Urban Development Patterns: Keys to Influencing Travel Behavior

A growing amount of research has been conducted on the impact of urban form on travel behavior. Urban land use and transport planning are correlated and it is clear that urban structural parameters affect the residents’ degree of transport and their preference of modes of movement. Most countries have now implemented policies to reduce the distance traveled by private cars and to embrace the use of mass transit, cycling and walking. Development of compact urban forms and the designing of urban communities that promote walking are seen as incredibly effective strategies intended to curtail automobile-dependency.  A report affirms that by returning to the walking patterns of 30 years since when car ownership was rare that is to say, by walking just 1 hour more during the week, people could help save up to 11 MtCO2, (15.4%) of total emissions from passenger cars while also lowering the chances of obesity.

If over 80% of personal trips in a neighborhood are made by private automobiles, that community can be classified as immensely automobile-dependent. Today, backbone of most urban environmental initiatives is moderating auto-dependency. The need of the hour is to ensure urban land-use in a manner that downsizes the need for travelling by car. A lot of attention is being directed towards addressing travel growth by pushing for sustainable patterns of development where the design and structure of urban areas can facilitate a reduction in car travel.

Instinctively, when the urban form has been settled, travel patterns gravitate in an expected way. Research-based evidence on the influence of urban form on travel behavior; specifically, modal choice has proved that compact cities with larger built-up areas are associated with a high-efficient and low-carbon travel pattern. In compact localities, residents are disposed to embark on active travel modes such as walking and cycling to a higher degree and cars to a lower degree, while folks living on the outskirts showed limited active modes and used cars a great deal more. Broadly speaking, the outcome of multiple investigations suggests that dense city policies that are presently operational in cosmopolises can have a positive bearing on sustainability as they lead to briefer journey durations, increased active mobility and also higher use of mass transit in opposition to suburban sprawl policies. High-quality public transport systems linked to work establishments can considerably subdue the utilization regularity of cars, while highly mixed land-uses were found to be positively associated with transit, cycling and walking rates.

Studies on cities around the world have proved that compact and connected cities are a step ahead when it comes to being sustainable. Leapfrog development furthers urban sprawl and fuels car-dependency because it takes a longer time to reach destinations. Besides, cities are characterized by the interplay between land-use and the mode of travel. Cities with high density and mixed land-use boast a high share of walking and cycling. Low-density coupled with segregated land-use leads to an increased number of trips on personal automobiles. In addition, it is crucial to allow the physical integration of transport which requires planned land-use; when urban sprawl is contained, it makes way for the integration of public transport services, by multi-modal transfers and interchanges where commuters can effortlessly jump from one mode to another.

Inarguably, urban density makes it simpler to build public transport and low-density is discouraged because certain modes of mass transit aren’t economically feasible in such situations. When all the development is compact and mixed around transit, a trend towards using public transport is revealed while a dispersed development along highways will lead to ‘car-dominated’ travel pattern. Also, a mixed-use area must be urged for over segregated spaces. Due to diverse utilities, cheek to cheek, subsequently reducing the distances being traveled whilst enabling walking or biking. 

The spatial pattern is elemental to urban mobility and vertical urbanism allows for clustering features one upon another on a single patch of land, as opposed to a jumbled outspread. Furthermore, nodal development can also be sustainable, only if densification around the nodes is enforced. Ideally, a shift from linear to a circular urban pattern would reduce automobile travel while the grid, a chaotic pattern, poses a hazard for pedestrian safety and is unfavorable to public transport.

Transportation system users find unaffordability, a huge worry, being pushed into oblivion by traditional planning. Encouraging economical modes such as walking, cycling and public transit policies for smart growth require compact, mixed, multi-modal, transit-oriented development that reduces the distances traveled for essentials and increases travel options. Plus, urban development must make and transport climate-resilient by incorporating climate change concerns like rainfall and temperatures into urban planning. By climate-proofing urban transport, a switch to emission-intensive transport can be avoided. The vulnerability of the transit system to adverse weather can lead to a crash in walking and cycling, beyond a certain trip length, compelling residents to resort to motorized transport. Hence, the importance of dense urban design is emphasized, which can reduce travel demand.

In winding up, the interrelationship between urban form and urban mobility has provided some practical enlightenments into sustainable urban planning and development, and how urban design can be manipulated by advocating dense, compact cities, rich with mixed-use developments to bring about targeted travel behavior. Therefore, it is critical that travel behavior change initiatives are grounded in land-use planning.