Effective Transit Requires Walkable Communities: Land Use Lessons of Transport Patterns in Four World Cities

Abstract

A comparison of transportation systems in the metropolitan areas of the world’s financial capitals—London, Paris, New York, and Tokyo—found that although all of the urban areas are spreading outward from their historical and economic cores, there are striking differences in their patterns of development—and the transport consequences. The principal determinant of travel demand and mode in the four cities is the extent to which housing and employment are clustered around transit. It appears that the more that daily trip needs can be met by walking, the more likely that longer trips will be made by transit than by automobile. This conclusion is drawn from the high transit use and low automobile use in the inner zones of New York, where there is the largest number of rapid-transit stations of all four cities. It is reinforced by comparisons of outer zones of New York and Tokyo with similar total population density but strikingly different configurations of settlement and greatly contrasting travel patterns. Extensive supporting data are reported. The land use configurations of each region are as much the product of institutional and economic forces as of each city’s geography, history, and culture. London, the urban area most similar to the New York region in size and culture, is responding to aggressive national policies that mandate land use plans to promote town centers and reduce travel demand. Long-range planning processes in Tokyo and Paris have achieved transit-oriented development even in their outer zones. In contrast, hundreds of municipalities in the 31 -county New York metropolitan area make reactive land use decisions influenced by incentives to sprawl inherent in the U.S. economy. Measures to offset these forces are recommended.

Rail City Berlin: Rail Infrastructure Development and Intermodality in the Reunified German Capital

“…Europe is a particularly important case, not only because of its expansive high-speed rail network but also because of its rich experiences in rail transit operations at the urban and regional levels. In Europe, sustainable transport strategies are generally better supported by supranational (European Union level), national, and local policy commitments and government incentives than in the United States (1) and by higher-density land use patterns that make transit and walking viable alternatives to automobile transport (2). Mobility styles in Germany are generally less auto oriented (3).…”

Creating walkable places: neighbourhood and municipal level perspectives on the socio‐political process in Ottawa, Canada

“…Walking is an inexpensive and accessible form of physical activity with numerous health benefits (Miller et al 2000, Weuve et al 2004, Lee and Buchner 2008, Nelson and Folta 2009, Pucher et al 2010. It also provides a means of transport and, in combination with public transit, represents a more environmentally sustainable option than travel by automobile (Kenworthy 2006, Konheim and Ketcham 2007, Vuchic 2008. In places that support walking, opportunities for social interaction and a sense of belonging are enhanced, which can contribute to a greater sense of community (Freeman 2001, Leyden 2003, Cattell et al 2008, Mehta 2008, Wood et al 2010.…”

A Bibliometric Analysis of Product-Service Systems’ Design Methodologies: Potential Root-Cause Identification of PSS’ Failures

“…Targeting this CSe might have resulted in higher revenue per trip and potentially lower availability acceptance within this CSe. Modal shift would have been smaller, as public transport is less represented outside of Paris's inner center [18].…”

“…Indeed, inside Paris, the CSe needed to generate revenue was one that would generate modal shift ultimately. With key resources (KR) set (charging station in this case) mostly inside Paris, where concentration of public station presents high density [18], contradictions between CSe and RS occurs as CSe of wealthy users inside Paris not using public transport represent a too narrow RS regarding the KR set for this CSe, and modifying RS (targeting outside Paris commuting) would not fit with KR set and CSe associated with it. Eventually, an environmental paradox appears as described earlier: The modal shift eclipses the first expected environmental impacts.…”