The academic literature on the impact of urban form on travel behavior has increasingly recognized that residential location choice and travel choices may be interconnected. We contribute to the understanding of this interrelation by studying to what extent commute mode choice differs by residential neighborhood and by neighborhood type dissonance—the mismatch between a commuter's current neighborhood type and her preferences regarding physical attributes of the residential neighborhood. Using data from the San Francisco Bay Area, we find that neighborhood type dissonance is statistically significantly associated with commute mode choice: dissonant urban residents are more likely to commute by private vehicle than consonant urbanites but not quite as likely as true suburbanites. However, differences between neighborhoods tend to be larger than between consonant and dissonant residents within a neighborhood. Physical neighborhood structure thus appears to have an autonomous impact on commute mode choice. The analysis also shows that the impact of neighborhood type dissonance interacts with that of commuters' beliefs about automobile use, suggesting that these are to be reckoned with when studying the joint choices of residential location and commute mode.

While urban form in general and density in particular are believed by many to significantly influence travel behavior, various recent studies have argued that the true determinants of travel patterns are attitudes rather than land use characteristics. This research builds on this notion and investigates to what extent a lackof congruence between physical neighborhood structure and preferences regarding land use near ones home location (termed residential neighborhood type dissonance or mismatch) affect distance traveled overall and by mode. A conceptual model is described in which the relationship between neighborhood type dissonance and distance traveled is embedded in a wider set of individual and household choices, and tobit models of the influence of neighborhood type mismatch are presented. The results suggest that neighborhood type mismatch should be taken into account in future research as well as in policies attempting to modify travel behavior through land use regulations.

While households’ general preference for low-density residential environments is well documented in the literature, little research in geography and urban planning has explicitly investigated how many and which households experience a state of mismatch in terms of land use patterns between their preferred residential neighborhood type and the type of neighborhood where they currently reside. Using data from 1,358 commuters living in three communities in the San Francisco Bay Area, this study finds that nearly a quarter of the residents live in a neighborhood type that does not match their land-use related preferences. The results of an investigation of the determinants of such dissonance are consistent with existing knowledge about residential preferences. It is shown that single suburban dwellers and large households and families in the city are more likely to be mismatched, or experience higher levels of mismatch in terms of neighborhood type. Further, the extent of mismatch is clearly related to automobile orientation, as well as to lifestyles and personality traits. The results suggest that policies aiming to attract a diverse market to neo-traditional, high-density neighborhoods may not be as effective as decision-makers and planners hope. If a broad range of households is artificially attracted to such new developments, e.g. through providing financial advantages or other policy incentives, this might on average result in lower levels of residential satisfaction, higher residential mobility, lower sense of community, and enduring auto dependency. On the other hand, it is encouraging to see that there is also a substantial proportion of suburban dwellers preferring high-density environments. Relaxation of land use laws in existing suburban communities might be successful in reducing residential neighborhood type dissonance for these types of suburban dwellers, but perhaps at the cost of increasing dissonance for the suburbanites preferring lower densities. It would be valuable to investigate whether there is a mix of densities and uses that would optimally satisfy both types of preferences.

In the USA and Europe land-use based solutions to transportation problems have rapidly gained in popularity over the past decade. It appears that the principles of New Urbanism (in the USA) or the Compact City (Europe) have found a solid place in the profession’s thinking. This popularity is not least the result of numerous empirical studies demonstrating that living in higher-density, mixed-use neighbourhoods is associated with less car use compared to living in low-density, suburban environments (Frank and Pivo, 1994; Meurs and Haaijer, 2001; Naess et al., 1995; Sun et al., 1998). The academic literature is, however, equivocal about the effect of neighbourhood characteristics on reducing car use. Several ambiguities and criticisms can be discerned. First, there is disagreement about the importance of land use characteristics in explaining variations in travel behaviour. Opinions differ about the role of urban form vis-à-vis other sets of variables. Some authors claim, for instance, that factors, such as land-use mixing or density, are more important than factors related to travellers’ sociodemographic variables (Kockelman, 1997). Others are, however, more conservative and argue that sociodemographic variables explain a larger share of the variation in travel patterns than do land use characteristics (Crane and Crepeau, 1998; Snellen et al., 2001). Some studies claim that not only are sociodemographic variables more important than land use characteristics, but that this also applies to attitudes towards travelling, land use and the environment (Bagley and Mokhtarian, 2002; Kitamura et al., 1997). Part of the disagreement is no doubt attributable to differences in theoretical framework, research design, data, and geographical settings. However, the fact that the ambiguities persist calls for additional research.

While urban form in general and density in particular are believed by many to significantly influence travel behavior, various recent studies have argued that the true determinants of travel patterns are attitudes rather than land use characteristics. This research builds on this notion and investigates to what extent a lack of congruence between physical neighborhood structure and preferences regarding land use near one's home location (termed 'residential neighborhood type dissonance' or mismatch) affect distance traveled overall and by mode. A conceptual model is described in which the relationship between neighborhood type dissonance and distance traveled is embedded in a wider set of individual and household choices, and tobit models of the influence of neighborhood type mismatch are presented. The results suggest that neighborhood type mismatch should be taken into account in future research as well as in policies attempting to modify travel behavior through land use regulations. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.