scispace - formally typeset

Journal ArticleDOI

Accessibility and transit-oriented development in European metropolitan areas

01 Jul 2015-Journal of Transport Geography (Elsevier)-Vol. 47, Iss: 47, pp 70-83

AbstractThis study investigates how urban form is related to accessibility. In particular, it explores the relationship between Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) and rail-based accessibility in a metropolitan area. The following overarching questions are addressed: Does a TOD-informed urban spatial structure correlate with high rail based accessibility? Which features of TOD are correlated to rail-based accessibility? These questions are answered through a comparative analysis of six metropolitan areas in Europe. The “TOD degree”, operationalized as the extent to which urban development is concentrated along rail corridors and stations, is correlated with a cumulative opportunity measure of rail-based accessibility to jobs and inhabitants. The comparison demonstrates that rail-based accessibility is higher in urban areas where inhabitants and jobs are more concentrated around the railway network and in lesser measure in urban areas with higher values of network connectivity. No correlation is found between rail-based accessibility and average densities of inhabitants and jobs.

Topics: Urban spatial structure (58%), Metropolitan area (56%), Urban planning (54%), Transit-oriented development (51%)

Summary (3 min read)

1. Introduction

  • The urban and transport planning strategy of Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) has been generating considerable interest in academic and professional circles recently (Bertolini et al., 2012; Cervero, 2004; Curtis et al., 2009).
  • By exploring these issues, the authors aim to provide empirical insights into the understudied relationship between TOD (a transport and urban development strategy embraced by increasing numbers of cities and regions across the world) and accessibility (a key policy aim and feature of the urban system).
  • Accordingly, this paper innovatively contributes (1) a transparent link between the two and (2) a systematic way of assessing to what extent and because of which transport and land use features, the spatial distribution of jobs and population matches the rail network.

2. Literature review: TOD degree of the urban structure, travel behaviour and accessibility

  • The interaction between the TOD degree of the urban structure, accessibility and travel behaviour has attracted considerable attention in the scientific literature worldwide.
  • Within the TOD literature, an increasing number of studies focus specifically on how transit development impacts land use changes (Cervero and Landis, 1997; Ratner and Goetz, 2013).
  • The answers to this broad issue remain thus ambivalent, and it is not yet clear whether land use strategies alone can have a significant effect on travel behaviour (Ewing and Cervero, 2010).
  • Using different methods and measures of subjective or objective accessibility, many studies compare the accessibility by different modes, predominantly comparing public transport and car use (Benenson et al., 2011; Keller et al., 2011).

3. Research design

  • The research methodology was set up to provide insights into the relationships between TOD degree of the urban structure and citywide accessibility.
  • – Comparison between the various case studies and interpretation of the results: through geographical information systems (GIS), which provides spatial analysis and comparison as well as the visualisation of results.

3.1. Case studies

  • The authors did not include TOD best practices in Europe (as exemplified by Copenhagen and Stockholm) as their aim was indeed not to identify best examples, or their defining characteristics, but rather urban form determinants of accessibility by rail.
  • The authors selected case studies that showed sufficient variation on possible determinants, not that were potential best (or worst) practices.
  • The decision was made to limit the number of case studies to six: more cities would have meant that fewer types of analyses could have been performed and triangulation between them and comparisons between different cities would have been more difficult and less transparent.
  • Data availability was also a factor behind the choice.

3.2. Data sets, study areas and spatial units

  • The GEOSTAT 1A project population grid (Statistical Office of the European Communities, 2012), which provides a homogeneous grid population dataset, was integrated with datasets from national census data and used for the land use analysis.
  • The boundaries of the study areas were set as the circumference of 30 km radius, which approximately corresponds to the average commuting distance, centred in the main rail station, which the authors took as the node in the network with the highest connectivity value.
  • Study areas in the different cases thus have similar total surface areas with only small differences because water and other non-urbanised natural areas are not computed in the boundaries of the study area, allowing a comparison between cases, as represented in Fig.
  • The choice of this spatial unit has impact on the analysis results, according to the modifiable areal unit problem (MAUP) (Dark and Bram, 2007), with reference to the number of areal units used (scale effect) and depending on how smaller areal units are grouped at the local scale (zonation effect).
  • Taking into account these two aspects, their choice was made according to three main criteria: (i) threshold of the total number of areal units for computational reasons, (ii) dimension of the spatial unit threshold based on walking accessibility to the station and (iii) comparable data availability for the six case studies.

3.3. Correlation variables

  • The first variable is the TOD degree of the urban structure defined as the extent to which the job and inhabitant densities are developed along rail transit (tram, metro and regional rail) corridors.
  • The authors measured this value with a method inspired by, but distinct from the node-place model (Bertolini, 1999): for each AZ they measured a ‘‘node index’’ and a ‘‘place index’’, and they analysed the bivariate scatterplot distribution in a xy graph of node and place index values for each AZ of the study area.
  • Indeed average density is not measuring if and how densities are strategically distributed and articulated in a zone, and this constitutes a problem in analysing the degree of transit and land-use integration.
  • The cumulative accessibility measure is calculated as the number of inhabitants and jobs reachable in 30 min travel time by rail (regional rail, metro and tram) and expressed as a percentage of the total number of inhabitants and jobs in the study area.
  • Their aim is not to assess the impact of accessibility by rail on rail modal share, but to provide insights into the urban form determinants of rail accessibility.

4. Outputs of study cases cross-sectional comparison

  • The cross-sectional analysis was completed in two steps.
  • First, the two variables for the different case studies were calculated and analysed independently.
  • The second step focused on the correlations between the two.

4.1. Outputs of cross-sectional analysis of TOD degree of the urban structure and accessibility in the study cases

  • The measurement of the TOD degree of the urban structure yielded twelve maps (Figs. 2 and 3) and six scatterplots (Fig. 4).
  • Diagrams in Fig. 4 allow a more systematic comparison of the different interrelations and scatter distributions of the place and node indices in the six study cases.
  • The higher correlation values for Amsterdam and Munich mean that in these cities there is a higher match between the distribution of residential and employment densities and the connectivity offered by the railway network.
  • The average values of accessibility in the six cases summarized in Table 4 show that Amsterdam is the city with the highest average accessibility (on average 32.48% of all jobs and inhabitants in the metropolitan area are accessible by 30 min rail travel) while Naples has the lowest (5.32%).

4.2. Outputs of correlation analysis

  • First, cumulative railbased accessibility is strongly correlated to the TOD degree of an urban area.
  • Indeed, cumulative rail-based accessibility almost increases in direct proportion, when urban development becomes Table 5 Correlation between TOD degree and cumulative rail-based accessibility (average citywide value).
  • Third, accessibility values are not correlated with maximal or average density of the study area.
  • In order to explore these relationships further, Table 6 shows the result from a multiple regression model.

5. Conclusions

  • Transit-Oriented Development is one the most commonly used development strategies for metropolitan areas.
  • It is important to stress that the proposed correlation analysis is exploratory and hypothesis-generating rather than explanatory or hypothesis-testing.
  • It can show the relationships between whole-city accessibility, and the density or connectivity of a single urban area and vice versa.
  • In terms of implications for urban and transportation planning, this study suggests that strengthening the relationship between the railway network and land uses is an effective measure for increasing cumulative rail-based accessibility; improving railway network connectivity is also important, but just increasing densities is not.
  • Thus, it would be interesting to extend the methodology with more sophisticated accessibility measures, for instance acknowledging distance decay and competition effects, or focusing on specific segments of the population.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

...read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (http
s
://dare.uva.nl)
UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)
Accessibility and transit-oriented development in European metropolitan areas
Papa, E.; Bertolini, L.
DOI
10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.07.003
Publication date
2015
Document Version
Final published version
Published in
Journal of Transport Geography
Link to publication
Citation for published version (APA):
Papa, E., & Bertolini, L. (2015). Accessibility and transit-oriented development in European
metropolitan areas.
Journal of Transport Geography
,
47
, 70-83.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.07.003
General rights
It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s)
and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open
content license (like Creative Commons).
Disclaimer/Complaints regulations
If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please
let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material
inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter
to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You
will be contacted as soon as possible.
Download date:09 Aug 2022

Accessibility and Transit-Oriented Development in European
metropolitan areas
Enrica Papa
, Luca Bertolini
Department of Human Geography, Planning and International Development AISSR, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 166, 1018 WV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
article info
Article history:
Received 2 October 2014
Revised 10 July 2015
Accepted 11 July 2015
Available online 28 August 2015
Keywords:
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)
Accessibility
abstract
This study investigates how urban form is related to accessibility. In particular, it explores the relation-
ship between Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) and rail-based accessibility in a metropolitan area.
The following overarching questions are addressed: Does a TOD-informed urban spatial structure corre-
late with high rail based accessibility? Which features of TOD are correlated to rail-based accessibility?
These questions are answered through a comparative analysis of six metropolitan areas in Europe. The
‘‘TOD degree’’, operationalized as the extent to which urban development is concentrated along rail cor-
ridors and stations, is correlated with a cumulative opportunity measure of rail-based accessibility to jobs
and inhabitants.
The comparison demonstrates that rail-based accessibility is higher in urban areas where inhabitants
and jobs are more concentrated around the railway network and in lesser measure in urban areas with
higher values of network connectivity. No correlation is found between rail-based accessibility and aver-
age densities of inhabitants and jobs.
Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
1. Introduction
The urban and transport planning strategy of Transit-Oriented
Development (TOD) has been generating considerable interest in
academic and professional circles recently (Bertolini et al., 2012;
Cervero, 2004; Curtis et al., 2009). TOD’s approach of concentrating
urban developments around railway networks builds upon strate-
gies applied since the late 19th and early 20th centuries in the Uni-
ted States and Europe, when the construction of streetcar and
metro lines was integrated with urban developments. After the
Second World War planners in parts of Europe, most notably in
Stockholm (Cervero, 1995 ) and Copenhagen (Knowles, 2012), were
able to channel suburban development into satellite suburbs along
transit corridors. In recent years a third generation of TOD
approaches has emerged. In the United States, since the 1990s, fol-
lowing experiences pioneered in the 1970s in cities such as Port-
land, TOD has become the dominant urban growth planning
paradigm. It is focused on combating unbridled urban sprawl and
closely connected with Smart Growth (SG) and New Urbanism
(NU) approaches (Dittmar and Ohland, 2004). Also in Europe many
metropolitan areas (Bertolini et al., 2012; Givoni and Banister,
2010) are promoting urban development along rail corridors as a
tool and, at the same time, a target for achieving more cohesive ter-
ritories and sustainable urban development.
Under favourable conditions, TOD is seen as delivering multiple
benefits, such as helping shape polycentric cities and regions, mit-
igate urban sprawl, boost public transport ridership, increase bik-
ing and walking, while accommodating economic growth and
creating attractive places. Indeed, there is a substantial body of lit-
erature on the comprehensive assessment of TOD strategies
(Arrington and Cervero, 2008; Renne, 2007); and on specific TOD
impacts, such as on property values (Bowes and Ihlanfeldt, 2001;
Duncan, 2011; Mathur and Ferrell, 2013) or on relocation of jobs
and dwellings (Cervero and Landis, 1997; Pagliara and Papa,
2011) but much of the interest is related to analysing TOD impacts
on travel behaviour (Cervero et al., 2002). However, none of these
studies give direct insight into the relationship between TOD and
accessibility, that is, the degree to which the urban and transit net-
work structures enable individuals to participate in activities and
obtain spatially distributed resources (Geurs and van Wee, 2004;
Handy, 1992; Handy and Niemeier, 1997). This can be seen as a
worthwhile objective in itself and as an influencing factor of travel
behaviour change.
In this paper, we aim to address this gap by studying how the
degree of TOD of a metropolitan area is related to the rail-based
accessibility to jobs and inhabitants. The following research
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.07.003
0966-6923/Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: enrica.papa@ugent.be (E. Papa), l.bertolini@uva.nl
(L. Bertolini).
Journal of Transport Geography 47 (2015) 70–83
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Transport Geography
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jtrangeo

questions are addressed: Does a TOD-informed urban spatial struc-
ture correlate with high rail-based accessibility? Which features of
TOD are correlated to rail-based accessibility? The latter include
such characteristics as density distribution of inhabitants and jobs,
and network connectivity. By exploring these issues, we aim to
provide empirical insights into the understudied relationship
between TOD (a transport and urban development strategy
embraced by increasing numbers of cities and regions across the
world) and accessibility (a key policy aim and feature of the urban
system). In so doing, we also provide a comparison of TOD degree
and accessibility values in six different metropolitan contexts.
Our interpretation of TOD is different from other, more local-
ized approaches (Bernick and Cervero, 1997; Cervero et al.,
2002); for us, TOD is the measure in which the whole urban area,
not just a single neighbourhood, is oriented towards transit.
Accordingly, we define the ‘‘TOD degree’’ as the degree of correla-
tion between the railway network connectivity and the distribu-
tion of densities in the whole urban area, and ‘‘accessibility’’ as
the number of jobs and inhabitants that can be reached by rail as
a percentage of the total jobs and inhabitants in the study area.
While recognising that accessibility is affected by a much wider
range of factors, including subjective ones, in this study
rail-based accessibility is measured as an aggregate objective indi-
cator, and it is defined as a condition for rail use and as an enabler
(or disabler) of travel choices and behaviours.
This research employs several innovative approaches. The first
is the use of accessibility in analysing the TOD degree of an urban
area. As previously stated, while there are multiple empirical stud-
ies on the linkages between TOD and travel behaviour, its relation-
ships with accessibility have attracted much less attention. By
definition, accessibility by rail is dependent on the spatial distribu-
tion of jobs and residents with regards to the vicinity to rail sta-
tions. However, the two measures are still conceptually distinct
(the former is a condition, or quality from a system user’s point
of view, the second a characteristic of urban form). Accordingly,
this paper innovatively contributes (1) a transparent link between
the two and (2) a systematic way of assessing to what extent and
because of which transport and land use features, the spatial distri-
bution of jobs and population matches the rail network. In this
sense, we offer novel, or at least more structured, insights into
how certain distribution of inhabitants and job densities and rail
transport characteristics, and their interrelationships, are related
to rail-based accessibility. While general TOD characteristics and
benefits of TOD are extensively addressed in the literature, this
research focuses on the yet understudied relationship between
TOD and accessibility. Furthermore, the existing literature rarely
employs accessibility metrics to compare metropolitan areas, and
most empirical research measuring accessibility focuses on case
studies of single regions (Benenson et al., 2011; Cheng et al.,
2007, 2013; for a recent exception comparing two cities see Silva
et al., 2014). In this study, we instead make a systematic compar-
ison of accessibility measures in six different urban areas, which is
seen as a valuable procedure for understanding the determinants
of accessibility (Levine et al., 2012). A final innovation is the focus
on Europe. TOD empirical studies focus overwhelmingly on the
North American context, and few studies (Keller et al., 2011;
Knowles, 2012; Singh et al., 2014) propose quantitative analysis
of TOD urban structures in the European context, where the urban-
isation patterns and histories differ radically from those in the US.
The paper is organised in five sections. Following this introduc-
tion, in Section 2 we position our research within the relevant lit-
erature on the relationships between TOD degree of the urban
structure, accessibility and travel behaviour. In Section 3, we pre-
sent the research design, subsequently turning to the presentation
and discussion of the results in Section 4. On the basis of the anal-
ysis provided, we formulate several conclusions in Section 5.
2. Literature review: TOD degree of the urban structure, travel
behaviour and accessibility
The interaction between the TOD degree of the urban structure,
accessibility and travel behaviour has attracted considerable atten-
tion in the scientific literature worldwide. Four main groups of
studies can be identified (see Fig. 1) and categorized according to
the main relationships studied:
1. interrelation between rail transport network and land use, and
the resulting TOD degree of the urban structure,
2. TOD degree of the urban structure as a factor affecting travel
behaviour,
3. impacts of accessibility on travel behaviour, and
4. impacts of TOD degree of the urban structure on accessibility.
With regard to the first relation (arrow 1), the problem of the
co-development of rail infrastructures and land use has been much
discussed (Levinson, 2008; Xie and Levinson, 2011) and has been
treated quantitatively in a number of examples (Anas et al.,
1998; King, 2011; Mogridge and Parr, 1997). The key aim of these
studies is to explore the two-way dynamics whereby transport
infrastructure development drives land use change and vice versa.
Within the TOD literature, an increasing number of studies focus
specifically on how transit development impacts land use changes
(Cervero and Landis, 1997; Ratner and Goetz, 2013). The much
sparser studies that examine the two-way interaction between
land use and transit network are often been based on the
node-place model approach introduced by Bertolini (1999) and
further elaborated in more recent applications (Chorus and
Bertolini, 2011; Kamruzzaman et al., 2014; Reusser et al., 2008;
Zemp et al., 2011a, 2011b; Vale, 2015). In our knowledge, no
TOD studies specifically focus on how land use changes impact
transit development.
With regard to the group of studies that are represented with
arrow 2, and as already discussed in the introduction, they chiefly
aim to examine the potential of the TOD degree of the urban struc-
ture to curb car travel demand and shift it towards transit and
non-motorized modes. A significant body of research has been pro-
duced on the impact of the urban form on travel behaviour, in
terms of travel distance, journey frequency, modal split, travel time
and transport energy consumption (Boarnet, 2011; Cervero and
Kockelman, 1997; Echenique et al., 2012; Ewing and Cervero,
2010; Naess, 2012; Schwanen et al., 2001; Shatu and
Kamruzzaman, 2014; Stead and Marshall, 2001). Within this clus-
ter a specific group of studies analyses the impact of TOD urban
structure on travel behaviour, including studies considering TOD
a systemic (urban area wide) rather than local characteristic
(neighbourhood-focused). Some authors assert that a TOD struc-
ture is able to increase rates of transit use, particularly rail rider-
ship (Cervero et al., 2002); to reduce car use and travel distances,
and to reduce commuting distances and times (Arrington and
Cervero, 2008; Cervero et al., 2002; Houston et al., 2015; Lund
et al., 2004, 2006) and to stimulate non-motorized travel (Curtis
and Olaru, 2010). On the other hand, studies also highlight that
other factors (e.g. housing type and tenure, local and
sub-regional density, bus service level, and especially parking
availability) can play a much more important role than proximity
to transit (Chatman, 2013). Yet others argue that TOD impacts on
travel behaviour are also or even principally dependent on per-
sonal characteristics such as travel-related attitudes and residen-
tial self-selection, influenced by certain factors as income, or
household composition. For instance, De Vos et al. (2014) and
Kitamura et al. (1997) found that attitudes are more strongly asso-
ciated with travel behaviour than are land use characteristics. They
suggested that land use policies that promote higher densities and
E. Papa, L. Bertolini / Journal of Transport Geography 47 (2015) 70–83
71

mixed land use may not reduce travel unless residents’ attitudes
also change. The answers to this broad issue remain thus ambiva-
lent, and it is not yet clear whether land use strategies alone can
have a significant effect on travel behaviour (Ewing and Cervero,
2010). However, as more recent studies have recognised
(Bertolini et al., 2005; Levine et al., 2012; van Wee, 2011; van
Wee and Handy, 2014), a single focus on travel behaviour impacts
might be too narrow. The argument in these studies is that even if
land use strategies appear to have no significant, independent
effect on travel behaviour, they can still be worth pursuing if they
bring sufficient benefits in the form of accessibility improvements.
Studies that focus on the direct impacts of accessibility on travel
behaviour (arrow 3) or the impact of urban form on accessibility
(arrow 4) are less numerous, even though accessibility is recog-
nised as one of the key concepts that connect transportation and
land use and explain regional form and distribution of population
and employment opportunities (Scott and Horner, 2008). With ref-
erence to arrow 3, studies of the impact of accessibility on travel
behaviour analyse how accessibility may affect individual travel
behaviours (Handy, 1992; Kockelman, 1997). Over time, accessibil-
ity has been defined and measured in numerous ways (Geurs and
van Wee, 2004), but in general, two main categories can be found
in the literature: objective measures and subjective understand-
ings of accessibility (Curl et al., 2015). Location-based measures,
contour (or cumulative) measures and potential (or gravity) mea-
sures belong to the first group and are designed to represent the
accessibility provided by the transport and land use system as an
objective condition. The second group of accessibility measures
relate to individuals’ experiences of accessibility, taking into
account the subjective dimension of mobility. Using different
methods and measures of subjective or objective accessibility,
many studies compare the accessibility by different modes, pre-
dominantly comparing public transport and car use (Benenson
et al., 2011; Keller et al., 2011). A negative correlation is usually
found between vehicle miles travelled and destination accessibil-
ity. Also, observed trip length is generally shorter at locations that
are more accessible (Ewing and Cervero, 2010).
Regarding the group of studies represented by arrow 4, focusing
on the impact of TOD on accessibility, it is important to underline
that TOD by definition is urban development integrated with high
capacity public transport and one of its main objectives is to offer
city-wide and local accessibility (Cervero, 1995; Curtis et al., 2009).
However, few studies measure the impact of TOD degree of the
urban structure on accessibility. The few existing studies measure
such things as accessibility impacts at the neighbourhood scale
(Cervero and Radisch, 1996), or walkable accessibility to transit
stations (Schlossberg and Brown, 2004), but studies of impacts in
terms of citywide accessibility are rare (Bertolini et al., 2005;
Silva et al., 2014) and importantly do not distil how particular
transport and land use features are related to particular accessibil-
ity levels.
3. Research design
The research methodology was set up to provide insights into
the relationships between TOD degree of the urban structure and
citywide accessibility. It is based on comparison of the urban struc-
ture and accessibility qualities of six European metropolitan areas
and entailed the following steps:
Design of a methodology for data-based inspection of the rela-
tionships between TOD degree of the urban structure and acces-
sibility: grid-based data from each case is organised in a
systematic spatial database and an integrated data structure
for subsequent analysis, at a detailed spatial scale.
Analysis of the correlation between TOD degree of the urban
structure and accessibility for selected study cases: a correla-
tion analysis was performed, using as variables the cumulative
rail-based accessibility to inhabitants and jobs and the TOD
degree of the urban structure of a study area, defined as the
extent to which the distribution of urban densities is or not
developed along rail infrastructures (tram, metro and regional
rail).
Comparison between the various case studies and interpreta-
tion of the results: through geographical information systems
(GIS), which provides spatial analysis and comparison as well
as the visualisation of results.
3.1. Case studies
We selected six Western European metropolitan areas as case
studies, as this allowed heterogeneity of key land use and transport
characteristics (directly related to our variables), a key criterion for
our selection of case studies: the characteristics chosen were the
number of inhabitants, jobs and relative densities as regards the
land use characteristics (Table 1), and the rail network extension
as regards the transport characteristics (Table 2). However, we
excluded case studies with very large differences in size (only cities
between one and four million inhabitants were considered), as this
might confuse our focus on the relationships between the mor-
phology of the railway network, the distribution of land uses,
and accessibility. We did not include TOD best practices in Europe
(as exemplified by Copenhagen and Stockholm) as our aim was
indeed not to identify best examples, or their defining characteris-
tics, but rather urban form determinants of accessibility by rail.
Fig. 1. Grouping of studies on interrelations between TOD degree of the urban structure, accessibility and travel behaviour.
72 E. Papa, L. Bertolini / Journal of Transport Geography 47 (2015) 70–83

With this aim in mind, we selected case studies that showed suffi-
cient variation on possible determinants, not that were potential
best (or worst) practices. The decision was made to limit the num-
ber of case studies to six: more cities would have meant that fewer
types of analyses could have been performed and triangulation
between them and comparisons between different cities would
have been more difficult and less transparent. Fewer than six cities
would have meant not enough variation in potential determinants
of accessibility. Data availability was also a factor behind the
choice. The choice of comparing cities in different European coun-
tries means including cases with different regional institutional
systems, regulatory regimes and mobility cultures. These differ-
ences should be kept in mind when inferring policy recommenda-
tions from our empirical results, as they constitute specific
implementation possibilities and constraints. A final point is that
information on car ownership, the modal share and travel time
of the journey to work is provided in Table 2 as reference and back-
ground information. It provides additional evidence of the hetero-
geneity of the case studies in question even though these
characteristics are not the focus of our analysis.
3.2. Data sets, study areas and spatial units
The GEOSTAT 1A project population grid (Statistical Office of
the European Communities, 2012), which provides a homogeneous
grid population dataset, was integrated with datasets from
national census data and used for the land use analysis. Further-
more, the rail, metro and tram networks were derived from Open-
StreetMap (OSM) geographical databases. Travel time datasets
were constructed by taking the travel times between transit stops,
accessible at the public transport agencies’ websites, and adding
them to the walking times along the street network from the cen-
troid of each Accessibility Zone (AZ) to the nearest rail stop, assum-
ing an average walking speed of 1.4 m/s (based on Chandra and
Bharti, 2013).
The boundaries of the study areas were set as the circumference
of 30 km radius, which approximately corresponds to the average
commuting distance, centred in the main rail station, which we
took as the node in the network with the highest connectivity
value. Study areas in the different cases thus have similar total sur-
face areas with only small differences because water and other
non-urbanised natural areas are not computed in the boundaries
of the study area, allowing a comparison between cases, as repre-
sented in Fig. 2. The study areas were divided into AZs, correspond-
ing to the 1 km by 1 km grid cell. The choice of this spatial unit has
impact on the analysis results, according to the modifiable areal
unit problem (MAUP) (Dark and Bram, 2007), with reference to
the number of areal units used (scale effect) and depending on
how smaller areal units are grouped at the local scale (zonation
effect). Taking into account these two aspects, our choice was
made according to three main criteria: (i) threshold of the total
number of areal units for computational reasons, (ii) dimension
of the spatial unit threshold based on walking accessibility to the
station and (iii) comparable data availability for the six case stud-
ies. While the chosen spatial analysis unit of 1 km
2
is quite
fine-grained, there are still issues that a finer definition would bet-
ter address. Some disadvantages are in fact related to the choice of
using a 1 km 1 km grid: in few cases is the station centrally
located in the grid and some units include more than one station.
3.3. Correlation variables
The first variable is the TOD degree of the urban structure
defined as the extent to which the job and inhabitant densities
are developed along rail transit (tram, metro and regional rail) cor-
ridors. In other words, the TOD level is the degree of spatial con-
centration of economic activities and population along the rail
transit networks. We measured this value with a method inspired
by, but distinct from the node-place model (Bertolini, 1999): for
each AZ we measured a ‘‘node index’’ and a ‘‘place index’’, and
we analysed the bivariate scatterplot distribution in a xy graph of
node and place index values for each AZ of the study area. The
TOD degree of the urban structure was then determined by the
strength of the correlation between the two variables.
The method proposed here is different from Bertolini (1999) in
several aspects as detailed below. Differently from Bertolini (1999)
and following adaptations and applications (Chorus and Bertolini,
2011; Kamruzzaman et al., 2014; Reusser et al., 2008; Zemp
et al., 2011a, 2011b; Vale, 2015), we did not limit our analysis to
the immediate surroundings of the station areas but to all areas
in the city. Our reasoning is that areas further away also play a role
in the TOD degree of a metropolitan area. In this perspective, not
only the immediate surroundings of stations have a role, but all
areas, albeit in proportion to their distance to stations. We believe
Table 1
Structural land use variables of the study cases. Source: Statistical Office of the
European Communities (2011).
Study
area
Inhabitants
and jobs
Average population and
jobs density
(km
2
) (inh. + jobs) ((inh. + jobs)/km
2
)
Amsterdam 1973 4,207,435 1714
Helsinki 2147 1,596,723 744
Munich 2219 3,528,261 1590
Naples 1906 4,627,604 2,428
Rome 2321 4,500,970 1939
Zurich 2647 2,337,367 883
Table 2
Structural transport system variables of the case studies. Source: Statistical Office of the European Communities: (a) 2004; (b) 2011; (c) 2001.
Transport supply Modal share journey to work
Number of registered cars
per 1000 inhabitants
Rail network Car Public
transport
Motorcycle Walking Bicycle Average home–work
journey time
(n) (Km/mln
inh.)
(n. stations/
mln inh.)
% % % % % (min)
2009 2013 2013 2009
Amsterdam 257 18 13 41
(a)
30
(a)
3
(a)
4
(a)
22
(a)
31
Helsinki 408 15 16 51.4
(b)
30.8
(b)
0.3
(b)
9.8
(b)
7.7
(b)
27
Munich 354 28 16 41
(a)
41.3
(a)
0.4
(a)
9.1
(a)
8.2
(a)
26
Naples 575 15 6 53.9
(c)
26.1
(c)
6.9
(c)
13
(c)
0.1
(c)
31
Rome 698 14 8 57.4
(c)
23.3
(c)
11.7
(c)
7.4
(c)
0.2
(c)
37
Zurich 361 26 26 23.7
(c)
62.6
(c)
1.3
(c)
7.5
(c)
4.9
(c)
26
E. Papa, L. Bertolini / Journal of Transport Geography 47 (2015) 70–83
73

Citations
More filters

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A methodology to quantitatively measure existing levels of TOD in terms of a TOD Index, within walkable distance of a transit node, by measuring various criteria that define TOD is proposed.
Abstract: Transit Oriented Development (TOD) can stimulate sustainable development by improving the interaction between transit and the surrounding development. Planning for TOD around existing transit nodes can only be effective if the assessment of the base situation is done properly. To do so, we propose a methodology to quantitatively measure existing levels of TOD in terms of a TOD Index, within walkable distance of a transit node, by measuring various criteria that define TOD. The value of a TOD index indicates the level to which TOD supporting characteristics are inplace around a transit node and what may be required to be improved so as to attain better transit orientation of thedevelopment. With these results in hand, TOD planning proposals can become more accurate by targeting investments on the most relevant or critical factors. The methodology was applied to the city region of Arnhem and Nijmegen, The Netherlands. A TOD index was calculated for areas around the 21 train stations in the region. The results help in drawing TOD policy for the region by identifying which station areas need more attention than others and at the same time, for each station, identifying specific TOD characteristic(s) that need improvement.

69 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: Among the attempts made worldwide to foster urban and transport sustainability, transit-oriented development (TOD) certainly is one of the most successful. Since the TOD concept appeared in the late 1980s, it has received increasing attention from researchers and practitioners as a way to merge together transport engineering and planning, land-use planning, and urban design for providing comprehensive solutions to contemporary urban problems. This attention has notably led to the publication of over 300 articles explicitly concerned with TOD in Web of Science journals, as well as to many implementations of the concept, some already completed and others underway (as, for example, the Grand Paris Project in France and Moscow Central Circle in Russia). Essentially, TOD can be described as land-use and transport planning that makes sustainable transport modes convenient and desirable, and that maximizes the efficiency of transport services by concentrating urban development around transit stations. However, as TOD projects started to be implemented worldwide, it became evident that their outcomes could be quite diverse, revealing that in practice the results of a project would depend on a wide variety of factors, trends and complex interrelations between them. In this article, we aim to provide a comprehensive, systematic and up-to-date review of TOD research achievements and challenges. We start by presenting the TOD concept, framing it in the theory of urban planning, and by describing the different typologies of TOD proposed in the literature. Then, we review the vast research dedicated to the study of TOD effects, distinguishing impacts on travel behavior, real-estate prices, residential location, urban form, and community life. The next subject we look at is TOD planning, focusing separately on policy issues and decision-support tools. In the final part of the article, based on the analysis of previous literature, we identify the main gaps and challenges that TOD research needs to address in the future.

43 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
Haixiao Pan1, Jing Li1, Qing Shen1, Qing Shen2, Cheng Shi1 
Abstract: Transit oriented development (TOD) has been an important topic for urban transportation planning research and practice. This paper is aimed at empirically examining the effect of rail transit station-based TOD on daily station passenger volume. Using integrated circuit (IC) card data on metro passenger volumes and cellular signaling data on the spatial distribution of human activities in Shanghai, the research identifies variations in ridership among rail transit stations. Then, regression analysis is performed using passenger volume in each station as the dependent variable. Explanatory variables include station area employment and population, residents’ commuting distances, metro network accessibility, status as interchange station, and coupling with commercial activity centers. The main findings are: (1) Passenger volume is positively associated with employment density and residents’ commuting distance around station; (2) stations with earlier opening dates and serving as transfer nodes tend to have positive association with passenger volumes; (3) metro stations better integrated with nearby commercial development tend to have larger passenger volumes. Several implications are drawn for TOD planning: (1) TOD planning should be integrated with rail transit network planning; (2) location of metro stations should be coupled with commercial development; (3) high employment densities should be especially encouraged as a key TOD feature; and (4) interchange stations should be more strategically positioned in the planning for rail transit network.

40 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that while the reform of the 2011 bus line reform increased the average accessibility for the entire city the increase was not uniform with different areas of the city experiencing different absolute accessibility by transit and relative accessibility in comparison to car travel.
Abstract: Accessibility is an important consideration in sustainable mobility policies, particularly for transit users. Measures suggested in the literature are based on coarse aggregate spatial resolution of traffic analysis zones that is sufficient for managing car travels only. To reflect a human door-to-door travel, transit accessibility demands an explicit view of the location of origin, transit stops and destination, as well as of the temporal fit between transit lines timetable and traveler’s needs. We thus estimate transit accessibility based on mode-specific travel times and corresponding paths, including walking and waiting, at the resolution of individual buildings and stops. Car accessibility is estimated at a high resolution too. A novel representation of transit network as a graph is proposed. This representation includes all modal components of a transit travel – walking, waiting at a stop, transit ride, transfers between lines, thus enabling unified view of a travel, regardless of mode. The use of modern high-performance graph database allows construction of high-resolution accessibility maps for an entire metropolitan area with its 100–200 K buildings. The application is tested and applied in a case study involving the evaluation of the 2011 bus line reform in the city of Tel Aviv. Specifically, we demonstrate that while the reform increased the average accessibility for the entire city the increase was not uniform with different areas of the city experiencing different absolute accessibility by transit and relative accessibility in comparison to car travel. The bus reform did in fact benefit travelers that experienced low relative accessibility, but the benefits are mainly accruing to longer trips. Our approach and computational methods can be employed for directly investigating the impacts of transportation infrastructure investments.

37 citations


References
More filters

Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: The built environment is thought to influence travel demand along three principal dimensions —density, diversity, and design. This paper tests this proposition by examining how the ‘3Ds’ affect trip rates and mode choice of residents in the San Francisco Bay Area. Using 1990 travel diary data and land-use records obtained from the U.S. census, regional inventories, and field surveys, models are estimated that relate features of the built environment to variations in vehicle miles traveled per household and mode choice, mainly for non-work trips. Factor analysis is used to linearly combine variables into the density and design dimensions of the built environment. The research finds that density, land-use diversity, and pedestrian-oriented designs generally reduce trip rates and encourage non-auto travel in statistically significant ways, though their influences appear to be fairly marginal. Elasticities between variables and factors that capture the 3Ds and various measures of travel demand are generally in the 0.06 to 0.18 range, expressed in absolute terms. Compact development was found to exert the strongest influence on personal business trips. Within-neighborhood retail shops, on the other hand, were most strongly associated with mode choice for work trips. And while a factor capturing ‘walking quality’ was only moderately related to mode choice for non-work trips, those living in neighborhoods with grid-iron street designs and restricted commercial parking were nonetheless found to average significantly less vehicle miles of travel and rely less on single-occupant vehicles for non-work trips. Overall, this research shows that the elasticities between each dimension of the built environment and travel demand are modest to moderate, though certainly not inconsequential. Thus it supports the contention of new urbanists and others that creating more compact, diverse, and pedestrian-orientated neighborhoods, in combination, can meaningfully influence how Americans travel.

2,961 citations


"Accessibility and transit-oriented ..." refers background in this paper

  • ...…form on travel behaviour, in terms of travel distance, journey frequency, modal split, travel time and transport energy consumption (Boarnet, 2011; Cervero and Kockelman, 1997; Echenique et al., 2012; Ewing and Cervero, 2010; Naess, 2012; Schwanen et al., 2001; Shatu and Kamruzzaman, 2014; Stead…...

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A meta-analysis of the built environment-travel literature existing at the end of 2009 is conducted in order to draw generalizable conclusions for practice, and finds that vehicle miles traveled is most strongly related to measures of accessibility to destinations and secondarily to street network design variables.
Abstract: Problem: Localities and states are turning to land planning and urban design for help in reducing automobile use and related social and environmental costs. The effects of such strategies on travel demand have not been generalized in recent years from the multitude of available studies. Purpose: We conducted a meta-analysis of the built environment-travel literature existing at the end of 2009 in order to draw generalizable conclusions for practice. We aimed to quantify effect sizes, update earlier work, include additional outcome measures, and address the methodological issue of self-selection. Methods: We computed elasticities for individual studies and pooled them to produce weighted averages. Results and conclusions: Travel variables are generally inelastic with respect to change in measures of the built environment. Of the environmental variables considered here, none has a weighted average travel elasticity of absolute magnitude greater than 0.39, and most are much less. Still, the combined effect o...

2,893 citations


"Accessibility and transit-oriented ..." refers background in this paper

  • ...…(in terms of correlation coefficient R and R2 linear) and rail-based accessibility, in line with the general expectations expressed in the literature (Ewing and Cervero, 2010); – a positive (albeit weaker) relationship also exists between the variables representing the mean and the maximal node…...

    [...]

  • ...…in terms of travel distance, journey frequency, modal split, travel time and transport energy consumption (Boarnet, 2011; Cervero and Kockelman, 1997; Echenique et al., 2012; Ewing and Cervero, 2010; Naess, 2012; Schwanen et al., 2001; Shatu and Kamruzzaman, 2014; Stead and Marshall, 2001)....

    [...]

  • ...The answers to this broad issue remain thus ambivalent, and it is not yet clear whether land use strategies alone can have a significant effect on travel behaviour (Ewing and Cervero, 2010)....

    [...]

  • ...Also, observed trip length is generally shorter at locations that are more accessible (Ewing and Cervero, 2010)....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI

1,883 citations


"Accessibility and transit-oriented ..." refers background in this paper

  • ...(1)) corresponds to the closeness centrality index (Sabidussi, 1966)....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: A review of accessibility measures is presented for assessing the usability of these measures in evaluations of land-use and transport strategies and developments. Accessibility measures are reviewed using a broad range of relevant criteria, including theoretical basis, interpretability and communicability, and data requirements of the measures. Accessibility impacts of land-use and transport strategies are often evaluated using accessibility measures, which researchers and policy makers can easily operationalise and interpret, such as travelling speed, but which generally do not satisfy theoretical criteria. More complex and disaggregated accessibility measures, however, increase complexity and the effort for calculations and the difficulty of interpretation. The current practice can be much improved by operationalising more advanced location-based and utility-based accessibility measures that are still relatively easy to interpret for researchers and policy makers, and can be computed with state-of-the-practice data and/or land-use and transport models. Research directions towards theoretically more advanced accessibility measures point towards the inclusion of individual's spatial–temporal constraints and feedback mechanisms between accessibility, land-use and travel behaviour. Furthermore, there is a need for theoretical and empirical research on relationships between accessibility, option values and non-user benefits, and the measurement of different components of accessibility.

1,823 citations


"Accessibility and transit-oriented ..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Over time, accessibility has been defined and measured in numerous ways (Geurs and van Wee, 2004), but in general, two main categories can be found in the literature: objective measures and subjective understandings of accessibility (Curl et al., 2015)....

    [...]

  • ...The literature documents many ways to operationalize accessibility, depending on the problem and context of its application (Geurs and van Wee, 2004; Handy and Niemeier, 1997)....

    [...]

  • ...…give direct insight into the relationship between TOD and accessibility, that is, the degree to which the urban and transit network structures enable individuals to participate in activities and obtain spatially distributed resources (Geurs and van Wee, 2004; Handy, 1992; Handy and Niemeier, 1997)....

    [...]


Posted Content
Abstract: Author(s): Anas, Alex; Arnott, Richard; Small, Kenneth A. | Abstract: An interview with Chicago's current mayor, Richard M. Daley:'New York is too big this way,' the mayor says, raising a thick hand over his head. Stretching both arms out at his sides, he adds, 'Los Angeles is too big this way. All the other cities are too small. We're just right.' (Bailey and Coleman, 1996, p. 6)Mayor Daley is catering to a widespread fascination with the roles that urban size and structure play in people's lives. Academic as well as other observers have long sought explanations for urban development patterns and criteria by which to judge their desirability. Furthermore, as we shall see, understanding the organization of cities yields insights about economy-wide growth processes and sheds light on economic concepts of long standing interest: returns to scale, monopolistic competition, vertical integration, technological innovation, innovation diffusion, and international specialization. Cities also are prime illustrations of some newer academic interests such as complex structural evolution and self-organization.

1,403 citations