• Contenu principal
  • Menu
OpenEdition Books
  • Accueil
  • Catalogue de 16313 livres
  • Éditeurs
  • Auteurs
  • Facebook
  • X
  • Partager
    • Facebook

    • X

    • Accueil
    • Catalogue de 16313 livres
    • Éditeurs
    • Auteurs
  • Ressources numériques en sciences humaines et sociales

    • OpenEdition
  • Nos plateformes

    • OpenEdition Books
    • OpenEdition Journals
    • Hypothèses
    • Calenda
  • Bibliothèques

    • OpenEdition Freemium
  • Suivez-nous

  • Lettre d’information
OpenEdition Search

Redirection vers OpenEdition Search.

À quel endroit ?
  • Presses universitaires du Septentrion
  • ›
  • Environnement et société
  • ›
  • Ecocity, Knowledge city, Smart city
  • ›
  • Chapitre 2. Ville, Modes de transports e...
  • ›
  • Urban Development and Sustainable Transp...
  • Presses universitaires du Septentrion
  • Presses universitaires du Septentrion
    Presses universitaires du Septentrion
    Informations sur la couverture
    Table des matières
    Liens vers le livre
    Informations sur la couverture
    Table des matières
    Formats de lecture

    Plan

    Plan détaillé Texte intégral Introduction 1. Benefits of Transit and TODs 2. Analyzing TODs 3. Understanding Lifecycle and Process of Assessing TOD 4. Methods 5. Results and discussions 6. Qualitative Outcome: Recommendations for All Stations 7. Additional Recommendations for TOD Stations 8. Implications Bibliographie Auteur

    Ecocity, Knowledge city, Smart city

    Ce livre est recensé par

    Précédent Suivant
    Table des matières

    Urban Development and Sustainable Transportation: Is Transit Oriented Development the Answer?

    Praveen Maghelal

    p. 91-102

    Texte intégral Bibliographie Auteur

    Texte intégral

    Introduction

    1Transit Oriented Development (TOD) is an outcome of sustainable planning approaches guided by the principles of New Urbanism and Smart growth. The benefits of TODs are two folds: (1) create active communities that incorporate multi-modal transportation system with complimentary land uses and (2) increased use of transit system by the residents of the TOD. Generally TODs are considered to have a positive impact on communities’ identity, vitality and health. However, the success of TOD to serve the two benefits has been discussed and analyzed for about two decades now (Cevero and Kockelman, 1997; TRB, 2002; Daniel and Patrick, 2011). Some TODs provide both the benefits within a few years of its development whereas some fail without either one of the benefits to the community. The third categories of TODs are those that report less success either at the beginning or after certain time period of its development. This indicates that TODs have a life-cycle and goes through a process that makes it more or less effective in providing the two intended benefits. It is therefore important to understand that life-cycle and the process to help develop TODs that can be more effective and successful over its lifespan. Does the transit oriented development serve its intended purpose successfully for all transit stations? Should planners and transit agencies develop such TODs for all the stations in their jurisdiction? What role do planners and private developers play in such developments? are some critical questions that remains unanswered to understand the lifecycle and processes of the TODs.

    2Henceforth, the goal of this investigation is to analyze the transit stations in the North Texas region and understand its lifecycle and the process that has made them more or less effective in delivering the benefit that was intended by both the city and the developer. To do so, stakeholders such as the developers, city representatives and transit agency representatives were interviewed to determine the general themes that they identify as successful strategies for a TOD.

    1. Benefits of Transit and TODs

    3Mass public transportation services and the TODs have a regional impact beyond just the jurisdiction it serves. Regular use of transit is associated with increased physical activity by walking and biking to transit stations, reduced vehicle miles travelled, reduced congestion and emission, reduction in vehicular accidents, improved community health, lower health and transportation based expenses per household and increased mobility (Besser and Dannenburg, 2005; Susan, Xinyu and Mokhtarian, 2005; Barth and Boriboonsomsin, 2008; Robin, Olu, David, 2010; Richardson, 2005; Maghelal, 2011a; Zahran, et al., 2008). Transit oriented developments provides similar benefits including active communities, sufficient open space, increased recreational and retail activities, better social life and higher tax revenues for cities. These benefits drive cities to plan a network of transit systems and attract transit oriented developments in their jurisdictions.

    2. Analyzing TODs

    4A good TOD will incorporate and strategically plan for density, diversity and design, meaning that each element must work in conjunction with the others for it to be successful. Because TODs are focused on providing alternative transportation, development with high densities and mixed land use allow pedestrians to walk or bike to their destinations. To compliment these elements, design also plays a factor in ensuring that TODs are an attractive place for current and prospective residents. Furthermore, TODs build a strong sense of community and place and from a sustainability perspective, successful TODs provide a variety of environmental benefits by way of decreased vehicular use.

    5The assessment of transit oriented development have traditionally used the 3Ds: Density, Diversity and Design (Cervero, 2002) and have sometimes included the Destinations (Lee and Moudon, 2006) as part of this assessment. Cervero and Kockelman (1997) reported that density, land-use diversity and pedestrian-oriented designs generally reduce (vehicular) trip rates and encourage non-auto travel in statistically significant ways, albeit marginally. The built-environment around transit stations have analyzed the impact of such development on transit use. These studies have investigated and proposed interventions in built-environment to increase walkability to transit station (Schlossberg and Brown, 2004; Besser and Dannenberg, 2005; Brown and Werner, 2007; Maghelal, 2011b).

    6For instance, Maghelal et al. (2011b) investigated the role of the design, density, diversity and destination characteristics at varying distance of quarter and half-mile on individuals walking to transit station. Parking at transit stations reported to have a mediating effect on walking to stations that report high employment and housing density. Therefore, in general, the density, diversity, design and destination characteristics of the built-environment have reported positive association with transit use. However, issues that impact the development process of TODs still remains to be investigated.

    3. Understanding Lifecycle and Process of Assessing TOD

    7In a report by TCRP (2004), a national survey of 90 transit agencies indicated that about 50% of these agencies reported having a regional vision or plan and 42% reported to have adopted a TOD plans or zoning in their vision. However, such plans and visions have either not been successfully implemented or has reported as success in making it a truly a transit oriented development. There are conflicts that arise between developers and planner, developers and the community, transit agency and the community or combinations of such that make this envisioning unsuccessful (e.g.: TODs in California, Oregon and Virginia).

    8The study also reported the most important factors that encourage a developer to opt for transit oriented developed. The top most criteria is understanding the proper use and availability of the existing land-use designation. Other barriers that could affect the implementation of a TOD plan range from financial barriers (lending) to political and community will. These can have a significant impact of the role a developer, planner, transit agency and the community play in the success or failure of a development around transit station.

    9This study investigates the roles developers and planners play in developing communities around transit station. Specifically, we investigate the process and the beginning of these developmental activities by interviewing the planners and private developers who are involved with major developments around 10 transit stations in the North Texas region.

    4. Methods

    10In the North Texas Region, three transit agencies that serve four county area (Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant), which include the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T) and the Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA). These agencies serve these communities through light-rail, bus systems, Para-transit, High Occupancy Vehicle lanes and ride share services and provide a combined ridership of about 115 million passenger trips in 2012. The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), the entity that projects the population and employment growth for the region, estimates that the population in the North Texas region will increase to 9.1 million in 2030 (2030 Transit Plan).

    11Currently, little is known about the successful strategies that have made and will continue to make the transit stations a magnet for development in North Texas. Because the North Texas transit system is in its infancy, the region has an opportunity to examine the interaction and process between transit and planning agencies and private developers to identify strategies that spur development that will enhance transit usage and mobility in the North Texas region now and in the future.

    Analysis

    12Every station has characteristics and context that is unique which makes the generalization of recommendations difficult. However, TODs are developments around transit stations that, if well planned, can serve both the community and the transit ridership. Henceforth, every station can be classified broadly based on the type of development and accessibility to transit. Development is driven by its setting: Urban versus Suburban. There are distinct differences in the type of development that occurs in an urban and suburban area and these differences impact development around the transit stations.

    13Conversely, one of the major barrier/supporting infrastructure that is related to transit ridership is the availability of parking at the station (Maghelal, 2011b). Research indicates that increased availability of parking is correlated with increased ridership. Therefore the stations were classified based on availability or lack thereof parking at the station. The sub-categorization of the development influences the land uses and the station characteristics equally. The Infill stations generally are located in communities that are moderately to well-developed while the Greenfield stations are located in communities with little or no development (Table 1).

    Table 1. Categorization of Study Stations based on Development and Parking Characteristics.

    DEVELOPMENT/TRANSIT CHARACTERPARKINGNO-PARKING
    URBANInfillMockingbirdCedars
    GreenfieldWestmorelandBuckner
    Commuter RailHebron-DCTA
    SURBURBANInfillGarlandDowntown Plano
    GreenfieldBush TurnpikeGalatyn Park
    Commuter RailIrving Heritage-TRE

    14A committee of experts with from the transit agency and transit oriented development worked together to develop the themes on which the public agencies and private developers were to be interviewed in order to understand the existing process and function of transit oriented development in the North Texas region. The major goal was to identify the current process and function that can help determine the barriers and opportunities to enhance the transit oriented development specifically for the North Texas region.

    15Therefore, specific public agency officials who were and are involved with the development decision around each study stations were selected. As recommended by the public officials, individual developers who are engaged in development around each of these stations were selected and interviewed as well.

    Qualitative Analysis

    16The interviews with the public officials and the private developers were used for content analysis and case study analysis. The themes identified from the content analysis were then used to answer specific questions for the case study analysis.

    17The goal of this analysis to summarize the discussions with the public agency representative and the private developers to answer questions related to the four main themes:

    • Lifecycle: What role do the public agencies and private developers play in Transit Oriented Developments? What accommodation or changes do they make for TODs? What future plans do they have for the TOD?
    • Characteristics: What is the diversity of land uses in the TOD (as reported by the public officials)? How do they perceive and rank the built-environment (aesthetics and multimodal access)? How do they characterize the residents (age, income, ethnicity, etc)? Does the development have any specific destination to attract public within and outside the TOD?
    • Function: Does the development support or benefit from transit? Does the development have or have a vision to consider transit as a focus of their development? Do the developments fit well with TOD characteristics?
    • Externalities: How are the developments in TOD financed? Do public residing around transit support the developments? Are the developments in future supportive to transit use and compact development?

    5. Results and discussions

    18It must be noted that the DART system is currently in its infancy in comparison to other major transit services in the nation. Nevertheless, it is the longest light rail network spanning over 85 miles across 13 cities developed in a period of just 17 years. Additionally, the geography and the culture of North Texas is unique due to its dependence on private auto use and the large suburban type development in most part of the region. For these reasons, the North Texas region may not be well suited to be evaluated using the traditional Calthorpe’s definition of a successful TOD. This is supported by the common claim by the public officials, transit agency, and the private developers that while the developments around the DART LRT stations benefit from being in close proximity to the station, these developments do not target transit use entirely in their mission.

    19One of the major implications of this analysis is, not all stations in the North Texas region can or must be targeted to be a traditional TOD. Such blanket targeting can have unforeseen impacts on the community and may not be beneficial to existing residents and sustainability of the community as a whole. Therefore, this study recommends certain approaches that can be utilized by all stations and others that are specific to the stations that could potentially become a TOD (in context of North Texas Region) in the future.

    6. Qualitative Outcome: Recommendations for All Stations

    20The following recommendations are approaches related to the four themes: (1) Lifecycle, (2) Characteristics, (3) Function and (4) Externalities. These recommendations are for all types of stations whether they be trip generator, trip destination, or TOD stations.

    Lifecycle

    (1) Role of Public and Private Agencies: The review of discussion with both the public agencies and private developers revealed that a conceptual idea for the type of development that may suit the station area is needed before actual development occurs. Henceforth, the planning agencies should develop a site-area plan prior to inviting developers on-board. This will help them guide the future development in the context area of the station. Also, since city planning agencies are most aware of the existing development, they can take a lead on setting a guideline for “context-sensitive” design strategies that can be attractive for private developers and does not affect the existing fabric of the community.

    (2) Changes in Development Area: In sense of the scale of planning, the planning agencies in the cities should take a lead in creating a general “land classification plan” of growth policy areas rather than a detailed land use pattern. When developing a more detailed “land use plan”, the public agencies should work with the developers and transit agencies to identify the exact development that could benefit transit users and the residents of the proposed development.

    (3) Future Plans: Planning is done with a vision to meet the needs of growth in future. However, contingency plans should be prepared incase planning and/or developments strategies fail owing to multiple reasons such as economic downturn, developer’s inability to continue with proposed project, or change in political/public will. This will however require detailed understanding and involvement of individuals with expertise in analyzing and predicting market behavior in future.

    Characteristics

    (4) Multimodal Access: Multimodal access to station may not work successfully for all stations the same way. Hence before making investments in development of infrastructure such as biking and walking trails, sidewalks, parking and availability of other modes of public transportation, station area characteristics need to be considered in the design. The demographic of residents, the origin destination trip characteristics and the context area of the station can be used as indicators to determine the extent of investment that could serve the transit and its users.

    Function

    (5) Support Transit: Parking at the station is positively associated with transit ridership (Maghelal, 2011). However, reduced availability of parking can deter individuals from using transit for their commuter and non-commuter trips. Therefore, parking at the station should be strategically planned to be available mostly for residents over the distance of half-mile (general walkable distance) from the station area and at reduced cost for long-term transit pass holders.

    (6) Development: Businesses that suit the needs of the residents of the community should be encouraged to set up an establishment in the neighborhood. Small and medium size businesses should be encouraged in primarily residential station areas whereas large retail, and recreational centers such as theatres, restaurants should be planned in a mixed use station area. Also, innovative, energy efficient, sustainable and green design approaches such as LEED certified buildings that can save energy for the cities should be encouraged for the proposed developments.

    Externalities

    (7) Transit Service: Availability or lack thereof of frequent transit service is one of the major deterrents of individuals planning to use transit for their trips. However, transit service providers have budgetary restrictions that does not help them maximize the service provision for its users. In such as case, innovative approaches such as public-private partnerships for transit service provision can be discussed to improve the frequency of transit availability.

    (8) Funding: Funding strategies, both public and private, such as the Tax Incentive Districts, Special Districts, Obligation Bonds, private funds and banking are some approaches that can be utilized to finance the proposed development in the station area. However, these strategies should be planned ahead and should be in-place for the developments to occur as planned. Also, private developers with sufficient independent financial support should be invited and encouraged to develop the station area. In recent, public-private partnership based developments are especially encouraged for such developments.

    (9) Public Support: Public participation is essential for successful implementation of any development. Therefore, planning agencies should include, educate and inform the citizens of their jurisdiction about the vision and goals of the future developments even before specific developments are identified. This could be done through community charrettes. This vision could inform concerned citizens and representatives from the community about the type and scale of planned development and use public feedback to identify the concerns and probable roadblocks in future. Development plans and progress of the same should be available on the city’s website to inform the citizens they may get affected by the proposed developments.

    7. Additional Recommendations for TOD Stations

    21The recommendations below are specific to stations that have the potential to become a TOD, although not in a traditional sense because of the unique development pattern and culture of North Texas region. These recommendations emerge from the gaps identified by the city, transit and the development agencies interviewed for this study.

    Lifecycle

    (1) Role of Public and Private Agencies: The public agencies can transition from a general land classification plan to a specific land use plan for the station area with private developers on-board. For a typical TOD area, these developers should have some experience and success in developing appropriate mixed use development. The public agencies should and continue to provide appropriate incentives and support to attract such developers. On the other hand, these developers should pass those incentives in ways such as incentivized parking for the residents of TOD developments in the station area.

    (2) Future Plans: It is essential to have flexible planning approaches and developments in the station area. It is especially important in the TODs, as recessions (as the one in 2008) can lead to limited funding from banks to support mixed use developments. Henceforth, experienced developers with sufficient financial backing should be invited on-board for the TODs.

    Characteristics

    (3) Design and Diversity: Transit-oriented developments attract young professional who prefer to live in locations that provides them different options for trip-making. Therefore, development plans for such transit area should provide variety of residential options for young professionals. Also, business and activities that support the needs of young professionals should be invited at locations that are underdeveloped or undeveloped and are in close proximity to the station. Although a typical TOD provides multimodal opportunities for its residents, some stations may work efficiently with just on-road access without special infrastructure that supports walking and biking. Hence “context-sensitive design” approaches should be incorporated in planning and development of multi-modal access. Research indicates increased prices of housing adjacent to transit stations (Hess and Almeida, 2007). This could have social implications by segregating the less fortunate. Hence, city official should try to incorporate market price housing (affordable housing) as part of TOD. Experienced developers who design and develop housing for low-income households and green and sustainable developments should be invited to the table for TODs. They could also provide special incentives to developers who focus on market price and/or green/sustainable housing developments such that its viable for these developers to encourage the diverse income community in the station catchment area.

    (4) Destination: Stations identified as a typical TOD station should have destination that are attractive not only to its residents, but also individuals who travel to those destination from surrounding communities. Therefore, city officials should plan to incorporate one or more activity centers in TOD centers to attract, engage and enhance the vitality of the community. These could be indoor activity centers such as the performance theatres or outdoor locations such as the music festival arena. To accomplish this, cities can work with the communities to organize and coordinate special events in close proximity to transit station to attract members of adjoining communities to use transit and attend special events at these stations. Other recreation destinations such as urban parks and open mall area with fountains and kiosks can add aesthetic value to such station areas.

    Function

    (5) Transit (and Development) Support Infrastructure: Parking infrastructure in the development around the transit station should be made available to the residents in close proximity to transit with little or no cost. However, these residents should be discouraged from parking at the station. Also, parking, at certain hours of the day, should be free of cost or at reduced cost for residents outside half-mile distance who utilize the businesses in the TOD area. This would attract more business from adjoining areas and reduce the peak hour demand on parking facilities.

    (6) Development: Existing business that does not fit the fabric of a typical TOD could be provided incentive to move their business to alternative sites. This is especially important for in-fill TOD stations. On the contrary, if such an option is not available or viable, design strategies and approaches to enhance the look of such business should be planned in the TOD area.

    Externalities

    (7) Transit Service: Transit agencies should work with communities and the city official to make provision for additional service at higher frequency for transit users traveling to TOD station or destination stations during a specific event (e.g.: state fair). This service should be at or in close proximity to the event location. Parking at premium cost, can also encourage individuals to use transit for their trips.

    (8) Funding: In-fill stations with locations or parcels in dilapidated condition should be demolished and rebuilt. These developments could be a good alternative for market-price housing. Therefore, cities can create a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with non-profit organizations such as Habitat for Humanity to develop dilapidated and deteriorating properties that can help incentivize the cost of housing for its residents.

    (9) Future Development: Future developments in the station area should use the principles of new urbanism and compact communities as their guiding principles for its design and development. Form-based code could be proposed that guides such developments not just within the TOD catchment area (half to one mile) but also in the context area (over one-mile) of the station.

    8. Implications

    22Developments around transit stations, over time, are proposed to generate healthier lifestyle for its residents and create opportunities for alternative mode of travel. Multi-modal transportation network with optimum land use mix generate an active lifestyle and encourage use of transit for utilitarian and recreational trips in these neighborhood.

    23Such developments do not necessary have to be a typical transit-oriented development, rather respond to the existing fabric of the community. This study proposed the type of development particular to the context area of the stations and categorized these stations as trip generation, trip destination and a typical TOD station.

    24The process and function of such developments are summarized below. It has to be noted that analysis of all the stations could reveal more strategies that could not be captured by analyzing the ten study stations. Also, North Texas is not typical major city and hence the implications could vary for regions analyzed in other parts of the country.

    25Nonetheless, the following implications have value for the process and function of developing a TOD and could be compared for its validity in other regions of the nation.

    Bibliographie

    Des DOI sont automatiquement ajoutés aux références bibliographiques par Bilbo, l’outil d’annotation bibliographique d’OpenEdition. Ces références bibliographiques peuvent être téléchargées dans les formats APA, Chicago et MLA.

    Format

    • APA
    • Chicago
    • MLA
    Cervero, R., & Kockelman, K. (1997). Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2(3), 199-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1361-9209(97)00009-6
    Cervero, R. (2002). Built environments and mode choice: toward a normative framework. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 7(4), 265-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1361-9209(01)00024-4
    Hess, D. B., & Almeida, T. M. (2007). Impact of Proximity to Light Rail Rapid Transit on Station-area Property Values in Buffalo, New York. Urban Studies, 44(5-6), 1041-1068. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980701256005
    Lee, C., & Moudon, A. V. (2006). Correlates of Walking for Transportation or Recreation Purposes. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 3(s1), S77-S98. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.3.s1.s77
    Maghelal, P. (2011). Investigating the relationships among rising fuel prices, increased transit ridership, and CO2 emissions. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 16(3), 232-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2010.12.002
    Schlossberg, M., & Brown, N. (2004). Comparing Transit-Oriented Development Sites by Walkability Indicators. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1887(1), 34-42. https://doi.org/10.3141/1887-05
    Zahran, S., Brody, S. D., Maghelal, P., Prelog, A., & Lacy, M. (2008). Cycling and walking: Explaining the spatial distribution of healthy modes of transportation in the United States. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 13(7), 462-470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2008.08.001
    Cervero, Robert, and Kara Kockelman. “Travel Demand and the 3Ds: Density, Diversity, and Design”. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 2, nos. 3 (September 1997): 199-219. doi:10.1016/s1361-9209(97)00009-6.
    Cervero, Robert. “Built Environments and Mode Choice: Toward a Normative Framework”. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 7, nos. 4 (June 2002): 265-84. doi:10.1016/s1361-9209(01)00024-4.
    Hess, Daniel Baldwin, and Tangerine Maria Almeida. “Impact of Proximity to Light Rail Rapid Transit on Station-Area Property Values in Buffalo, New York”. Urban Studies 44, no. 5-6 (May 2007): 1041-68. doi:10.1080/00420980701256005.
    Lee, Chanam, and Anne Vernez Moudon. “Correlates of Walking for Transportation or Recreation Purposes”. Journal of Physical Activity and Health 3, no. s1 (February 2006): S77-S98. doi:10.1123/jpah.3.s1.s77.
    Maghelal, Praveen. “Investigating the Relationships Among Rising Fuel Prices, Increased Transit Ridership, and CO2 Emissions”. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 16, nos. 3 (May 2011): 232-35. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2010.12.002.
    Schlossberg, Marc, and Nathaniel Brown. “Comparing Transit-Oriented Development Sites by Walkability Indicators”. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1887, no. 1 (January 2004): 34-42. doi:10.3141/1887-05.
    Zahran, Sammy, Samuel D. Brody, Praveen Maghelal, Andrew Prelog, and Michael Lacy. “Cycling and Walking: Explaining the Spatial Distribution of Healthy Modes of Transportation in the United States”. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 13, nos. 7 (October 2008): 462-70. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2008.08.001.
    Cervero, Robert, and Kara Kockelman. “Travel Demand and the 3Ds: Density, Diversity, and Design”. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vols. 2, nos. 3, Sept. 1997, pp. 199-1. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.1016/s1361-9209(97)00009-6.
    Cervero, Robert. “Built Environments and Mode Choice: Toward a Normative Framework”. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vols. 7, nos. 4, June 2002, pp. 265-84. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.1016/s1361-9209(01)00024-4.
    Hess, Daniel Baldwin, and Tangerine Maria Almeida. “Impact of Proximity to Light Rail Rapid Transit on Station-Area Property Values in Buffalo, New York”. Urban Studies, vols. 44, no. 5-6, May 2007, pp. 1041-68. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980701256005.
    Lee, Chanam, and Anne Vernez Moudon. “Correlates of Walking for Transportation or Recreation Purposes”. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, vols. 3, no. s1, Feb. 2006, pp. S77-S98. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.3.s1.s77.
    Maghelal, Praveen. “Investigating the Relationships Among Rising Fuel Prices, Increased Transit Ridership, and CO2 Emissions”. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vols. 16, nos. 3, May 2011, pp. 232-5. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2010.12.002.
    Schlossberg, Marc, and Nathaniel Brown. “Comparing Transit-Oriented Development Sites by Walkability Indicators”. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vols. 1887, no. 1, Jan. 2004, pp. 34-42. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.3141/1887-05.
    Zahran, Sammy, et al. “Cycling and Walking: Explaining the Spatial Distribution of Healthy Modes of Transportation in the United States”. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vols. 13, nos. 7, Oct. 2008, pp. 462-70. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2008.08.001.

    Cette bibliographie a été enrichie de toutes les références bibliographiques automatiquement générées par Bilbo en utilisant Crossref.

    2030 Transit System Plan. October 2006. Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Dallas TX.

    BARTH, M. and BORIBOONSOMSIN, K., 2008. “Real-World CO2 Impacts of Traffic Congestion.” University of California Transportation Center. UC Berkeley: University of California Transportation Center. Retrieved from: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4fx9g4gn.

    BESSER, L. M. and DANNENBERG, A. L., 2005. “Walking to Public Transit: Steps to Help Meet Physical Activity Recommendations.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 29: 273-80.

    CERVERO, R. and KOCKELMAN, K., 1997. “Travel Demand and the 3ds: Density, Diversity, and Design.” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 2: 199-219.

    10.1016/S1361-9209(97)00009-6 :

    CERVERO, R., 2002. “Built environments and mode choice: Towards a normative framework.” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 7: 265-84.

    10.1016/S1361-9209(01)00024-4 :

    DANIEL, T. and MALLOY, P., 2011. “Suburbs in Disguise? Examining the Geographies of the New Urbanism.” Urban Geography 32: 424-47.

    HESS, D. B and TANGERINE, M. A., 2007. “Impact of proximity to light rail rapid transit on station-area property values in Buffalo, New York.” Urban Studies 44: 1041-1068.

    10.1080/00420980701256005 :

    LEE, C., MOUDON, A. V., 2006. “Correlates of walking for transportation or recreation purposes.” Journal of Physical Activity and Health 3: S77-S98.

    10.1123/jpah.3.s1.s77 :

    MAGHELAL, P., 2011a. “Investigating the Relationships among Rising Fuel Prices, Increased Transit Ridership, and CO2 Emissions.” Transportation Research D: Environment and Transportation 16D: 232-35.

    10.1016/j.trd.2010.12.002 :

    MAGHELAL, P., 2011b. “Walking to Transit: Influence of Built Environment at Varying Distances.” Institute of Transportation Engineers Journal 81: 38-43.

    MCHARG, I., 1969. “Design with nature.” Garden City, NY: Natural History Press.

    SCHLOSSBERG, M. and BROWN, N., 2004. “Comparing Transit-Oriented Development Sites by Walkability Indicators.” Transportation Research Record 1887: 34-42.

    10.3141/1887-05 :

    TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AND JOINT DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES: A LITERATURE REVIEW. 2002. TCRP Report 52, Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC.

    TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES: EXPERIENCES, CHALLENGES, AND PROSPECTS. 2004. TCRP Report 102, Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC.

    ZAHRAN, S., BRODY, S. D., MAGHELAL, P., PRELOG, A. and LACY, M., 2008. “Cycling and Walking: Explaining the Spatial Distribution of Healthy Modes of Transportation in the United States.” Transportation Research D: Environment and Transportation 7: 462-70.

    10.1016/j.trd.2008.08.001 :

    Auteur

    • Praveen Maghelal

      ORCID : 0000-0003-0324-9955

      Khalifa University. Abu Dhabi. Masdar Institute Abu Dhabi a fusionné en 2018 avec Khalifa University.

    Précédent Suivant
    Table des matières

    Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

    Voir plus de livres
    La ville et ses risques

    La ville et ses risques

    Habiter Dunkerque

    Séverine Frère et Hervé Flanquart (dir.)

    2017

    Dire la ville c’est faire la ville

    Dire la ville c’est faire la ville

    La performativité des discours sur l’espace urbain

    Yankel Fijalkow (dir.)

    2017

    Lille, métropole créative ?

    Lille, métropole créative ?

    Nouveaux liens, nouveaux lieux, nouveaux territoires

    Christine Liefooghe, Dominique Mons et Didier Paris (dir.)

    2016

    Biocarburants, les temps changent !

    Biocarburants, les temps changent !

    Effet d'annonce ou réelle avancée ?

    Helga-Jane Scarwell (dir.)

    2007

    Forêts et société au Canada

    Forêts et société au Canada

    Ressources durables ou horreur boréale ?

    Éric Glon

    2008

    Le changement climatique

    Le changement climatique

    Quand le climat nous pousse à changer d'ère

    Isabelle Roussel et Helga-Jane Scarwell (dir.)

    2010

    Inégalités écologiques, territoires littoraux & développement durable

    Inégalités écologiques, territoires littoraux & développement durable

    Philippe Deboudt (dir.)

    2010

    Enseigner les sciences sociales de l'environnement

    Enseigner les sciences sociales de l'environnement

    Un manuel multidisciplinaire

    Stéphane La Branche et Nicolas Milot (dir.)

    2010

    Développement durable et territoire

    Développement durable et territoire

    Nouvelle édition originale

    Bertrand Zuindeau (dir.)

    2010

    Éco-fiscalité et transport durable : entre prime et taxe ?

    Éco-fiscalité et transport durable : entre prime et taxe ?

    Séverine Frère et Helga-Jane Scarwell (dir.)

    2011

    Écologie industrielle et territoriale

    Écologie industrielle et territoriale

    Stratégies locales pour un développement durable

    Nicolas Buclet

    2011

    Universités et enjeux territoriaux

    Universités et enjeux territoriaux

    Une comparaison internationale de l'économie de la connaissance

    Patrizia Ingallina (dir.)

    2012

    Voir plus de livres
    1 / 12
    La ville et ses risques

    La ville et ses risques

    Habiter Dunkerque

    Séverine Frère et Hervé Flanquart (dir.)

    2017

    Dire la ville c’est faire la ville

    Dire la ville c’est faire la ville

    La performativité des discours sur l’espace urbain

    Yankel Fijalkow (dir.)

    2017

    Lille, métropole créative ?

    Lille, métropole créative ?

    Nouveaux liens, nouveaux lieux, nouveaux territoires

    Christine Liefooghe, Dominique Mons et Didier Paris (dir.)

    2016

    Biocarburants, les temps changent !

    Biocarburants, les temps changent !

    Effet d'annonce ou réelle avancée ?

    Helga-Jane Scarwell (dir.)

    2007

    Forêts et société au Canada

    Forêts et société au Canada

    Ressources durables ou horreur boréale ?

    Éric Glon

    2008

    Le changement climatique

    Le changement climatique

    Quand le climat nous pousse à changer d'ère

    Isabelle Roussel et Helga-Jane Scarwell (dir.)

    2010

    Inégalités écologiques, territoires littoraux & développement durable

    Inégalités écologiques, territoires littoraux & développement durable

    Philippe Deboudt (dir.)

    2010

    Enseigner les sciences sociales de l'environnement

    Enseigner les sciences sociales de l'environnement

    Un manuel multidisciplinaire

    Stéphane La Branche et Nicolas Milot (dir.)

    2010

    Développement durable et territoire

    Développement durable et territoire

    Nouvelle édition originale

    Bertrand Zuindeau (dir.)

    2010

    Éco-fiscalité et transport durable : entre prime et taxe ?

    Éco-fiscalité et transport durable : entre prime et taxe ?

    Séverine Frère et Helga-Jane Scarwell (dir.)

    2011

    Écologie industrielle et territoriale

    Écologie industrielle et territoriale

    Stratégies locales pour un développement durable

    Nicolas Buclet

    2011

    Universités et enjeux territoriaux

    Universités et enjeux territoriaux

    Une comparaison internationale de l'économie de la connaissance

    Patrizia Ingallina (dir.)

    2012

    Accès ouvert

    Accès ouvert freemium

    ePub

    PDF

    PDF du chapitre

    Suggérer l’acquisition à votre bibliothèque

    Acheter

    Édition imprimée

    Presses universitaires du Septentrion
    • amazon.fr
    • decitre.fr
    • mollat.com
    • leslibraires.fr
    • lcdpu.fr
    ePub / PDF

    Ecocity, Knowledge city, Smart city

    X Facebook Email

    Ecocity, Knowledge city, Smart city

    Ce livre est diffusé en accès ouvert freemium. L’accès à la lecture en ligne est disponible. L’accès aux versions PDF et ePub est réservé aux bibliothèques l’ayant acquis. Vous pouvez vous connecter à votre bibliothèque à l’adresse suivante : https://freemium.openedition.org/oebooks

    Suggérer l’acquisition à votre bibliothèque Acheter ce livre aux formats PDF et ePub

    Si vous avez des questions, vous pouvez nous écrire à access[at]openedition.org

    Ecocity, Knowledge city, Smart city

    Vérifiez si votre bibliothèque a déjà acquis ce livre : authentifiez-vous à OpenEdition Freemium for Books.

    Vous pouvez suggérer à votre bibliothèque d’acquérir un ou plusieurs livres publiés sur OpenEdition Books. N’hésitez pas à lui indiquer nos coordonnées : access[at]openedition.org

    Vous pouvez également nous indiquer, à l’aide du formulaire suivant, les coordonnées de votre bibliothèque afin que nous la contactions pour lui suggérer l’achat de ce livre. Les champs suivis de (*) sont obligatoires.

    Veuillez, s’il vous plaît, remplir tous les champs.

    La syntaxe de l’email est incorrecte.

    Référence numérique du chapitre

    Format

    Maghelal, P. (2019). Urban Development and Sustainable Transportation: Is Transit Oriented Development the Answer?. In P. Ingallina (éd.), Ecocity, Knowledge city, Smart city. Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses universitaires du Septentrion. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.septentrion.35938
    Maghelal, Praveen. « Urban Development and Sustainable Transportation: Is Transit Oriented Development the Answer? ». In Ecocity, Knowledge City, Smart City, édité par Patrizia Ingallina. Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 2019. doi:10.4000/books.septentrion.35938.
    Maghelal, Praveen. « Urban Development and Sustainable Transportation: Is Transit Oriented Development the Answer? ». Ecocity, Knowledge City, Smart City, édité par Patrizia Ingallina, Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4000/books.septentrion.35938.

    Référence numérique du livre

    Format

    Ingallina, P. (éd.). (2019). Ecocity, Knowledge city, Smart city. Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses universitaires du Septentrion. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.septentrion.35851
    Ingallina, Patrizia, éd. Ecocity, Knowledge city, Smart city. Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 2019. doi:10.4000/books.septentrion.35851.
    Ingallina, Patrizia, éditeur. Ecocity, Knowledge city, Smart city. Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4000/books.septentrion.35851.
    Compatible avec Zotero Zotero

    1 / 3

    Presses universitaires du Septentrion

    Presses universitaires du Septentrion

    • Mentions légales
    • Plan du site
    • Se connecter

    Suivez-nous

    • Facebook
    • LinkedIn
    • Instagram
    • X
    • Bluesky
    • Flux RSS

    URL : http://www.septentrion.com

    Email : contact@septentrion.com

    Adresse :

    Université de Lille

    Rue du barreau

    BP 30199

    59654

    Villeneuve d’Ascq

    France

    OpenEdition
    • Candidater à OpenEdition Books
    • Connaître le programme OpenEdition Freemium
    • Commander des livres
    • S’abonner à la lettre d’OpenEdition
    • CGU d’OpenEdition Books
    • Accessibilité : partiellement conforme
    • Données personnelles
    • Gestion des cookies
    • Système de signalement