pedestrian crossing.

In selecting buffer distances for pedestrian analysis, previous studies have commonly considered various radii to assess access to transit stations. For instance, distances of 300 m [44,45,46] and 400 m [46,47], which correspond to an estimated 5 min walk [47], have been widely adopted. Furthermore, walking distances of 800 and 1200 m, corresponding to 10 to 15 min walks, and 1600 m, representing a 20 min walk [47], have been used to evaluate pedestrian access.

In this study, buffers were generated around each pedestrian crossing to identify areas where crossings may be spatially insufficient. These buffers were created with radii ranging from 100 m to 1500 m, in 100 m increments, following the same approach used for service station analysis to ensure comprehensive coverage of the study area.

3. Results

3.1. Pedestrian Continuity

Figure 5 illustrates the spatial distribution of pedestrian continuities, represented by green lines, and discontinuities, represented by red lines. The figure provides a view of pedestrian conditions in both Zones A and B and includes close-up views of specific sectors to visualize types of continuities and discontinuities.

The information presented in Figure 5 is detailed in

Table 1. Comparison of pedestrian continuity and discontinuity by zone.

Data	Types	Zone A (%) a	Relative A (%) b	Zone B (%) a	Relative B (%) b	Study Area (%) a	Rel. Study Area (%) b
Pedestrian continuity	Sidewalks	62.63	88.11	61.74	92.52	61.91	91.65
	Marked pedestrian crossings	8.45	11.89	4.99	7.48	5.64	8.35
Pedestrian discontinuity	Pedestrian crossings without demarcation	6.23	21.52	3.27	9.81	3.83	11.80
	Business interruptions	15.66	54.13	23.64	71.04	22.13	68.20
	Service station interruptions	0.36	1.25	1.76	5.28	1.49	4.59
	Absence of sidewalks	6.68	23.10	4.61	13.87	5.00	15.41

^a Represents the percentage of the analyzed zone; ^b represents the relative proportion within the pedestrian continuity or discontinuity category.

, which provides a quantitative breakdown of pedestrian continuity and discontinuity. As shown, sidewalks account for 61.91% of the total length of the pedestrian network, while marked crosswalks represent 5.64%. Together, these elements indicate that 67.55% of the whole pedestrian network analyzed is continuous. In contrast, the remaining 32.45% of the network is discontinuous. Zone A’s pedestrian network shows 71.08% continuity, whereas Zone B’s network shows 66.73%.

Table 1 provides an overview of relative composition of pedestrian discontinuities in the compared zones. It reveals that in Zone A, 21.52% of interruptions are caused by pedestrian crossings without demarcation, while in Zone B, they represent 9.81%. Regarding business interruptions, these account for 54.13% of total discontinuities in Zone A and 71.04% in Zone B. This suggests that in both zones, more than half of the pedestrian discontinuities are due to commercial infrastructure that interferes with continuity.

In Zone A, service stations generate a total of 82.67 m of discontinuity across three stations, with an average of 27.56 m of discontinuity per station, representing 1.25% of the total discontinuities in this zone. In Zone B, interruptions caused by service stations reach 1734.41 m, with 50 stations distributed along the study streets, yielding an average of 34.69 m of discontinuity per station and accounting for 5.28% of total discontinuities. In Zone B, the largest discontinuity generated by a single station is 74.73 m. These data indicate that Zone B not only has more service stations but also has a higher proportion of discontinuities caused by them, significantly contributing to the fragmentation of pedestrian continuity compared to Zone A.

The absence of sidewalks covers 1538.30 m in Zone A and 4556.05 m in Zone B. However, these values represent 23.10% of discontinuities in Zone A and 13.87% in Zone B. This suggests that although Zone B has a greater total length of area without sidewalks, its relative percentage is lower due to its larger extension. Thus, proportionally, Zone A has a higher ratio of areas without sidewalks in relation to its size.

By contrast, considering only the data from the continuous segments extracted from the analysis,

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of pedestrian continuity in Zones A and B.

Statistic	Mean (m)	Median (m)	σ (m)	Lmax (m)	95% CI (m)
Zone A	73.37	25.88	166.15	1716.14	[51.45, 95.3]
Zone B	45.60	22.27	77.40	1122.41	[41.61, 49.6]

shows that the mean length of continuous segments in Zone A is 73.37 m (σ = 166.15 m), while in Zone B, it is 45.60 m (σ = 77.40 m). This variability is reflected in the standard deviation, which is notably higher in Zone A compared to Zone B.

As shown in Figure 6, pedestrian continuity exhibits considerable fragmentation and variability, where the regular grid layout of Zone A enables more continuous pedestrian routes, whereas the irregular layout of Zone B introduces more interruptions in the pedestrian network.

Owing to the variability in the length of the continuous segments, Figure 7 presents a violin plot illustrating the analysis of these segments. The third quartile (Q3) of the segment lengths reaches up to 65.62 m in Zone A and up to 46.97 m in Zone B, as graphically represented in the violin plots. The wider sections indicate a higher concentration of continuous segment samples, particularly at lengths that fall below the typical pedestrian walking distances [48]. This suggests that although some segments are relatively long, a greater proportion of continuous segments in both zones are relatively short.

In Zone A, the longest recorded continuous segment extends approximately 1.72 km, while in Zone B it is 1.12 km, representing the maximum pedestrian continuity found in the urban network of each area. These values are high and considered outliers; therefore, they do not represent typical continuity patterns in each zone, as depicted in the violin plot presented in Figure 7.

3.2. Urban Elements

Within the analysis of pedestrian continuity, the impact of service stations on pedestrian discontinuities was characterized. These facilities represent a significant factor in interrupting pedestrian continuity, as each station within an area contributes to the fragmentation of pedestrian routes.

To further analyze the influence of discontinuities on the total extent, a specific spatial analysis of service stations was conducted. Figure 8 shows the zones of influence of each station: 25% of the area is within a radius of 205 m, 50% is within 315 m, and the entire area is covered with radii up to 1200 m. However, Zone A has a slightly smaller coverage radius of 1110 m.

Table 3. Distances between service stations in Zones A and B.

Zone	Max. (m)	Min. (m)	Average (m)
Zone A	741.78	674.07	696.64
Zone B	860.96	17.51	361.31

shows the distances between service stations in Zones A and B to contextualize their spatial distribution within the study area of the city. In Zone A, the stations are relatively more spaced, with an average distance of 696.64 m, while in Zone B, the average distance is significantly shorter at 361.31 m. This indicates that Zone A has a lower station density, with 1.86 stations per square kilometer, compared to 2.27 stations per square kilometer in Zone B, highlighting a higher concentration of stations in the latter.

Figure 9 shows the location of bus stops and pedestrian crossings. In Zone A, the average distance from bus stops to the nearest pedestrian crossing is 74.76 m, while in Zone B, it is 170.63 m. The overall average distance for the entire study area is 152.68 m.

Table 4. Percentage distribution of distances between bus stops and pedestrian crossings.

Zone	0–100 m	>100–150 m	>150–200 m	>200 m
Zone A	78.95%	15.79%	5.26%	0%
Zone B	47.27%	17.58%	8.48%	26.67%
Case of study	53.20%	17.24%	7.88%	21.67%

details the distribution of distance ranges between bus stops and formal pedestrian crossings, highlighting the greater proximity observed in Zone A, where 78.95% of the measured distances fall within 100 m. In contrast, Zone B exhibits more dispersed distances, with a significant amount of 26.67% exceeding 200 m. In the overall study, 46.79% of the measured distances between bus stops and formal pedestrian crossings exceed 100 m, while 21.67% exceed 200 m

In Zone A, the average distance between pedestrian crossings is 75.39 m (σ = 41.83 m), with the maximum distance between crossings being 338.59 m. In Zone B, the average distance is 154.32 m (σ = 129.06 m), and the maximum distance between crossings is 815.91 m. The overall average distance for the entire study area is 124.46 m (σ = 111.59 m).

Table 5. Percentage distribution of distances between pedestrian crossings.

Zone	0–100 m	>100–150 m	>150–200 m	>200 m
Zone A	87.67%	8.22%	2.74%	1.37%
Zone B	38.33%	20.83%	16.67%	24.17%
Case of study	56.99%	16.06%	11.40%	15.54%

provides a detailed distribution of the distance ranges between pedestrian crossings in the study area, highlighting the higher density of crossings in Zone A, where most crossings are within 100 m of each other. In contrast, Zone B exhibits more dispersed crossings, with a significant portion of distances exceeding 200 m.

Figure 10a shows the buffer zones around pedestrian crossings in Zone A, where the distribution of crossings reveals a high density within relatively short distances. The greater part of the area is covered by pedestrian crossings spaced within 400 m of each other, which indicates a well-connected network that supports efficient pedestrian movement. In contrast, Figure 10b highlights the greater separation between crossings in Zone B, with some areas exhibiting disconnections of more than 600 m, especially in the northern part of the zone.

4. Discussion

The analysis of pedestrian structures reveals that discontinuities in both zones are considerably frequent along typical pedestrian routes, resulting from a combination of urban factors that limit continuous routes. This finding underscores the degree of fragmentation in both areas, with notable differences in average continuity, highlighting a barrier to accessibility and mobility experiences for pedestrians within Panama City.

The continuous stretches of pedestrian routes in Zone A tend to be longer and more variable, a product of dense, regular urban planning that favors extensive pedestrian segments. In contrast, Zone B presents shorter continuous stretches with less variability, reflecting a less planned urban pattern. This irregular structure in Zone B implies more pronounced fragmentation, with less consistent pedestrian routes.

Zone A’s grid layout, combined with a more orderly mix of land uses, promotes longer and more direct pedestrian routes, although certain elements, such as service stations and unmarked crossings, create interruptions. Its grid-like, regular structure enhances street connectivity, facilitating shorter and more direct pedestrian routes. This regular layout allows pedestrians to follow linear routes, promoting greater pedestrian use of the space [49]. The connectivity of an urban grid directly influences the number of intersections and access points, improving the pedestrian experience by reducing physical barriers and maximizing accessible destinations within a walkable range [50]. In contrast, Zone B exhibits a more irregular urban configuration with a mix of commercial, residential, and industrial areas that limits pedestrian continuity.

Service stations in Zone B generate a greater proportion of discontinuities, reinforcing the idea that areas with an unbalanced mix of land uses tend to fragment pedestrian routes. The coexistence of different land uses in this area creates complex dynamics that impact pedestrian mobility. Pedestrian flows, influenced by commercial, industrial, and residential activities, can complicate connectivity between areas within the city. Although this diversity of uses fosters pedestrian activity and the use of public transportation, it also presents challenges due to a lack of infrastructure continuity, impacting integration between both systems [51].

The concentration of businesses in urban areas, while often seen as an asset for accessibility, can lead to significant interruptions in pedestrian mobility. Research emphasizes that urban functions, particularly land use and population density, significantly shape pedestrian movement and satisfaction. However, poorly planned commercial areas often prioritize vehicular access over continuous paths, disrupting the continuity of pedestrian networks, as observed in the case of Panama City. Studies highlight that while land use and population density influence pedestrian movement, proximity to services alone does not guarantee improved walkability [21]. Instead, inadequate integration of commercial regulations with pedestrian infrastructure exacerbates the fragmentation of pedestrian networks and undermines their effectiveness for sustainable mobility.

The impact assessment of these stations reveals that they promote car-oriented urban infrastructure [52,53]. Moreover, factors such as single-use zoning—which separates urban functions—and increased trip lengths, along with limited pedestrian and public transport accessibility, ultimately hinder pedestrian movement within the urban space [54,55].

Design guidelines recommend spacing crossings within 80–100 m to promote safe, predictable movement and reduce the likelihood of unsafe, non-designated crossings. Distances over 200 m should be avoided, as they create compliance and safety issues, increasing the chances of pedestrians choosing riskier, unauthorized crossing routes [56]. In Panama City, Zone A generally aligns with these guidelines, with most crossings within short distances, fostering a well-connected pedestrian network. In contrast, Zone B has larger gaps, with many crossings exceeding 100 m and some surpassing 200 m. These longer distances in Zone B may encourage pedestrians to bypass designated crossings in favor of more direct, unsafe routes, heightening the risk of pedestrian–vehicle conflicts.

The distance between bus stops and pedestrian crossings is crucial for both safety and the overall functionality of the transport network. In Zone B, where many bus stops exceed 100 m from crossings—and in some cases are more than 200 m—pedestrians are likely to take unsafe, non-designated routes, compromising safety and disrupting pedestrian flow. This mirrors the challenges observed with crossing density in Zone B, where long distances encourage risky crossings. In contrast, Zone A benefits from better alignment, with most bus stops within the recommended 100 m range, though some still exceed it.

This study highlights the relationship between urban structure and discontinuities in pedestrian networks. In Zone A, more coherent planning allows for better pedestrian continuity, although elements like service stations still create interruptions. Zone B, however, faces additional challenges due to its less organized structure and higher density of service stations. To improve pedestrian accessibility and mobility, it is essential for urban planning strategies to pursue a balanced integration of urban elements that favor pedestrian continuity.

The case of Panama City illustrates how accelerated urban expansion and lack of planning have significantly impacted pedestrian routes, contributing to a fragmented pedestrian network within the urban environment. This setting presents a diverse range of land uses that, while encouraging accessibility and travel purposes, also contribute to pedestrian discontinuities, according to the study. This situation is somewhat paradoxical, as varied land use tends to promote accessibility [57,58]; however, in this urban context, it has been one of the main causes of fragmentation in pedestrian routes.

5. Conclusions

This study highlights the significant role of urban configurations in shaping pedestrian continuity and underscores the necessity for cohesive urban planning to support sustainable mobility and equitable access. By comparing Zones A and B in Panama City, clear differences in pedestrian continuity emerged. Zone A’s structured grid layout enables longer and more consistent pedestrian routes, whereas Zone B’s irregular and fragmented structure exacerbates discontinuities, reducing mobility and compromising safety. These findings underline the broader impact of unplanned urban growth on pedestrian infrastructure.

Key findings reveal that service stations and insufficient pedestrian crossings are important contributors to interruptions in pedestrian continuity, particularly in Zone B, where a high density of service stations reflects a car-oriented infrastructure. These elements create barriers to pedestrian mobility and integration with public transport systems. Conversely, Zone A demonstrates better alignment with design guidelines for crossing density and bus stop placement, enhancing pedestrian safety and connectivity. Addressing these challenges requires urban planning strategies that prioritize integrating street networks and urban elements, such as redesigning service station layouts and improving pedestrian continuity within mixed land-use environments.

Policy measures should emphasize proper spacing of pedestrian crossings, strategic placement of public transport stops, and mitigation of barriers from commercial infrastructures. Additionally, the findings reveal an apparent contradiction in urban contexts: while varied land use can increase accessibility, it often coincides with fragmented pedestrian networks in poorly planned environments. This study further emphasizes the need for thorough consideration of continuity in research focused on the characterization of macro pedestrian networks, particularly in cases involving challenges related to urban planning and irregular urban grids.

The proposed framework for efficient urban planning, considering the Panamanian context—where pedestrian mobility is not prioritized in urban structuring—aims to enhance the role of pedestrians within the mobility hierarchy. This study identifies a divergence between land-use diversity and pedestrian continuity, which leads to two key reflections. First, in an urban context such as Panama City, pedestrian mobility requires a more prominent and integrated role within the mobility system. Second, the interaction between different types of continuity is recognized, highlighting how pedestrian continuity interconnects with other forms of continuity within the urban system. Urban planning policies should be directed toward an integrated system of planned continuities at the parcel level—one that considers both functionality and the dynamism of urban activities while maintaining pedestrian continuity as the primary structuring element linking the built environment with other transport modes.

Future research should explore institutional and regulatory frameworks influencing the spatial distribution of service stations and other commercial establishments. Understanding how these frameworks impact pedestrian networks, particularly in fragmented urban settings, could provide valuable insights for designing cohesive and equitable pedestrian infrastructure. Such studies would further equip urban planners and policymakers with actionable strategies to foster sustainable and inclusive urban mobility in rapidly growing cities.

Some limitations of this study arise from the fact that both the results and the comparisons between zones are presented solely in a descriptive manner. Furthermore, because the study focuses exclusively on pedestrian continuity, it does not directly measure whether continuity influences pedestrian flow or route choice, nor does it examine how pedestrian continuity might affect walkability or equity. In addition, as this study addresses the spatial distribution of urban elements, walking distances adjusted directly to pedestrian routes were not considered.