Research on urban walkability does not always make a clear distinction between design features supporting walkability and those leading to a sense of urban liveliness. Walkability, for this article’s purposes, entails the opportunity for continuous movement across some distance and therefore engages both the local and global street networks. Urban liveliness, by contrast, may exist in isolated pockets that provide limited support for physical activity. This case study of a large, urban smart growth development in Atlanta, Georgia, provides an example of a new development with characteristics that suggest a high degree of walkability. However, observational data show pedestrians are clumped on relatively few street segments rather than distributed throughout the site, indicating it is unlikely that the site is hosting much walking between the development and its surrounds. This descriptive case study is intended to contribute to more explicit theory of how environmental design contributes to walking.
BafnaS. (2003). Space syntax: A brief introduction to its logic and analytical techniques. Environment and Behavior, 35, 17-29.
2.
BoarnetM.ForsythA.DayK.OakesJ. M. (2011). Irvine Minnesota inventory short forms: Results of a predictive validity study. Environment and Behavior, 43(6), 735-775.
3.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2005). Trends in leisure-time physical inactivity by age, sex, and race/ethnicity—United States, 1994–2004. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 54(39), 991-994.
4.
CerveroR. (2006). Alternative approaches to modeling the travel-demand impacts of smart growth. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72, 285-295.
5.
CerveroR.KockelmanR. (1997). Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2, 199-219.
6.
CliftonK. J.Livi SmithA.RodriguezD. (2007). The development and testing of an audit for the pedestrian environment. Landscape and Urban Planning, 80, 95-110.
7.
DayK.BoarnetM.AlfonzoM.ForsythA. (2006). The Irvine-Minnesota inventory to measure built environments: Development. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 30(2), 144-52.
8.
EwingR.BartholomewK.WinkelmanS.WaltersJ.ChenD. (2008). Growing cooler, evidence on urban development and climate change. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
9.
EwingR.CerveroR. (2010). Travel and the built environment: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(3), 265-294.
10.
Federal Housing Administration. (1935). Subdivision development: Standards for the insurance of mortgages on properties located in undeveloped subdivisions: Title II of the National Housing Act, circular 5. US Government Printing Office: Washington, DC.
11.
FrankL.SchmidT.SallisJ.ChapmanJ.SaelensB. (2005). Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form: Findings from SMARTRAQ. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28, 117-125.
12.
HessP. M.MoudonA. V.SnyderM. C.StanilovK. (1999). Site design and pedestrian travel. Transportation Research Record, 1674, 9-18.
13.
HillJ. O.PetersJ. C. (1998). Environmental contributions to the obesity epidemic. Science, 280, 1371-1374.
14.
HillierB.HansonJ. (1984). The social logic of space. New York, NY: University of Cambridge.
15.
HillierB.PennA.HansonJ.GrajewskiT.XuJ. (1993). Natural movement: Configuration and attraction in urban pedestrian movement. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 20, 29-66.
16.
IttelsonW. H.RivlinL. G.ProshanskyH. M. (1970). The use of behavioral maps in environmental psychology. In ProshanskyH. M.IttelsonW. H.RivlinL. G. (Eds.), Environmental psychology: Man and his physical setting (pp. 658-668). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
17.
LeviJ.VinterS.St.LaurentR.SegalL. M. (2010). F as in fat: How obesity threatens America’s future. Washington, DC: Trust for America’s Health.
18.
LundH.WilsonR. W.CerveroR. (2006). A re-evaluation of travel behavior in California TODs. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 23, 247-263.
19.
MarcusC. C. (1990). From the pragmatic to the spiritual. In AltmanI.ChristensenK. (Eds.), Environment and behavior studies: Emergence of intellectual traditions (pp. 111-140). New York, NY: Plenum.
20.
MarksH. (1957). Subdividing for traffic safety. Traffic Quarterly, 11(3), 308-325.
21.
MarksH. (1961). Geometrics of local and collector streets. ITE Proceedings, 31st annual meeting. ITE: Washington, DC.
22.
McCormackG.Giles-CortiB.BulsaraM. (2008). The relationship between destination proximity, destination mix and physical activity behaviors. Preventive Medicine, 46, 33-40.
23.
MoudonA. V.LeeC.CheadleA. D.GarvinC.JohnsonD.SchmidT. L.WeathersR.LinL. (2006). Operational definitions of walkable neighborhood: Theoretical and empirical insights. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 3(Sup. 1), S99–S117.
24.
ÖzbilA. (2007). Pedestrian movement in three Atlanta neighborhoods. Unpublished manuscript.
25.
ÖzbilA.PeponisJ. (2007). Modeling street connectivity and pedestrian movement according to standard GIS street network representations. Proceedings, 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, Istanbul, 01801-01810.
26.
PeponisJ.HadjinikolaouE.LivieratosC.FatourosD. A. (1989). The spatial core of urban culture. Ekistics, 334-335, 43-55.
27.
PeponisJ.RossC.RashidM. (1997). The structure of urban space, movement, and co-presence: The case of Atlanta. Geoforum, 28, 341-358.
28.
Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee. (2008). Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report, 2008. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
29.
PikoraT.BullF.JamrozikK.KnuimanM.Giles-CortiB.DonovanR. (2002). Developing a reliable audit instrument to measure the physical environment for physical activity. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 23, 187-194.
30.
SallisJ. F. (2009). Measuring physical activity environments: A brief history. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 36, S86-S92.
31.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2000). Finding of no significant impact for 17th street extension [GDOT Project NH-7141-00(900), P.I. Number 714190] and Atlantic Steel Redevelopment Project Fulton County, Georgia. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/projectxl/atlantic/fonsi.pdf
32.
YeL.MandpeS.MeyerP. B. (2005). What is “smart growth?”—Really?Journal of Planning Literature, 19, 301-315.
