Are Portland's smart growth policies related to reduced automobile dependence?

Journal of Planning Education and Research

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 100-107

  Jun, Myung Jin ^a  

^a Chung Ang University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Automobile dependence in journey to work; Portland's smart growth; Transit oriented development; Urban growth boundary

Indexed keywords

EID: 49849084383     PISSN: 0739456X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0739456X08319240     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Allison, Paul D. 1999. Logistic regression using the SAS system: Theory and application. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
2. American Planning Association. 2002. Policy guide on smart growth. Available at http://www.planning.org/policyguides/SmartGrowth.pdf
3. Cervero, R. 2002. Built environments and mode choice: Toward a normative framework. Transportation Research, Part D, 7: 265-84.
4. Cervero, R., and R. Gorham 1995. Commuting in transit versus automobile neighborhoods. Journal of American Planning Association 61: 210-25.
5. Cox, W. 2001. American dream boundaries: Urban containment and its consequences. Available at www.gppf.org/pubs/analyses/2001
6. Crane, R. 1999. The impacts of urban form on travel: A critical review (Working paper WP99RC1). Boston: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
7. Downs, Anthony. 2005. Smart growth: Why we discuss it more than we do it. Journal of American Planning Association 71 (4): 367-78.
8. Dueker, K.J., and M.J. Bianco. 1999. Light rail transit impacts in Portland: The first ten years. Transportation Research Record 1685: 171-80.
9. Ewing, R., and R. Cervero. 2001. Travel and the built environment: A synthesis. Transportation Research Record 1780: 87-114.
10. Federal Highway Administration. 2003. Journey to work trends in the United States and its major metropolitan areas, 1960-2000. Publication No. FHWA -EP-03-058. Available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ctpp/jtw/
11. Frank, Lawrence D., and Gary Pivo. 1994. Impacts of mixed use and density on utilization of three modes of travel: Single-occupant vehicle, transit, and walking. Transportation Research Record 1466: 44-52.
12. Friedman, B., S.P. Gordon, and J.B. Peers. 1994. Effect of neo-traditional neighborhood design on travel characteristics. Transportation Research Record 1466: 63-70.
13. Giuliano, G. 1995. The weakening transportation-land use connection. Access 6: 3-11.
14. Gordon, D., and S. Vipond. 2005. Gross density and new urbanism: Comparing conventional and new urbanist suburbs in Karkham, Ontario. Journal of American Planning Association 71 (1): 41-54.
15. Gordon, P., and H.W. Richardson. 1997. Are compact cities a desirable planning goal ? Journal of American Planning Association 63 (1): 95-106.
16. Gordon, P., and H.W. Richardson. 1998. Prove it: The costs and benefits of sprawl. The Brookings Review 16 (4): 23- 26.
17. Handy, Susan. 1996. Methodologies for exploring the link between urban form and travel behavior. Transportation Research, Part D, 1: 151-65.
18. Handy, Susan. 2005. Smart growth and the transportation-land use connection: What does the research tell us ? International Regional Science Review 28 (2): 146-67.
19. Hess, D. 2001. Effect of free parking on commuter mode choice: Evidence from travel diary data. Transportation Research Record 1753: 35-42.
20. Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R., and Wan, C.K. 1990. Interaction effects in multiple regression. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
21. Jun, Myung-Jin. 2004. The effects of Portland's urban growth boundary on urban development patterns and commuting. Urban Studies 41 (7): 1333-48.
22. Kennedy, Peter. 1985. A guide to econometrics, 2 nd edition. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
23. Kitamura R., P.L. Mokhtarian, and L. Laidet. 1997. A microanalysis of land use and travel in five neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation 24: 125-58.
24. Kline, J., and R. Alig. 1999. Does land use planning slow the conversion of forest and farm lands ? Growth and Change 30: 3-22.
25. Nelson, A.C., and T. Moore. 1993. Assessing urban growth management: The case of Portland, Oregon, the USA's largest urban growth boundary, Land Use Policy 10: 293-302.
26. Nelson/Nygaard Consulting Associates. 1995. Land use and transit demand: The transit orientation index. Chapter 3 of Primary Transit Network Study. Portland, OR: Tri-Met.
27. Newman, Peter, and Jeffrey Kenworthy. 1989. Gasoline consumption and cities: A comparison of U.S. cities with a global survey. Journal of American Planning Association 55: 24-37.
28. Newman, Peter, and Jeffrey Kenworthy. 1999. Sustainability and cities: Overcoming automobile dependence. Washington, DC: Island Press.
29. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas. 1996. Public policy and transit oriented development: Six international case studies. Transit and Urban Form, TCRP Report 16, vol. 2. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
30. Pucher, John, and John L. Renne. 2004. Urban-rural differences in mobility and mode choice: Evidence from the 2001 NHTS. Working Paper, Rutgers University. Available at http://nhts.ornl.gov/2001/articles/ UrbanRural.pdf
31. Pushkarev, Boris S., and Jeffrey M. Zupan. 1977. Public transportation and land use policy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
32. Rajamani, J., C.R. Bhat, S. Handy, G. Knaap, and Y. Song. 2003. Assessing impact of urban form measures on nonwork trip mode choice after controlling for demographic and level-of-service effects. Transportation Research Record 1831: 158-65.
33. Richardson, H.W., and P. Gordon. 2001. Portland and Los Angeles: Beauty and the beast. Paper presented at the 17th Pacific Regional Science Conference, Portland.
34. Seskin, S., and R. Cervero. 1996. Transit and urban form. Washington, DC: Federal Transit Administration.
35. Staley, S.R., J.D. Edgens, and G.C.S. Mildner. 1999. A line in the land: Urban-growth boundaries, smart growth, and housing afford-ability. Policy Study No. 263, Reason Public Policy Institute.
36. Transportation Research Board. 1996. Transit and urban form. TCRP Report 16. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
37. Tri-Met. 2005. Community building source book: Land use and transportation initiatives in Portland, Oregon. Portland: Author. Available at www.community-wealth.org/_pdfs/articles-publications/tod/ report-trimet.pdf
38. U.S. Census Bureau. 1990. Summary tape file 3, census of population and housing. [Data files]. Retrieved from http://ftp.census.gov/census_1990/
39. U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Summary tape file 3, census of population and housing. [Data files]. Retrieved from http://ftp.census.gov/census_2000/ datasets/Summary_File_3/
40. U.S. Department of Transportation. 1990. Census transportation planning package 1990. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. [Data files]. Retrieved from http://www.transtats.bts.gov/
41. U.S. Department of Transportation. 2000. Census transportation planning package 2000. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. [Data files] Retrieved from http://www.transtats.bts.gov/
42. Zhang, Ming. 2004. The role of land use in travel mode choice: Evidence from Boston and Hong Kong. Journal of American Planning Association 70 (3): 344-60.