IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v48y2021i7p1787-1805.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating pedestrian perceptions of street design with a 3D stated preference survey

Author

Listed:
  • Dena Kasraian

    (Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands)

  • Sneha Adhikari

    (University of Toronto, Canada)

  • David Kossowsky
  • Michael Luubert
  • G Brent Hall

    (Esri Canada Ltd, Canada)

  • Jason Hawkins
  • Khandker Nurul Habib
  • Matthew J Roorda

Abstract

In many places, streets are still primarily designed for the convenience of motorists, considering mobility function as the principal design goal. There is a scarcity of empirical evidence on the relationship between the design of a street and how it is experienced by pedestrians who use it. This work focuses on quantifying pedestrians’ perception of walkability through a stated preference survey using a dynamic 3D representation of various street designs in Toronto, Canada. The stated preference scenarios are generated through a rule-based 3D environment (Esri’s CityEngine) and animated using a gaming engine (Unity). A random sample of 600 Torontonians is used for the empirical investigation by estimating a mixed multinomial logit model. The results indicate that there is a high preference for (i) streets that include transit lanes as opposed to car-exclusive lanes, (ii) the presence of trees on the sidewalk, and (iii) two-way cycle paths on the curb lane. Furthermore, pedestrians are willing to trade sidewalk width for the presence of trees and outdoor dining. The survey’s innovative presentation mode and its findings can contribute to the development of much-needed evidence-based design tools to assess the trade-offs required between the many possible uses of roadway space, while focusing on the overlooked role of the pedestrian experience.

Suggested Citation

  • Dena Kasraian & Sneha Adhikari & David Kossowsky & Michael Luubert & G Brent Hall & Jason Hawkins & Khandker Nurul Habib & Matthew J Roorda, 2021. "Evaluating pedestrian perceptions of street design with a 3D stated preference survey," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 48(7), pages 1787-1805, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:48:y:2021:i:7:p:1787-1805
    DOI: 10.1177/2399808320946050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2399808320946050
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2399808320946050?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reid Ewing & Robert Cervero, 2010. "Travel and the Built Environment," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(3), pages 265-294.
    2. Zohreh Asadi-Shekari & Mehdi Moeinaddini & Muhammad Zaly Shah, 2013. "Non-motorised Level of Service: Addressing Challenges in Pedestrian and Bicycle Level of Service," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 166-194, March.
    3. Kelly, C.E. & Tight, M.R. & Hodgson, F.C. & Page, M.W., 2011. "A comparison of three methods for assessing the walkability of the pedestrian environment," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1500-1508.
    4. Nancy Hui & Shoshanna Saxe & Matthew Roorda & Paul Hess & Eric J. Miller, 2018. "Measuring the completeness of complete streets," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 73-95, January.
    5. Arlie Adkins & Jennifer Dill & Gretchen Luhr & Margaret Neal, 2012. "Unpacking Walkability: Testing the Influence of Urban Design Features on Perceptions of Walking Environment Attractiveness," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 499-510.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Siti Raudhatul Fadilah & Hiroaki Nishiuchi & An Minh Ngoc, 2022. "The Impact of Traffic Information Provision and Prevailing Policy on the Route Choice Behavior of Motorcycles Based on the Stated Preference Experiment: A Preliminary Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-21, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ahmad Adeel & Bruno Notteboom & Ansar Yasar & Kris Scheerlinck & Jeroen Stevens, 2021. "Sustainable Streetscape and Built Environment Designs around BRT Stations: A Stated Choice Experiment Using 3D Visualizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-21, June.
    2. Maria Grazia Bellizzi & Carmen Forciniti & Gabriella Mazzulla, 2021. "A Stated Preference Survey for Evaluating Young Pedestrians’ Preferences on Walkways," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-12, November.
    3. Maria Johansson & Catharina Sternudd & Mattias Kärrholm, 2016. "Perceived urban design qualities and affective experiences of walking," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 256-275, April.
    4. Yu, Haitao & Peng, Zhong-Ren, 2019. "Exploring the spatial variation of ridesourcing demand and its relationship to built environment and socioeconomic factors with the geographically weighted Poisson regression," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 147-163.
    5. Sheila Ferrer & Tomás Ruiz, 2017. "Comparison on travel scheduling between driving and walking trips by habitual car users," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 27-48, January.
    6. Millward, Hugh & Spinney, Jamie & Scott, Darren, 2013. "Active-transport walking behavior: destinations, durations, distances," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 101-110.
    7. Tufail Ahmed & Mehdi Moeinaddini & Meshal Almoshaogeh & Arshad Jamal & Imran Nawaz & Fawaz Alharbi, 2021. "A New Pedestrian Crossing Level of Service (PCLOS) Method for Promoting Safe Pedestrian Crossing in Urban Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-18, August.
    8. McGreevy, Michael & Harris, Patrick & Delaney-Crowe, Toni & Fisher, Matt & Sainsbury, Peter & Riley, Emily & Baum, Fran, 2020. "How well do Australian government urban planning policies respond to the social determinants of health and health equity?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    9. Ana Margarita Larranaga & Julián Arellana & Luis Ignacio Rizzi & Orlando Strambi & Helena Beatriz Bettella Cybis, 2019. "Using best–worst scaling to identify barriers to walkability: a study of Porto Alegre, Brazil," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2347-2379, December.
    10. Yi Lu, 2018. "The Association of Urban Greenness and Walking Behavior: Using Google Street View and Deep Learning Techniques to Estimate Residents’ Exposure to Urban Greenness," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-15, July.
    11. Carmen Lizárraga & Cathaysa Martín-Blanco & Isabel Castillo-Pérez & Jorge Chica-Olmo, 2022. "Do University Students’ Security Perceptions Influence Their Walking Preferences and Their Walking Activity? A Case Study of Granada (Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, February.
    12. Ali SOLTANI & Mohammad HOSSEINPOUR & Parisa ZARE, 2018. "The Development And Assessment Of Environmental Features Associated With Walkability Of Urban Streets," Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 13(1), pages 22-36, February.
    13. Calvin P Tribby & Harvey J Miller & Barbara B Brown & Carol M Werner & Ken R Smith, 2017. "Analyzing walking route choice through built environments using random forests and discrete choice techniques," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 44(6), pages 1145-1167, November.
    14. Liu, Yanan & Yang, Dujuan & Timmermans, Harry J.P. & de Vries, Bauke, 2020. "Analysis of the impact of street-scale built environment design near metro stations on pedestrian and cyclist road segment choice: A stated choice experiment," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    15. Mona Jabbari & Fernando Fonseca & Rui Ramos, 2018. "Combining multi-criteria and space syntax analysis to assess a pedestrian network: the case of Oporto," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 23-41, January.
    16. Peiravian, Farideddin & Derrible, Sybil & Ijaz, Farukh, 2014. "Development and application of the Pedestrian Environment Index (PEI)," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 73-84.
    17. Hamid Motieyan & Farnaz Kaviari & Nikrouz Mostofi, 2022. "Quantifying walking capability: a novel aggregated index based on spatial perspective and analyses," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 101(2), pages 483-503, April.
    18. Ivan Blečić & Tanja Congiu & Giovanna Fancello & Giuseppe Andrea Trunfio, 2020. "Planning and Design Support Tools for Walkability: A Guide for Urban Analysts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-18, May.
    19. Trichês Lucchesi, Shanna & Larranaga, Ana Margarita & Bettella Cybis, Helena Beatriz & Abreu e Silva, João António de & Arellana, Julian Alberto, 2021. "Are people willing to pay more to live in a walking environment? A multigroup analysis of the impact of walkability on real estate values and their moderation effects in two Global South cities," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    20. UnHyo Kim & Jeongwoo Lee & Sylvia Y. He, 2021. "Pedestrianization Impacts on Air Quality Perceptions and Environment Satisfaction: The Case of Regenerated Streets in Downtown Seoul," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-16, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:48:y:2021:i:7:p:1787-1805. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.