Testing the decentralization effects of rail systems: Empirical findings from Israel

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

Volumn 44, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 523-536

  Israel, Emil ^a   Cohen Blankshtain, Galit ^b  

^a TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

^b HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

Decentralization effect; Rail and suburbanization

Indexed keywords

HOUSING; LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT; MASS TRANSPORTATION; URBAN GROWTH; URBAN TRANSPORTATION;

DECENTRALIZATION EFFECT; DETERMINANT FACTORS; EMPIRICAL FINDINGS; LOCATION CHOICE; PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION; RESIDENTIAL LOCATIONS; SUBURBAN DEVELOPMENT; SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT;

RAILROAD TRANSPORTATION;

COMMUTING; DECENTRALIZATION; LOCATION DECISION; METROPOLITAN AREA; PUBLIC TRANSPORT; RAILWAY TRANSPORT; RESIDENTIAL LOCATION; SUBURBANIZATION; TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT; URBAN DEVELOPMENT;

ISRAEL; TEL AVIV;

EID: 77953536579     PISSN: 09658564     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2010.03.021     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Alonso W. Location and Land Use 1969, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA.
2. Bagley M.N., Mokhtarian P.L. The impact of residential neighborhood type on travel behavior: a structural equations modeling approach. Annals of Regional Science 2002, 36(2):279-297.
3. Banister D. Unsustainable Transport City Transport in the New Century 2005, Routledge, London, New York.
4. Banister, D., 2007. Cities, Urban Form and Sprawl: a European Perspective. In: OECD/ECMT, Transport, Urban Form and Economic Growth, ECMT round table no. 137.
5. Baum-Snow, N., Kahn, M.E., 1998. The Effects of New Urban Rail Transit: Evidence from Five Cities. /d3360cf1dd214739852567280070dfdd/$FILE/baum-kahn.pdf. http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/wpi.nsf/12c00e90612694a1852566980065c8e4.
6. Ben-Akiva M., Bowman J.L. Integration of an activity-based model system and residential location model. Urban Studies 1998, 35(7):1131-1153.
7. Bolger D., Colquhoun D., Morral J. Planning and design of park-and-ride facilities for the Calgary light rail transit system. Transportation Research Record 1992, 1361:141-148.
8. Bovy, P., van der Waard, J., 1991. Substitution of Travel Demand between Car and Public Transport: a Challenge to Policy Makers. Presented at the PTRC Annual Meeting, Brighton, UK.
9. Boyce D.E. Impact of Rapid Transit on Suburban Residential Property Values and Land Development 1972, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
10. Brown B. Modal choice, location demand and income. Journal of Urban Economics 1986, 20(2):128-139.
11. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2007, National Transportation Statistics, US Department of Transportation. http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/#front_matter.
12. Camagni R., Gibelli M.C., Rigamonti P. Urban mobility and urban form: the social and environmental costs of different patterns of urban expansion. Ecological Economics 2002, 40:199-216.
13. Catanese, A.J., 1988. Transit, Life and Development in the Sunbelt. In: Attoe, W. (Ed.), Transit Land Use and Form. Center for the Study of American Architecture, pp. 47-54.
14. Cervero R. Sustainable new towns. Cities 1995, 12(1):41-51.
15. Cervero R. The Transit Metropolis 1998, Island Press, Washington & Covelo, California.
16. Cervero, R., Day, J., 2008. Residential Relocation and Commuting Behavior in Shanghai, China: The Case for Transit Oriented Development, Working Paper UCB-ITS-VWP-2008-4, UC Berkeley Center for Future Urban Transport. http://www.its.berkeley.edu/publications/UCB/2008/vwp/UCB-ITS-vwp-2008-4.pdf.
17. Cervero R., Duncan M. Transit's value-added effects: light and commuter rail services and commercial land values. Transportation Research Record 2002, 1805:8-15.
18. Crampton G.R. Urban economic structure and the optimal rail system. Urban Studies 2000, 37(3):623-632.
19. Deitz R. A joint model of residential and employment location in urban areas. Journal of Urban Economics 1998, 44:197-215.
20. DeSalvo J.S., Huq M. Income, residential location, and mode choice. Journal of Urban Economics 1996, 40:84-99.
21. ECMT, 2007. Transport, Urban Form and Economic Growth, Round Table no. 137.
22. European Commission, 2007. EU Energy and Transport in Figures Statistical Pocketbook 2006. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/energy_transport/figures/pocketbook/2006_en.htm.
23. Ewing R. Is Los Angeles-style sprawl desirable?. Journal of the American Planning Association 1997, 63:107-126.
24. Ewing R., Cervero R. Travel and the built environment. A synthesis. Transportation Research Record 2001, 1780:87-114.
25. Feitelson E. The potential of rail as environmental solution. Environment and Planning A 1993, 25:553-569.
26. Filion P. Balancing concentration and dispersion? Public policy and urban structure in Toronto. Environment and Planning C 2000, 18:163-189.
27. Fishman R. Bourgeois Utopias 1987, Basic Books, New York.
28. Florida R. The Rise of the Creative Class 2004, Basic Books, New York.
29. Freedman O., Kern C.R. A model of workplace and residence choice in two-worker households. Regional Science and Urban Economic 1997, 27:241-260.
30. Fulford C. The compact city and the market. The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? 1996, 122-133. E & FN Spon Publishers, London and New York. M. Jenks, E. Burton, K. Williams (Eds.).
31. Gannon C.A., Dear M.J. Rapid transit and office development. Traffic Quarterly 1975, 29(2):223-257.
32. Garmendia M., de Ureña J.M., Ribalaygua C., Leal J., Coronado J.M. Urban residential development in isolated small cities that are partially integrated in metropolitan areas by high speed train. European Urban and Regional Studies 2008, 15(3):249-264.
33. Giuliano G. Land use impacts of transportation investments: highway and transit. The Geography of Urban Transportation 2004, 237-273. The Guillford Press, New York and London. S. Hanson, G. Giuliano (Eds.).
34. Giuliano G. The weakening transportation-land use connection. Access 1995, 6:3-11.
35. Gospodini A. Urban development, redevelopment and regeneration encouraged by transport infrastructure projects: the case study of 12 European cities. European Planning Studies 2005, 13(7):1083-1111.
36. Green R.D., Jones D.M. Rail Transit Station Area Development: Small Modeling in Washington DC 1993, Armmonk, New York.
37. Hadj-Chikh G.J., Thompson G.L. Reaching jobs in the suburbs - tri-rail in South Florida. Transportation Research Record 1998, 1618:14-21.
38. Handy S. Smart growth and the transportation-land use connection: what does the research tell us. International Regional Science Review 2005, 28(2):146-167.
39. Horner M.W., Grubesic T.H. A GIS-based planning approach to locating urban rail terminals. Transportation 2001, 28(1):55-77.
40. Hunt J.D., McMillan J.D.P., Abraham J.E. Stated preferences investigation of influences on attractiveness of residential location. Transportation Research Record 1994, 1466:79-87.
41. Kim, J.H., Pagliara, F., Preston, J., 2004. The intention to move and residential location choice behavior. In: Paper Presented at the 2004 World Conference on Transport Research in Istanbul, Turkey.
42. Kim T.K., Horner M.W., Marans R.W. Life cycle and environmental factors in selecting residential and job locations. Housing Studies 2005, 20(3):457-473.
43. Knaap G.J., Ding C., Hopkins D. Do plans matter? The effects of light rail plans on land values in station areas. Journal of Planning Education and Research 2001, 21:32-39.
44. Knight R.L., Trygg L.L. Evidence of land use impacts of rapid transit systems. Transportation 1977, 6:231-247.
45. Kreibich V. The successful transportation system and the regional planning problem: an evolution of the Munich rapid transit system in the context of urban and regional planning. Transportation 1978, 7:137-145.
46. Landis, J., Guhathakurta, S., Haung, W., Zhang, M., 1995. Rail Transit Investments, Real Estate Values, and Land Changes: A Comparative Analysis of Five California Rail Transit System, Working Paper UCTC No. 285, The University of California, Berkeley, Transportation Center.
47. Lehrer U.A. Images of the periphery: the architecture of flexspace in Switzerland. Environmental and Planning D 1994, 12(2):187-205.
48. Levinson D. Density and dispersion: the co-development of land-use and rail in London. Journal of Economic Geography 2008, 8:55-77.
49. Lund L. Reasons for living in a transit-oriented development, and associated transit use. Journal of the American Planning Association 2006, 72(3):357-366.
50. McMillen D.P. An empirical model of urban fringe land use. Land Economics 1989, 65(2):138-145.
51. Metz D. The myth of travel time saving. Transport Reviews 2008, 28(3):321-336.
52. Mills E.S. Studies in Structure of the Urban Economy 1972, John Hopkins Press, Baltimore.
53. Mokhtarian P.L., Chen C. TTB or not TTB, that is the question: a review and analysis of the empirical literature on travel time (and money) budgets. Transportation Research Part A 2004, 38(9-10):643-675.
54. Muller P.O. Transportation and urban form: stages in the spatial evolution of the american metropolis. The Geography of Urban Transportation 2004, 59-85. The Guillford Press, New York and London. S. Hanson, G. Giuliano (Eds.).
55. Muth R.F. Cities and Housing 1969, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
56. Nelson A.C., Sanchez T.L., Ross C.L., Meyer M.D. Rail transit in the suburbs: case study of transit use in Atlanta's affluent northern tier. Transportation Research Record 1997, 1571:142-152.
57. Northern Virginia Planning District Commission (NVPDC) Impact Assessment of the Virginia Railway Express Commuter Rail on Land Use Development Patterns in Northern Virginia 1993, US Department of Transportation, Washington.
58. O'Sullivan S., Morrall J. Walking distances to and from light-rail transit stations. Transportation Research Record 1996, 1568:19-26.
59. Papa, E., 2005. Urban Transformation and Rail Stations System: the Study Case of Naples. Presented at 45th Congress of the European Regional Science Association, 23-27 August, Amsterdam.
60. Perez P.E., Martinez F.J., Ortuzar J.D. Microeconomic formulation and estimation of residential location choices model: implications for the value of time. Journal of regional science 2003, 43(4):771-789.
61. Porter D.R. Transit-focused development and light rail systems: the lite connection. Transportation Research Record 1998, 1623:165-169.
62. Post J.R. The portland light rail experience. Transit, Land Use and Form 1988, 63-80. Center for the Study of American Architecture. W. Attoe (Ed.).
63. Pucher J., Renne J.L. Socioeconomic of urban travel: evidence from the 2001 NHTS. Transportation Quarterly 2003, 57(3):49-77.
64. Pushkarev B.S., Zupan J.M. Public Transportation and Land Use Policy 1977, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
65. Rietveld P. Spatial economic impacts of transport infrastructure supply. Transportation Research Part A 1994, 28A(4):329-341.
66. Schwanen T., Dijst M. Travel-time ratios for visits to the workplace. The relationship between commuting and work duration. Transportation Research Part A 2002, 36:573-592.
67. Shiftan Y. The use of activity-based modeling to analyze the effect of land-use policies on travel behavior. The Annals of Regional Science 2008, 42(1):79-97.
68. Tayyaran M.R., Khan A.M. Telecommuting and residential location decisions: combined stated and revealed preferences model. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 2007, 34(10):1324-1333.
69. Turnbull G.K. Revealed preference and location choice. Journal of Urban Economics 1997, 41(3):358-376.
70. Ureña, J.M., Coronado, J.M., Escobedo, F., Ribalaygua, C., 2008. Situaciones y Retos Territoriales de la Alta Velocidad Ferroviaria en Espana. Ciudad y Territorio-Estudios Territoriales 148, pp. 397-424.
71. van Dam F., Heins S., Elbersen B.S. Lay discourses of the rural and stated and revealed preferences for rural living. some evidence of the existence of a rural idyll in the Netherlands. Journal of Rural Studies 2002, 18:461-476.
72. Vance J.E. Capturing the Horizon: the Historical Geography of Transportation Since the Transportation Revolution of the Sixteenth Century 1986, Harper & Row, New York.
73. Vega A., Reynolds-Feighan A. A methodological framework for the study of residential location and travel-to-work mode choice under central and suburban employment destination patterns. Transportation Research Part A 2009, 43:401-419.
74. Vickerman R., Spiekermann K., Wegener M. Accessibility and economic development in Europe. Regional Studies 1999, 33(1):1-15.
75. Wardman M., Tight M., Page M. Factors influencing the propensity to cycle to work. Transportation Research Part A 2007, 41(4):339-350.
76. Warner S.B. Streetcar Suburbs 1970, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
77. White M.J. Location choice and commuting behavior in cities with decentralized employment. Journal of Urban Economics 1988, 24:129-152.
78. White K.J.C. Sending or receiving stations? the dual influence of railroads in early 20th-century great plains settlement. Population Research and Policy Review 2008, 27(1):89-115.
79. Zahavi Y., Talvitie A. Regularities in travel time and money expenditures. Transportation Research Record 1980, 750:19-26.