Beyond affordable shelters: Subsidized housing and surrounding environments for pedestrian safety Ayoung Woo, PhD a , Chia-Yuan Yu, PhD b, * a Department of Architecture, Sejong University, Seoul, South Korea b School of Public Administration, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA article info Article history: Received 16 September 2016 Received in revised form 23 January 2017 Accepted 1 March 2017 Keywords: Low Income Housing Tax Credit Subsidized housing Pedestrian safety Built environment Community design abstract Beyond the provision of affordable housing itself, planners and policymakers have raised concerns as to whether subsidized housing developments provide “suitable living environments” for the nation's poor. Despite numerous concerns regarding unfavorable living environments and the neighborhood context of subsidized housing, we have limited understanding as to whether built environments around subsidized housing ensure pedestrian safety. This study addressed this gap by examining how built environments around Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) sites affect pedestrian-vehicle crashes in Austin, Texas. We employed the two-level negative binomial regression to clarify the impacts of street segment-level and neighborhood-level built environments on pedestrian crashes around LIHTC complexes. We found that higher speed roads, traffic-generating land uses, higher transit stop densities, and higher four-or- more-leg intersection densities may hinder pedestrian safety. Conversely, local roads as well as single- family residential parcels and connected sidewalks along street segments may enhance pedestrian safety around LIHTC complexes. Our results may inform planners and policymakers on how to enhance pedestrian safety for subsidized housing by modifying surrounding environments and how to provide better site selection considerations for subsidized housing to ensure pedestrian safety. © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Planners and policymakers have long faced a dilemma with respect to the implementation of subsidized housing programs. While subsidized housing developments have achieved some suc- cess in increasing affordable housing for the nation's poor, the developments have been criticized for contributing to the con- centration of poverty in distressed neighborhoods. Literature from the past decade is replete with studies documenting that subsi- dized housing tends to be located in disadvantaged neighborhoods, often represented by high poverty and minority populations, concentrated crime, and poor education quality (Ellen, Lens, & O'Regan, 2012; Freeman, 2004; Newman & Schnare, 1997; Oakley, 2008; Van Zandt & Mhatre, 2009). Hence, beyond the provision of affordable housing itself, there has been growing consideration by planners and policymakers about the importance of locating subsidized housing so as to provide “suitable living environments” for the nation's poor. Despite numerous concerns for the living environments of subsidized households, little attention has been devoted to the location of subsidized housing and pedestrian safety. Given that low-income families have lower auto ownership rates than high- income families (Murakami & Young, 1997), human-powered traveldi.e., walkingdmay be the dominant travel mode, particu- larly for subsidized households (Lee, Ory, Yoon, & Forjuoh, 2013; Wang & Lee, 2010). However, subsidized households may face greater risk of traffic-related injuries because distressed inner-city neighborhoods where subsidized housing is usually located tend to feature high traffic volumes and poor pedestrian infrastructure. Subsidized households, often represented by low-income, minority, or elderly households, may be particularly vulnerable to pedestrian crashes. The built environment around subsidized housing can be a centerpiece to enhance or hinder pedestrian safety for disadvan- taged populations. Pedestrian-friendly community designs with low travel speeds, connected street networks, and non-motorized infrastructure may provide safe environments and promote walking activities. On the other hand, pedestrian-hostile environ- ments with higher speed designs, larger blocks, and lack of non- motorized infrastructure could increase a risk of pedestrians * Corresponding author. 4364 Scorpius Street, Orlando, FL, 32816, USA. E-mail address: ychiayuan@gmail.com (C.-Y. Yu). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Applied Geography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apgeog http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2017.03.014 0143-6228/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Applied Geography 83 (2017) 37e45