BACKGROUND: Complete streets require evaluation to determine if they encourage active transportation. METHODS: Data were collected before and after a street intervention provided new light rail, bike lanes, and better sidewalks in Salt Lake City, Utah. Residents living near (<800 m) and far (≥801 to 2000 m) from the street were compared, with sensitivity tests for alternative definitions of near (<600 and <1000 m). Dependent variables were accelerometer/global positioning system (GPS) measures of transit trips, nontransit walking trips, and biking trips that included the complete street corridor. RESULTS: Active travel trips for Near-Time 2 residents, the group hypothesized to be the most active, were compared with the other 3 groups (Near-Time 1, Far-Time 1, and Far-Time 2), net of control variables. Near-Time 2 residents were more likely to engage in complete street transit walking trips (35%, adjusted) and nontransit walking trips (50%) than the other 3 groups (24% to 25% and 13% to 36%, respectively). Bicycling was less prevalent, with only 1 of 3 contrasts significant (10% of Near-Time 2 residents had complete street bicycle trips compared with 5% of Far-Time 1 residents). CONCLUSIONS: Living near the complete street intervention supported more pedestrian use and possibly bicycling, suggesting complete streets are also public health interventions.
BACKGROUND: Complete streets require evaluation to determine if they encourage active transportation. METHODS: Data were collected before and after a street intervention provided new light rail, bike lanes, and better sidewalks in Salt Lake City, Utah. Residents living near (<800 m) and far (≥801 to 2000 m) from the street were compared, with sensitivity tests for alternative definitions of near (<600 and <1000 m). Dependent variables were accelerometer/global positioning system (GPS) measures of transit trips, nontransit walking trips, and biking trips that included the complete street corridor. RESULTS: Active travel trips for Near-Time 2 residents, the group hypothesized to be the most active, were compared with the other 3 groups (Near-Time 1, Far-Time 1, and Far-Time 2), net of control variables. Near-Time 2 residents were more likely to engage in complete street transit walking trips (35%, adjusted) and nontransit walking trips (50%) than the other 3 groups (24% to 25% and 13% to 36%, respectively). Bicycling was less prevalent, with only 1 of 3 contrasts significant (10% of Near-Time 2 residents had complete street bicycle trips compared with 5% of Far-Time 1 residents). CONCLUSIONS: Living near the complete street intervention supported more pedestrian use and possibly bicycling, suggesting complete streets are also public health interventions.
Entities:
Keywords:
active transportation; global positioning system (GPS); light rail
Authors: Richard P Troiano; David Berrigan; Kevin W Dodd; Louise C Mâsse; Timothy Tilert; Margaret McDowell Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Sarah Jarjour; Michael Jerrett; Dane Westerdahl; Audrey de Nazelle; Cooper Hanning; Laura Daly; Jonah Lipsitt; John Balmes Journal: Environ Health Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 5.984
Authors: Stephen J Mooney; Caroline Magee; Kolena Dang; Julie C Leonard; Jingzhen Yang; Frederick P Rivara; Beth E Ebel; Ali Rowhani-Rahbar; D Alex Quistberg Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Wyatt A Jensen; Barbara B Brown; Ken R Smith; Simon C Brewer; Jonathan W Amburgey; Brett McIff Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-09-05 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Francesca L Pontin; Victoria L Jenneson; Michelle A Morris; Graham P Clarke; Nik M Lomax Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2022-09-14 Impact factor: 8.915