Yes, but there's a big difference: a bike commuter is going to want to take, more or less, the most direct route, because he only has so much physical stamina and his max speed is also pretty low. The only exceptions are that he'll want to avoid highways, and might also want to take some lower-traffic roads if possible, as long as they don't add too much distance to the trip. There's a very strong correlation between physical distance and travel time for a cyclist.
A transit rider doesn't care one bit how far anything is as far as physical distance. It's completely and utterly irrelevant. The only thing that matters is transit time there, and that's entirely unique to the mode of transit and its routes. Since buses travel on specific routes, something might only be 5 miles away, but it could take 4 hours to get there by bus (because you have to travel 30+ miles to get there, taking 3 transfers along the way, because there's no direct route available), making it a destination to avoid for a transit rider, while another destination that's 10 miles away may only be a 30-minute ride. The only way physical distance comes into things is if the transit rider decides they might need to walk some or all of the distance, because the available public transit routes aren't sufficient, but since walking is so slow, that only realistically gives them a few miles to work with.