Integrated Urban Models for Simulation of Transit and Land-Use Policies Final Report (1998) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3.0 Empirical Findings and Implications for Modeling
3.0 Empirical Findings and Implications for Modeling
Pages 51-72
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 51... ...
~ attempts to summarize the empincal evidence conceding urban form impacts on Ravel which is discussed In greater detail in Appendix A To bnug some structure to this summary, the table is divided into four main categories: residential density impacts, employment density impacts, accessibility impacts, arid neighborhood design impacts.
|
From page 52... ...
1991 FHWA Highway Statistics -- urban regions with higher densities generate higher transit trips per capita and less VMT per capita, trends hold when analyzed at the zonal rather than regional level; total trip rates do not vary substantially with density Households in higher density neighborhoods have lower auto ownership levels (after controlling for income) ; people with fewer cars use transit more and generate less VMT; net density effects, however, are generally small In practical terms Density has negligible impact on travel behavior (except with respect to auto ownership)
|
From page 53... ...
TCRP H-12 Final Report Table 3.l, cont'd Higher residential densities, combined win greater concentration of employment In the CBD & inner suburbs, plus socio-economic differences, contribute to higher transit mode splits In Toronto relative to Boston 1985 American Housing Survey Data -- density has a significant Impact on work trip auto and transit mode shares; this Impact is greater than the land-use mix impact Increased density, combined win mixed land-uses, reduced auto ownership levels and commuting distances Density greatly influences commuter mode choice, transit Hip rates and rapid rail boardings. much more so man urban design or land-use mix Rail access walk mode shares affected by neighborhood density and land-use mix; the distances walked, however, are not; rail access transit mode share primarily affected by transit service levels and not density/land-use mix per se Catchment areas for rail stations vary with density of development Density affects auto ownership, which, In turn, affects transit ndership Density does not directly affect commuting VMT/worker Residential density near commuter rail stations not significant in explaining choice of walk access mode, once socio-economic factors properly [Schimek, 1996a, pg.
|
From page 54... ...
(c) Accessibility Impacts Accessibility an unportant determinant of VMT and mode choice A stronger relationship between mode choice and urban form exists when both ends of the trip are considered Increases in both "local" and "regional 't accessibility results in shorter shopping Hip distances, but no reduction in shopping trip frequency .
|
From page 55... ...
Impact on vehicular travel, but accessibility of residences to a range of land-uses does reduce vehicular travel Distance from home to store Important in Me choice of destination for walk shopping trips (~1) Neighborhood Design Impacts Comparison of new, mixed land-use comrnun~ties with "semi-planned" traditional suburbs -- no significant difference in VMT or transit usage, except for recreational trips Pre-war, traditional comrnun~ties versus standard, post-war suburbs: transit use & walking significantly higher In traditional communities; total trip rates and auto-driver trip rates [Nowlan & Stewart, 1991, pg.
|
From page 56... ...
M~xed-use development Is more important than density in affecting non-motor~zed work trip mode shares Neighborhood design variables have little impact on work trip mode choice, although a "traditional neighborhood" dummy variable showed some statistical significance Land-use mix affects work trip mode choice In suburban office centers Neighborhood type not statistically significant in explaining travel behavior once socio-economic factors are accounted for Individual motivations and Imitations central to the decision to walk; urban fonn then encourages or discourages walking, given the motivation to do so [Handy, 1995, pg.
|
From page 57... ...
. In order to understand this result, one must note that a classic demand-supply relationship exists between factors such as residential density and transit service levels.
|
From page 58... ...
Transit Ridership and Service Supply - Demand Relationships (aclapted from Gonzales, 1980) Combor Residential Density (b)
|
From page 59... ...
~ (b) depends upon the equilibrated supply responses ofthe transit operator, along with all the other factors relevant to Me determination oftransit demand (auto ownership levels, population socio-economic attributes, etc.)
|
From page 60... ...
relative to a household which owns that "extra" car. Thus as in the transit service case previously discussed, a proper specification of the urban form travel demand interaction requires including auto ownership as an endogenous component of the system.
|
From page 61... ...
, suburban employment centers, and employment centers located near commuter rail stations. This strong, clear result relative to the more ambiguous residential density case is likely due to the more direct relationship which almost certainly exists between employment density and transit service supply (i.e., such centers are readily Rentable loci for transit services', as well as the "levels of service" for other modes as well (e.a.~ · ~ ~ .
|
From page 62... ...
Particularly in the last fear years. marry researchers have focussed on more "micro-level" questions concerning the role which local neighborhood design plays in determining travel behavior.
|
From page 63... ...
''Urbar1 form" or "larld-use" or "physical design" (as represented by residential density, employment density and neighborhood designs provides a context for human behavior, which, in this case, includes location decisions (residence, job locations) , auto ownership decisions, and.
|
From page 64... ...
TCRP H-12 Final Report Figure 3.2 Urban Form Impacts on Activity and Travel ~ \~ (Accessibility) (Demographic)
|
From page 65... ...
199] influence on development within North Quincy along with other complementary factors; elsewhere, little impacts observed - 41
|
From page 66... ...
TCRP H-12 Final Report Table 3e2, contld C~g~' Residential location preferences strongly affected by transportation system; significant premium exists for housing within walking distance of a light rail station (Calgary) Chicago Rail system improvements generated no discernable land-use impacts, although one must note He high level of CBD development high cost of land, and the "mature" nature of the existing system Cleveland Subway construction had minimal land-use impact; note lack of complementary policies/factors relative to the Toronto case Glasgow.
|
From page 67... ...
TCRP H-12 Final Report Table 3e2, cont~d Philadelphia Substantial increase in property values along the Lindewold tine; influenced zoning and actual investments ~ suburban office and apa~-ln~ent buildings although growth along the line was not higher than in other portions of the urban region Portland Property value Trip acts of Me Portland light-rai! line difficult to identify No statistically significant impact of proximity to rail stations on property values for Portland stations Significant new development observed adjacent to Portland light rail stations Toronto Significant development occured around many stations; some evidence of increased proper values and densities adjacent to stations; however, much of this results from aggressive zoning, joint public-private development, and, in general carefully coordinated transit and land-use development Washington, D.C.
|
From page 68... ...
Such flexible relativeiv ubiquitous systems Carl provide reasonably high levels of accessibility, which, in nine influence location and Ravel choices, but which, In and of themseIves. are assumed to be unlikely to stimulate major land development decisions.
|
From page 69... ...
The decision concerning where to live or where to locate one's Finn depends in no small way on the prices of different building types at different locations. Given the absolutely fundamental importance of market processes in both land development and location choice, it is essential that these processes be explicitly included in any integrated model of transportation and land-use, if a proper understanding of urban system dynamics and evolution is to be achieved.
|
From page 70... ...
be modeled within an Integrated urban model, some almost certainly can not. The lesson, however is Me same as has been stated at venous points throughout this section: the need for integrated urban models as the only to feasible method for properly analyzing and forecasting the land development process.
|
From page 71... ...
Public Facilities | Urban l | Renewal ~OTHER NEW NEARBY LAND Prig ate ~ INVESTMENTS Dcvclopment l cighborhood ~LOCAL LAND I Aninades I USE POLICIES _ 1 / Zoning & / I Development Incentives TCRP H-12 Final Report Figure 3.3 Factors Influencing Land-Use Impact (Source: Knight aIld TIygg t19774) Cost of Land &` Site Preparation Public Assembly Activities · Urban Renewal Transit Excess (Young Amend,T~cut)
|
From page 72... ...
TCRP H-12 Final Report - 48
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.