1995Unpublished venueRequires access

Travel Choices in Pedestrian Versus Automobile Oriented Neighborhoods - eScholarship

Robert Cervero, Carolyn Radisch

Open publisher page 8 citations

Abstract

The New Urbanism movement calls for redesigning American neighborhoods so that they are less oriented toward automobile travel and more conducive to walking, bicycling, and transit riding, especially for non-work trips. New Urbanism calls for a return to compact neighborhoods with grid-like street patterns, mixed land uses, and pedestrian amenities. This paper investigates the effects of New Urbanism design principles on both non-work and commuting travel by comparing modal splits between two distinctly different neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area. The neo-traditional neighborhood, Rockridge, and the nearby conventional suburban community, Lafayette, were chosen as case studies because they have similar income profiles, freeway and transit service levels, and geographical locations. Rockridge residents averaged around a 10 percent higher share of non-work trips by non-automobile modes than did residents of Lafayette, controlling for relevant factors like income and transit service levels. The greatest differences were for shop trips under one mile. Modal splits were more similar for work trips, confirming the proposition that neighborhood design practices exert their greatest influence on local shopping trips and other non-work purposes. For work trips, compact, mixed-use, and pedestrian-oriented development appears to have the strongest effect on access trips to rail stations, in particular inducing higher shares of access trips by foot and bicycle.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The New Urbanism movement calls for redesigning American neighborhoods so that they are less oriented toward automobile travel and more conducive to walking, bicycling, and transit riding, especially for non-work trips. New Urbanism calls for a return to compact neighborhoods with grid-like street patterns, mixed land uses, and pedestrian amenities. This paper investigates the effects of New Urbanism design principles on both non-work and commuting travel by comparing modal splits between two distinctly different neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area. The neo-traditional neighborhood, Rockridge, and the nearby conventional suburban community, Lafayette, were chosen as case studies because they have similar income profiles, freeway and transit service levels, and geographical locations. Rockridge residents averaged around a 10 percent higher share of non-work trips by non-automobile modes than did residents of Lafayette, controlling for relevant factors like income and transit service levels. The greatest differences were for shop trips under one mile. Modal splits were more similar for work trips, confirming the proposition that neighborhood design practices exert their greatest influence on local shopping trips and other non-work purposes. For work trips, compact, mixed-use, and pedestrian-oriented development appears to have the strongest effect on access trips to rail stations, in particular inducing higher shares of access trips by foot and bicycle.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 8 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The New Urbanism movement calls for redesigning American neighborhoods so that they are less oriented toward automobile travel and more conducive to walking, bicycling, and transit riding, especially for non-work trips. New Urbanism calls for a return to compact neighborhoods with grid-like street patterns, mixed land uses, and pedestrian amenities. This paper investigates the effects of New Urbanism design principles on both non-work and commuting travel by comparing modal splits between two distinctly different neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area. The neo-traditional neighborhood, Rockridge, and the nearby conventional suburban community, Lafayette, were chosen as case studies because they have similar income profiles, freeway and transit service levels, and geographical locations. Rockridge residents averaged around a 10 percent higher share of non-work trips by non-automobile modes than did residents of Lafayette, controlling for relevant factors like income and transit service levels. The greatest differences were for shop trips under one mile. Modal splits were more similar for work trips, confirming the proposition that neighborhood design practices exert their greatest influence on local shopping trips and other non-work purposes. For work trips, compact, mixed-use, and pedestrian-oriented development appears to have the strongest effect on access trips to rail stations, in particular inducing higher shares of access trips by foot and bicycle.

Key concepts: TRIPS architecture, Transport engineering, Pedestrian, Work (physics), Geography, Service (business), Travel behavior, New Urbanism

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Travel Choices in Pedestrian Versus Automobile Oriented Neighborhoods - eScholarship — Research Paper | ScholarLens