Impact of Neighborhood Walkability on Trip Generation and Trip Chaining: Case of Los Angeles

AbstractThe purpose of this study was to test whether a compact neighborhood design is associated with trip-chaining behavior. Trip chaining is regarded as a growing phenomenon in travel and activity behavior because people seek to minimize the travel time and cost required to accomplish their daily activities based on the available time budget and other needs. In this study, trip-chaining patterns were examined over a survey day, giving insight into the association between land use and the planning of the trip and its distance, as well as the preferred mode of transportation. A tour consists of a combination of individual trips, including all of the stops that are made along the way. A series of multivariate models was used separately for different types of tours segmented into simple (one destination) and complex (more than one destination), and into work and nonwork tours. The results confirmed the idea that trip chaining diminishes the likelihood of using nonmotorized modes of transportation. In addit...

[1]  Michael N. Bagley,et al.  The impact of residential neighborhood type on travel behavior: A structural equations modeling approach , 2001 .

[2]  R. Cervero,et al.  Travel Choices in Pedestrian Versus Automobile Oriented Neighborhoods - eScholarship , 1995 .

[3]  H. Timmermans,et al.  Influence of Land Use on Tour Complexity: A Dutch Case , 2006 .

[4]  K. Krizek.  Operationalizing Neighborhood Accessibility for Land Use-Travel Behavior Research and Regional Modeling , 2003 .

[5]  J. Sallis,et al.  The development of a walkability index: application to the Neighborhood Quality of Life Study , 2009, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[6]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  PII: S0965-8564(99)00043-9 , 2000 .

[7]  Chandra R. Bhat,et al.  A Comprehensive Analysis of Built Environment Characteristics on Household Residential Choice and Auto Ownership Levels , 2007 .

[8]  R. Kitamura.  An evaluation of activity-based travel analysis , 1988 .

[9]  D. McFadden,et al.  Specification tests for the multinomial logit model , 1984 .

[10]  Xin Ye,et al.  An Exploration of the Relationship Between Mode Choice and Complexity of Trip Chaining Patterns , 2007 .

[11]  S. Shaheen,et al.  Achieving California’s Land Use and Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emission Targets Under AB 32: An Exploration of Potential Policy Processes and Mechanisms , 2009 .

[12]  Jaisung Choi,et al.  Roadside walking environments and major factors affecting pedestrian level of service , 2013 .

[13]  Susan L Handy,et al.  Regional Versus Local Accessibility: Implications for Nonwork Travel , 1993 .

[14]  Yoram Shiftan,et al.  The use of activity-based modeling to analyze the effect of land-use policies on travel behavior , 2008 .

[15]  L. Frank,et al.  Urban form, travel time, and cost relationships with tour complexity and mode choice , 2007 .

[16]  K. Sundquist,et al.  Neighborhood walkability, physical activity, and walking behavior: the Swedish Neighborhood and Physical Activity (SNAP) study. , 2011, Social science & medicine.

[17]  Marlon G. Boarnet,et al.  Travel by design : the influence of urban form on travel , 2001 .

[18]  Chulmin Jun,et al.  An empirical study on sustainable walkability indices for transit-oriented development by using the analytic network process approach , 2011 .

[19]  Dominic Stead,et al.  Land Use and Travel Behaviour: Expected Effects from the Perspective of Utility Theory and Activity-Based Theories , 2005 .

[20]  W. G. Hansen.  How Accessibility Shapes Land Use , 1959 .

[21]  Soora Rasouli,et al.  Activity-based models of travel demand: promises, progress and prospects , 2014 .

[22]  S. O’sullivan,et al.  Walking Distances to and from Light-Rail Transit Stations , 1996 .

[23]  Torsten Hägerstraand.  WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE IN REGIONAL SCIENCE , 1970 .

[24]  Harry Timmermans,et al.  Capturing tour mode and activity choice interdependencies: A co-evolutionary logit modelling approach , 2007 .

[25]  J. Sallis,et al.  Neighborhood built environment and income: examining multiple health outcomes. , 2009, Social science & medicine.

[26]  K. Krizek.  Neighborhood services, trip purpose, and tour-based travel , 2003 .

[27]  A. Bauman,et al.  Neighborhood walkability and the walking behavior of Australian adults. , 2007, American journal of preventive medicine.

[28]  Petter Næss.  Residential Self‐Selection and Appropriate Control Variables in Land Use: Travel Studies , 2009 .

[29]  J. Sallis,et al.  Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: Findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures , 2003, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[30]  M. Boarnet,et al.  Can Land Use Policy Really Affect Travel Behavior? A Study of the Link between Non-Work Travel and Land Use Characteristics , 1996 .

[31]  Douglas Crawford-Brown,et al.  Short trips: An opportunity for reducing mobile-source emissions? , 2010 .

[32]  Jeongwoo Lee,et al.  Perceived Neighborhood Environment and Transit Use in Low-Income Populations , 2013 .

[33]  D. Brownstone,et al.  The Impact of Residential Density on Vehicle Usage and Energy Consumption , 2005 .

[34]  P. Mokhtarian,et al.  Self-Selection in the Relationship between the Built Environment and Walking: Empirical Evidence from Northern California , 2006 .