Compact, Walkable, Diverse Neighborhoods:Assessing Effects on Residents

Abstract

What research supports the view that compact, walkable, diverse (CWD) neighborhoods are beneficial for urban residents? To make this assessment, we searched the literature to try to understand the current status of evidence regarding claims about the CWD neighborhood. We find that research linking CWD neighborhoods to effects on residents coalesces around three main topics: social relations, health, and safety. We conclude that on the basis of the literature reviewed, most of the intended benefits of the CWD neighborhood have been researched and found to have significant, positive effects for urban dwellers. While physical factors are but one element affecting behavior and outcomes, and the issues of self-selection and causality remain, overall, key dimensions of the CWD neighborhood have been found to positively affect social interaction, health, and safety.

Keywords::

• urban planning
• smart growth
• neighborhood
• walkability
• urban form

Acknowledgments

The work that provided the basis for this publication was supported by funding under an award with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (Grant AZSRM0001-11). The substance and findings of the work are dedicated to the public. The author and publisher are solely responsible for the accuracy of the statements and interpretations contained in this publication. Such interpretations do not necessarily reflect the views of the Government.

Notes

^1. CWD neighborhoods can, and do, vary in terms of specific design features like block size, street type, building forms, and mix of amenities. Our focus is on the general parameters of the CWD neighborhood as a type distinct from auto-dependent, single-use suburbs.

^2. This statistic is based on a Walk Score of 70 or higher, obtained at the block group level for 359 metro areas. Information on Walk Score's algorithm and rating system can be found at http://www.walkscore.com/.

^3. The following journals were included: Planning/Design—Journal of Urban Design, Journal of the American Planning Association, Urban Studies, Environment and Planning, Journal of Planning Education and Research, Urban Design International, Environment and Planning A and B; Health—American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Journal of Physical Activity and Health, Health and Place, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, American Journal of Health Promotion, American Journal of Community Psychology, American Journal of Public Health, British Journal of Sports Medicine, Environmental Psychology, Annals of Behavioral Medicine, International Journal of Health Geographics, Preventive Medicine, Environment and Behavior, Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations, International Journal of Pediatric Obesity, Health Affairs, International Journal of Obesity, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Canadian Journal of Public Health, Social Science & Medicine, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity; Transportation—Transportation Research Part A, Transportation Research Part D, Transportation, Transportation Research Record.

^4. The many environmental impacts of the sustainable neighborhood—which overlaps substantially with the CWD neighborhood—can be summarized. The sustainable neighborhood has the ability to (1) lower vehicle miles traveled, limiting carbon emissions by looking for ways to reduce reliance on fossil fuels (cars) and increasing reliance on clean transportation (e.g., bus rapid transit, light rail); (2) lower energy costs by lowering infrastructure, like highways, and utility lines, which in turn results in lower transmission loss; and (3) limit damage to natural environments by lowering impervious surfaces and runoff, compacting development, and lowering disruption of biodiversity and natural habitat (Ewing et al., 2008).

^5. See, for example, the research connecting sprawl to global warming (Gonzalez, 2009), social inequity (Pendall, 2000; Squires, 2002), increased automobile use (Ewing & Cervero, 2010), environmental degradation (Benfield, Terris, & Vorsanger, 2001; Ewing, 2005), and public health problems (Frumkin, 2004; Moudon et al., 2006).