Joint accessibility design: Framework developed with practitioners to integrate land use and transport planning in the Netherlands

Transportation Research Record

Volumn , Issue 2077, 2008, Pages 1-8

  Straatemeier, Thomas ^a   Bertolini, Luca ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DESIGN;

DESIGN FRAMEWORKS; JOINT ACCESSIBILITY; LAND USE AND TRANSPORTS; LAND USE PLANNING; LAND USE POLICY; NETHERLANDS; PROFESSIONAL COMMUNITY; SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY; TRANSPORT AND LAND USE; TRANSPORT PLANNING;

LAND USE;

EID: 61349201462     PISSN: 03611981     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3141/2077-01     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Banister, D. Unsustainable Transport. Spon, London, 2005.
2. Coogan, M., M. Meyer, and C. Casgar. A New Vision for Mobility: Guidance to Foster Collaborative Multimodal Decision Making. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2004. onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/ tcrp-rrd-65.pdf.
3. Banister, D. Transport Planning. Spon, London, 2002.
4. Gifford, J. L. Flexible Urban Transportation. ElsevierScience, Oxford, New York, 2003.
5. Handy, S. Regional Transportation Planning in the US: An Examination of Changes in Technical Aspects of the Planning Process in Response to Changing Goals. Transport Policy, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2008, pp. 113-126.
6. Hull, A. Integrated Transport Planning in the UK: From Concept to Reality. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 13, No. 4, 2005, pp. 318-328.
7. Handy, S. Accessibility- vs. Mobility-Enhancing Strategies for Addressing Automobile Dependence in the U.S. Presented at European Conference of Ministers of Transport, 2002.
8. Bertolini, L., and F. le Clercq. Urban Development Without More Mobility by Car? Learning from Amsterdam, a Multimodal Urban Region. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 35, No. 4, 2003, pp. 575-589.
9. Geurs, K. T., and J. R. Ritsema van Eck. Accessibility Measures: Review and Application. National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Utrecht, Netherlands, 2001.
10. Handy, S., and D. A. Niemeier. Measuring Accessibility: An Exploration of Issues and Alternatives. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 29, No. 7, 1997, pp. 1175-1194.
11. Groenendijk, J. M., F. le Clercq, and L. Bertolini. Bereikbaarheid als Planningskader voor. Interventies in Verkeer en Vervoer, Amersfoort, Netherlands, 2003.
12. Regionale Netwerkanalyses. Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, The Hague, Netherlands. www.verkeerenwater staat.nl/. Accessed July 30, 2007.
13. Handy, S., and K. Clifton. Evaluating Neighborhood Accessibility: Possibilities and Practicalities. Journal of Transportation and Statistics, Vol. 4, No. 2/3, 2001, pp. 67-78.
14. Bertolini, L., F. le Clercq, and L. Kapoen. Sustainable Accessibility: A Conceptual Framework to Integrate Transport and Land Use Plan-Making. Two Test-Applications in the Netherlands and a Reflection on the Way Forward. Transport Policy, Vol. 12, No. 3, 2005, pp. 207-220.
15. Pirie, G. H. The Possibility and Potential of Public Policy on Accessibility. Transportation Research A, Vol. 15, No. 5, 1981, pp. 377-381.
16. Argyris, C., and D. A. Schön. Participatory Action Research and Action Science Compared: A Commentary. American Behavioral Scientists, Vol. 32, No. 5, 1991, pp. 612-623.
17. van Aken, J. E. Management Research Based on the Paradigm of the Design Sciences: The Quest for Field-Tested and Grounded Technological Rules. Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 41, No. 2, 2004, pp. 219-246.
18. Ben Akiva, M., and S. R. Lerman. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1985.
19. Bhat, C., S. Handy, K. Kockelman, H. Mahmassani, Q. Chen, and L. Weston. Development of an Urban Accessibility Index: Literature Review. Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas, Austin, 2002.
20. Pettigrew, A. The Double Handles of Management Research. In Advancement in Organizational Behavior: Essays in Honor of Derek S. Pugh (T. Clarke, ed.), Darthmouth Press, London, 1997, pp. 277-296.
21. Kolb, D. A. Experimental Learning: Experience as the Source of learning and Development. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1984.
22. Wegener, M., and F. Fürst. Land Use Transport Interaction: State of the Art. Report 46. Institut für Raumplanung, Dortmund, Germany, 1999.
23. Innes, J. E., and D. E. Booher. Indicators for Sustainable Communities: A Strategy Building on Complexity Theory and Distributed Intelligence. Planning Theory and Practice, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2000, pp. 173-186.
24. Klosterman, R. E. Planning Support Systems: A New Perspective on Computer-Aided Planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 17, No. 1, 1997, pp. 45-54.
25. Geertman, S., and J. Stillwell. Planning Support Systems: An Introduction. In Planning Support Systems in Practice (S. Geertman and J. Stillwell, eds.), Springer, Berlin, 2003.
26. Couclecis, H. "Where Has the Future Gone?" Rethinking the Role of Integrated Land Use Models in Spatial Planning. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 37, 2005, pp. 1353-1371.
27. Brömmelstroet, M. te, and P. Schrijnen. Developing a Meaningful PSS for Land Use and Transport Integration: First Experiences from Working with a Community of Practice. Presented at Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management 2007, Iguasso Falls, Brazil, 2007.
28. Mobiliteits Onderzoek Nederland. www.rws-avv.nl/mon. Accessed April 15, 2007.
29. Geurs, K. T., and B. van Wee. Accessibility Evaluation of Land Use and Transport Strategies: Review and Research Directions. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2004, pp. 127-140.
30. Project Bereikbaarheid. Atelier Zuidvleugel. www.atelierzuidvleugel.nl/ section/projecten/projectid/4. Accessed June 2007.