This paper investigates the impact of pedestrian environments on walking behavior, and the related choice of travel path for transit riders. Activity logs from trip surveys combined with transit-route and land-use information are used to fit discrete-choice models of how riders choose among multiple paths to downtown destinations. The work illustrates (1) how the quality of pedestrian environments along transit egress paths affects transfers inside a transit system, and (2) how the impedance of transferring affects egress walking path choices. The use of GIS techniques for path-based spatial analysis is key to understanding the impact of pedestrian environments on walking behavior at the street level. The results show that desirable pedestrian environments encourage transit riders to choose paths that are ‘friendlier’, even if they involve more walking after leaving transit. Policy implications for land-use planning and transit service planning are discussed.
BoarnetMCraneR, 2001, “The influence of land use on travel behavior: Specifications and estimation strategies”Transportation Research Part A35823–845
3.
BoarnetMSarmientoS, 1998, “Can land use policy really affect travel behavior? A study of the link between non-work travel and land use characteristics”Urban Studies351155–1169
4.
Central Transportation Planning Staff, 1997, “Transfer penalties in urban mode choice modeling”, report prepared for the Travel Model Improvement Program, FTS, US Department of Transportation
5.
CerveroR, 2002, “Built environments and mode choice: Towards a normative framework”Transportation Research Part D7265–284
6.
CerveroRKockelmanK, 1997, “Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design”Transportation Research Part D2199–217
7.
CrockettC, 2002, “A process for improving transit service connectivity”, unpublished MST thesis, Center of Transportation and Logistics, MIT
8.
EagleT, 1988, “Context effects in consumer spatial behavior”, in Behavioural Modelling in Geography and Planning Eds GolledgeRGTimmermansH (Croom Helm, London) pp 299–324
9.
EwingR, 1966, “Appendix C”, in Pedestrian- and Transit-Friendly Design (American Planning Association, Chicago, IL) pp 83–92
10.
FrankLDPivoG, 1994, “Impacts of mixed use and density on utilization of three modes of travel: Single-occupant vehicle, transit, and walking”Transportation Research Record number 1466, 44–51
11.
FrankLDSallisJFConwayTLChapmanJESaelensBEBachmanW, 2006, “Many pathways from land use to health: Associations between neighborhood walkability and active transportation, body mass index, and air quality”Journal of the American Planning Association7275–87
12.
GehlJ, 1987Life Between Buildings (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York)
13.
Giles-CortiBBroomhallMKnuimanMCollinsCDouglasKNgKLangeADonovanR, 2005, “Increasing walking: How important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open space?”American Journal of Preventive Medicine28(2S2) 169–176
14.
GreenwaldMBoarnetM, 2001, “Built environment as determinant of walking behavior: Analyzing non-work pedestrian travel in Portland, Oregon”Transportation Research Record number 1780, 33–42
15.
GuoZ, 2003, “Assessment of the transfer penalty: a GIS-based disaggregate modeling approach”, unpublished master's thesis, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, MIT
16.
GuoZWilsonN, 2004, “Assessment of the transfer penalty: A GIS-based disaggregate modeling approach”Transportation Research Record number 1872, 10–19
17.
HandyS, 2005, “Does the built environment influence physical activity? Examining the evidence”, Special Report number 282 (Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC)
18.
HessPMoudonASnyderMStanilovK, 1999, “Site design and pedestrian travel”Transportation Research Record number 1674, 9–19
19.
HillierBPennAHansonJGrajewskyTXuJ, 1993, “Natural movement: Or, configuration and attraction in urban pedestrian movement”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design2029–66
20.
Hoogendoorn-LanserS, 2005Modelling Travel Behavior in Multi-modal Networks TRAIL Thesis Series T2005/4, TRAIL Research School, Delft
21.
HowardCBurnsE, 2001, “Cycling to work in Phoenix: Route choice, travel behavior, and commuter characteristics”Transportation Research Record number 1773, 39–46
22.
KitamuraRMokhtarianPALaidetL, 1997, “A micro-analysis of land use and travel in five neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area”Transportation24125–158
23.
KrugerM, 1980, “An approach to built-form connectivity at an urban scale: Relationship between built-form connectivity, adjacency measures, and urban spatial structure”Environment and Planning B7163–194
24.
LandisBWVattikutiVROttenbergRMMcLeodDSGuttenplanM, 2001, “Modeling the roadside walking environment: a pedestrian level of service”, Transportation Research Board paper 01–0511
25.
LevineJ, 1998, “Rethinking accessibility and jobs-housing balance”Journal of the American Planning Association64133–149
26.
LiS, 1994, “Users' behavior of small urban spaces in winter and marginal seasons”Architecture and Behavior1095–109
27.
LiuRPendyalaRPolzinS, 1997, “Assessment of intermodal transfer penalties using stated preference data”Transportation Research Record number 1607, 74–80
28.
OppewalHTimmermansH, 1999, “Modeling consumer perception of public space in shopping centers”Environment and Behavior3145–65
29.
RodriguezDJooJ, 2004, “The relationship between non-motorized mode choice and the local physical environment”Transportation Research Part D9151–173
30.
RodríguezDKhattakAJEvensonKR, 2006, “Can New Urbanism encourage physical activity? Comparing a New Urbanist neighborhood with conventional suburbs”Journal of the American Planning Association7243–56
31.
RottenJShatsMStandersR, 1990, “Temperature and pedestrian tempo”Environment and Behavior22650–674
SrinivasanSFerreiraJ, 1998, “Comparing trip chaining behavior in center city versus suburbs: using GIS to understand the link between spatial characteristics and trip chaining in the Boston Metropolitan area”, paper presented at American Collegiate School of Planning conference, Pasadena; copy available from second author
34.
StampsA, 2000Psychology and the Aesthetics of the Built Environment (Kluwer, Dordrecht)
35.
WaldmanMHineJStradlingS, 2001Interchange and Travel Choice Volume 1Scottish Executive Central Research Unit, 2J Victoria Quay, Edinburgh
36.
ZachariasJ, 2001, “Pedestrian behavior and perception in urban walking environment”Journal of Planning Literature162–18
37.
ZhangM, 2001, “Conditions and effectiveness of land use as a mobility tool”, unpublished dissertation, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, MIT
