Transport, Urban form and Land-Use

Outline: -Transportation and urban form - Land use and urban form -Urban land use and transportation

Outline: -Transportation and urban form - Land use and urban form -Urban land use and transportation

Urban form In urban situations mobility and demographic growth have been shaped by the capacity of transport infrastructure, ranging from roads, bus routes and rail lines. Urban form in the context of an urban transportation system is the spatial imprint on an urban network. Urban (spatial) structure is the set of relationships arising from urban form and the underlying movements of goods and people.

The interconnection between urban centres like in most transport applications is achieved through a series of nodes and links. - Nodes: these can be termed as either a spatial accumulation of economic activities or the accessibility to the transport system. Such transport nodes include: rail stations, ports, air ports or bus stations. -Linkages are the infrastructure supporting movements. These linkages vary from footpaths to roads and railways. Urban transport systems can be structured in three broad categories, collective, individual and freight transport. In most cases they can be complementary to each other, however they may be competing against each other for land.

- Collective Transportation (public transport): The purpose of collective transportation is to provide publicly accessible mobility over specific parts of a city. Its efficiency is based upon transporting large numbers of people and achieving economies of scale. It includes modes such as light rail, buses, metro etc.

- Individual Transportation. Includes any mode where mobility is the outcome of a personal choice and means such as the automobile, walking, cycling and the motorcycle. The majority of people walk to satisfy their basic mobility, but this number varies according to the city considered. For instance, walking account for 88% of all movements inside Tokyo while this figure is only 3% for Los Angeles. -Freight Transportation. As cities are dominant centres of production and consumption, urban activities are accompanied by large movements of freight. These movements are mostly characterised by delivery trucks moving between industries, distribution centres, warehouses and retail activities as well as from major terminals such as ports, rail yards, distribution centres and airports. Urban transportation is thus associated with a spatial form which varies according to the models being used. What has not changed much is that cities tend to opt for a grid street pattern. This was the case for many Roman cities as it is for American cities. The reasons behind this permanence are relatively simple; a grid pattern jointly optimise accessibility and available real estate. In an age of motorisation and personal mobility, an increasing number of cities are developing a spatial structure that increases reliance on motorised transportation, particularly the privately owned automobile.

Dispersion, or urban sprawl, is taking place in many different types of cities, from dense, centralised European metropolises such as Madrid, Paris, London and Dublin, to rapidly industrialising metropolises such as Seoul, Shanghai, and Buenos Aires, to those experiencing recent, fast and uncontrolled urban growth, such as Bombay and Lagos.

Walking. The space / time relationship of such a commute would be a circle of 10 km of diameter. Public transport. In this case, the space / time relationship would be star shaped to reflect walking to the public transport service and of 15 km of diameter along the lines. Cycling. With approximately the same speed of public transport , but with no fixed line limitations, the space / time relationship of commuting by bicycle would be a circle of 15 km of diameter. Driving (no freeways). With a driving speed of about 30 km per hour (taking into account of stops, lights, congestion and parking), an automobile creates a spherical space / time relationship of about 30 km in diameter. Driving (with freeways). Along a freeway, a fixed infrastructure, the driving speed is doubled to 60 km per hour. The space / time relationship is then star shaped with 60 km of diameter along its axis.

The relationship between Transportation and Urban Form The evolution of transportation has generally led to changes in urban form. The more radical the changes in transport technology, the more the urban form has been altered. Among the most fundamental changes in urban form is the emergence of new clusters expressing new urban activities and new relationships between elements of the urban system.

Among the most fundamental changes in urban form is the emergence of new clusters expressing new urban activities and new relationships between elements of the urban system.

In many cities, the central business district (CBD), once the primary destination of commuters and serviced by public transportation, has been changed by new manufacturing, retailing and management practices.

Whereas traditional manufacturing depended on centralised workplaces and transportation, technological and transportation developments rendered modern industry more flexible. In many cases, manufacturing relocated in a suburban setting, if not altogether to entirely new low costs locations. Retail and office activities are also suburbanising, producing changes in the urban form.

From the 1950s, the growth of suburbs was mainly taking place adjacent to major road corridors, leaving a lot of vacant or farm land in between. Later, intermediate spaces were gradually filled up, more or less coherently. Highways and ring roads, which circled and radiated from cities, favoured the development of suburbs and the emergence of important sub-centres that compete with the central business district for the attraction of economic activities. As a result, many new job opportunities have shifted to the suburbs (if not to entirely new locations abroad) and the activity system of cities has been considerably modified. Different parts of a city have different dynamism depending on its spatial pattern.

These changes have occurred according to the variety of geographical and historical contexts, notably in North America and Europe (Muller, 1995). In addition, North American and European cities have seen different changes in urban density. Two processes have a substantial impact on contemporary urban forms:

Dispersed urban land development patterns have been dominant in North America over the last 50 years, where land is abundant, transportation costs are low, and the economy has become dominated by service and technology industries.

Under such circumstances, it is not surprising to find that there is a strong relationship between urban density and automobile use. For many cities their built up areas have grown at a faster rate than their populations.

In addition, commuting has become relatively inexpensive compared with land costs, so households have an incentive to buy lower-priced housing at the urban periphery. Similar patterns can be found in many European cities, but this change is occurring at a lower pace and involving a smaller range.

The decentralisation of activities resulted in two opposite effects.

First, commuting time has remained relatively stable in duration.

Second, commuting increasingly tends to be longer and made using the automobile rather than by public transit. Most transit and road systems were developed to facilitate suburb-to-city, rather than suburb-to-suburb, commuting. As a result, suburban highways are often as congested as urban highways.

Although transportation systems and travel patterns have changed considerably over time, one enduring feature remains that most people travel between 30-40 minutes in one direction.

Globally, people are spending about 1.2 hours per day commuting, wherever this takes place in a low or a high mobility setting (Schafer, 2000). Different transport technologies, however, are associated with different travel speeds and capacity. As a result, cities that rely primarily on non-motorised transport tend to be different than auto-dependent cities. Transport technology thus plays a very important role in defining urban form and the spatial pattern of various activities.

The Spatial Imprint of Urban Transportation

The amount of urban land allocated to transportation is often correlated with the level of mobility. In the pre-automobile era, about 10% of the urban land was devoted to transportation which were simply roads for a traffic that was dominantly pedestrian. As the mobility of people and freight increased, a growing share of urban areas is allocated to transport and the infrastructures supporting it. Large variations in the spatial imprint of urban transportation are observed between different cities as well as between different parts of a city, such as between central and peripheral areas. The major components of the spatial imprint of urban transportation are:

- Pedestrian areas: Refer to the amount of space devoted to walking. This space is often shared with roads as sidewalks may use between 10% and 20% of a road's right of way. In central areas, pedestrian areas tend to use a greater share of the right of way and in some instances, whole areas are reserved for pedestrians. However, in a motorised context, most of pedestrian areas are for servicing people's access to transport modes such as parked automobiles.

- Roads and parking areas: Refer to the amount of space devoted to road transportation, which has two states of activity; moving or parked. In a motorised city, on average 30% of the surface is devoted to roads while another 20% is required for off-street parking. This implies for each car about 2 off-street and 2 onstreet parking spaces. In North American cities, roads and car parks account between 30 to 60% of the total surface.

Cycling areas: In a disorganised form, cycling simply shares access to pedestrian and road space. However, many attempts have been made to create spaces specifically for bicycles in urban areas, with reserved lanes and parking facilities. Public transport systems: Many public transport systems, such as buses and tramways, share road space with automobiles, which often impairs their respective efficiency. Attempts to mitigate congestion have resulted in the creation of road lanes reserved to buses either on a permanent or temporary (during rush hour) basis. Other transport systems such as subways and rail have their own infrastructures and, consequently, their own rights of way. Transport terminals: Refer to the amount of space devoted to terminal facilities such as ports, airports, transit stations, railyards and distribution centres. Globalisation has increased the mobility of people and freight, both in relative and absolute terms, and consequently the amount of urban space required to support those activities. Many major terminals are located in the peripheral areas of cities, which are the only locations where sufficient amounts of land are available.

Rings of mobility

A (Core area). Often related to a CBD representing the optimum level of urban density and centrality. In such a context, the pedestrian space is dominant as most origins and destinations are close by. Sidewalks tend to be substantial and where the conditions are favourable, a system of overpasses and pedestrian-only streets have been established. This area is often the point of convergence of the regional passenger transport system, implying the presence of transit systems and their associated terminal spaces. The handhold of the road space is mainly attributed to a pattern of streets supporting local circulation. B (Central area). Represents areas of medium to high densities, often adjacent to core areas. The walking space has lost some of its importance but still support mobility around major nodes (transit stations) and corridors (commercial streets). Commercial terminals, mainly rail freight yards and old port facilities, are also occupying substantial amounts of space. C (Peripheral / suburban area). Mobility is dominantly provided by road transportation with walking and cycling servicing residual functions, often leisureoriented. Space consuming terminal activities, such as airport and modern containerised- port facilities occupy significant amounts of land.

B (Central area). Represents areas of medium to high densities, often adjacent to core areas. The walking space has lost some of its importance but still support mobility around major nodes (transit stations) and corridors (commercial streets). Commercial terminals, mainly rail freight yards and old port facilities, are also occupying substantial amounts of space. C (Peripheral / suburban area). Mobility is dominantly provided by road transportation with walking and cycling servicing residual functions, often leisureoriented. Space consuming terminal activities, such as airport and modern containerised- port facilities occupy significant amounts of land.

Performance of Urban Transport Modes

Modal choice is linked with the territorial usage of transportation and consequently with its spatial imprint. The previous graph portrays spatial, speed and performance characteristics of major urban transportation modes. Performance is simply the ratio of speed over space consumption. Public transport consumes on average 10 times less space than individual transportation. Thus, in car dependant cities a much larger amount of space must be allocated to transportation than in transit oriented cities. For instance, 70% of the land use of Los Angeles is attributed to the car, making it one of the most car oriented city in the world. When building a new facility such as a skyscraper, at least one parking space per employee must be allocated.

Land Area Consumed by the Car in Selected Countries, 1999 Although Japan is the country among those selected that has the largest portion of its territory devoted to road transportation (3.5%), it is Canada that allocates the largest amount of space per capita to the automobile (734 square meters per person), followed by the United States (573). While the percentage of total land area used by the car is an indication of density and economic intensity, area per capita figures are an indication of car dependency. In the US about 155,000 square kilometres are reserved for car use, which equals to 10% of all the available arable land. Even if total area values are relatively small, roads and parking facilities are dominantly concentrated in urban areas.

Land Area Consumed by the Car in Selected Countries, 1999

Transportation and Urban Structure Rapid and expanded urbanisation occurring around the world involves an increased numbers of trips in urban areas. Cities have traditionally responded to growth in mobility by expanding the transportation supply, by building new highways and/or transit lines. In the developed world, that has mainly meant building more roads to accommodate an ever-growing number of vehicles, therefore creating new urban structures. Several urban spatial structures have accordingly emerged, with the reliance on the automobile being the most important discriminatory factor. Four major types can be identified at the metropolitan scale

Type I - Completely Motorised Network Characterised by low to average land use densities, this automobile-oriented city assumes free movements between all locations. Public transit has a residual function while a significant share of the city is occupied by structures servicing the automobile, notably highways and large parking lots. Most activities are designed to be accessed with an automobile. This type of urban structure requires a massive network of high capacity highways to the point that urban efficiency is based on individual transportation. Secondary road converges at highways, along which small centres are located, notably nearby interchanges. This system characterises recent cities in a North American context where urban growth occurred in the second half of the twentieth century, such as Los Angeles, Phoenix, Denver and Dallas.

Type I - Completely Motorised Network

Type II - Weak Centre These cities are characterised by average land use densities and a concentric pattern. The central business district is relatively accessible by the automobile and is the point of convergence of the transit system, which tend to be under-used and requiring subsidies. The urban area cannot be cost effectively serviced with the transit system, so services are often oriented along major corridors. In many cases, ring roads favoured the emergence a set of small centres at the periphery, notably at the convergence of radial lines, some of them effectively competing with the central business district for the location of economic activities. This system is often related to older cities, which emerged in the first half of the twentieth century, such as Melbourne, San Francisco, Boston, Chicago and Montreal, and were afterwards substantially impacted by motorisation.

Type II - Weak Centre

Type III - Strong Centre Characterises cities having a high land use density and high levels of accessibility to urban transit. There are thus limited needs for highways and parking space in the central area, where a set of high capacity public transit lines are servicing most of the mobility needs. The productivity of this urban area is thus mainly related to the efficiency of the public transport system. The convergence of radial roads and ring roads favours the location of secondary centres, where activities that could no longer able to afford a central location converge. This system characterises cities having important commercial and financial functions and having grown in the 19th century, such as Paris, New York, Shanghai, Toronto, Sydney and Hamburg.

Type III - Strong Centre

Type IV - Traffic Limitation Represents urban areas that have efficiently implemented traffic control and modal preference in their spatial structure. Commonly, the central area is dominated by public transit. They have a high land use density and were planned to limit the usage of the automobile in central areas for a variety of reasons, such as to preserve its historical character or to avoid congestion. Through a "funnel effect, the capacity of the road transport system is reduced the closer one gets to the central area. Public transport is used in central areas, while individual transportation takes a greater importance in the periphery. Between suburbs and the central city are places of interface between individual (automobile) and collective transportation or between low capacity collective transportation (bus) and high capacity collective transportation (metro, rail). Several cities are implementing this strategy, namely through congestion pricing, as it keeps cars from the central areas while supporting the bulk of the mobility in the suburbs. This system typifies cities having a long planning history favouring public transit, particularly in socialist economies. London, Singapore, Hong Kong, Vienna and Stockholm are good examples of this urban transport structure.

Type IV - Traffic Limitation

Scale and Urban Spatial Structure There are different scales where transportation systems influence the structure of communities, districts and the whole metropolitan area. For instance, one of the most significant impacts of transportation on the urban structure has been the clustering of activities near areas of high accessibility. The impact of transport on the spatial structure is particularly evident in the emergence of suburbia. Although many other factors are important in the development of suburbia, including low land costs, available land (large lots), the environment (clean and quiet), safety, and car-oriented services (shopping malls), the spatial imprint of the automobile is dominant. Although it can be argued that roads and the automobile have limited impacts on the extent of urban sprawl itself, they are a required condition for sprawl to take place. Initially an American invention, suburban developments have occurred in many cities worldwide, although no other places have achieved such a low density and automobile dependency than in the United States.

Facing the expansion of urban areas, congestion problems and the increasing importance of inter-urban movements, several ring roads have been built around major cities. They became an important attribute of the spatial structures of cities, notably in North America.

The impact of ring roads on the spatial structure is favouring a radial pattern (doughnut effect) and the development of commercial, residential and industrial activities nearby highway interchanges. The decreasing dynamism of central areas is often linked with the emergence of centres at the periphery. Ring roads also improved accessibility within a metropolitan area, especially at the periphery. As indicated in the above figure, prior to the construction of a ring road, going from point A to point B would take 30 minutes, with delays mainly imposed by having to go through the central area. Once a ring right has been established, travel time between point A and point B is reduced to 20 minutes.

Highway interchanges in suburban areas are notable examples of new clusters of urban development. The extension (and the over-extension) of urban areas have created what may be called peri-urban areas. They are located well outside the urban core and the suburbs, but are within reasonable commuting distances.

The above is a typical example the spatial structure of a contemporary suburban development in North America. The highway interchange is the leading structural influence on land uses with a gradient-like effect. Next to the interchange (highest accessibility and visibility) retailing activities, such as restaurants, shopping malls and hotels ca be found. A little bit further are offices, manufacturing and warehousing activities and, finally, residential areas. Obviously, this land use pattern is strictly supported by road transportation.

2007 Paper

2007 Paper

2007 Paper

2007 Paper

2007 Paper