Rail-based transit-oriented development: Lessons from New York City and Hong Kong

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 97, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 202-212

  Loo, Becky P Y ^a   Chen, Cynthia ^b   Chan, Eric T H ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^c CKM Asia Limited   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Hong Kong; Land use; New York City; Rail transit ridership; Station patronage; Transit oriented development

Indexed keywords

ECONOMICS; LAND USE; LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT; RAILROAD TRANSPORTATION;

HONG-KONG; NEW YORK CITY; RAIL TRANSIT; STATION PATRONAGE; TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT;

RAILS;

AUTOMOBILE; DEMOGRAPHY; LAND USE; MULTIPLE REGRESSION; NEIGHBORHOOD; OWNERSHIP; RAILWAY TRANSPORT; SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS; SUSTAINABILITY; TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT; URBAN PLANNING; URBAN TRANSPORT;

CHINA; HONG KONG; NEW YORK [NEW YORK (STT)]; NEW YORK [UNITED STATES]; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77955273406     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.06.002     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Anselin L., Rey S. Properties of tests for spatial dependence in linear-regression models. Geogr. Anal. 1991, 23:112-131.
2. Bernick M., Cervero R. Transit Villages in the 21st Century 1996, McGraw-Hill, New York.
3. Bernasconi C., Strager M.P., Maskey V., Hasenmyer M. Assessing public preferences for design and environmental attributes of an urban automated transportation system. Landscape Urban Plan 2009, 90:155-167.
4. Boarnet M., Compin N. Transit-oriented development in San Diego County: the incremental implementation of a planning idea. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 1999, 65(1):80-95.
5. Boarnet M., Crane R. The influence of land use on travel behavior: specification and estimation strategies. Transport. Res. A-Pol. 2001, 35:823-845.
6. Cao X., Mokhtarian P., Handy S. Do changes in neighborhood characteristics lead to changes in travel behavior? A structural equations modeling approach. Transportation 2007, 34:535-556.
7. Cervero R., Ferrell C., Murphy S. Transit-oriented Development and Joint Development in the United States: A Literature Review 2002, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
8. Cervero R., Kovkelman K. Travel demand and the 3Ds: density, diversity and design. Transport. Res. D-Transport Environ. 1997, 2(3):199-219.
9. Cervero, R., Murakami, J., 2008. Rail+property development: a model of sustainable transit finance and urbanism. Working paper, Berkeley: UC Berkeley Center for Future Urban Transport: A Volvo Center of Excellence.
10. Cliff A., Ord J.K. Testing for spatial autocorrelation among regression residuals. Geogr. Anal. 1972, 4(3):267-284.
11. Crane R. The influence of urban form on travel: an interpretive review. J. Plann. Lit. 2000, 15(1):3-23.
12. European Commission Urban Sprawl in Europe: The Ignored Challenge 2006, European Environmental Agency, Copenhagen.
13. Ewing R., Pendall R., Chen D. Measuring Sprawl and Its Impact 2002, Smart Growth America, Washington, D.C.
14. Ewing R., Cervero R. Travel and the built environment - a synthesis. Transport. Res. Rec. 2001, 1780:87-114.
15. Frank L., Pivo G. The impacts of mixed use and density on the utilization of three modes of travel: the single occupant vehicle, transit, and walking. Transport. Res. Rec. 1994, 1466:44-52.
16. Hair J.F., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L., Black W.C. Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings 1995, Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs. 4th ed.
17. Handy S. Methodologies for exploring the link between urban form and travel behavior. Transport. Res. D-Transport Environ. 1996, 1(2):151-165.
18. Handy S.L. Smart growth and the transportation-land use connection: what does the research tell us?. Int. Regional Sci. Rev. 2005, 28:146-167.
19. Handy S., Cao X., Mokhtarian P. Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transport. Res. D-Transport Environ. 2005, 10(6):427-444.
20. Handy S., Cao X., Mokhtarian P. Self-selection in the relationship between built environment and walking? Evidence from Northern California. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 2006, 72(1):55-74.
21. Jefferson C. Improving access by public transport. Landscape Urban Plan 1996, 35:173-179.
22. Kim S., Ulfarsson G.F., Hennessy J.T. Analysis of light rail rider travel behavior: impacts of individual, built environment, and crime characteristics on transit access. Transport. Res. A-Pol. 2007, 41:511-522.
23. Kuby M., Barranda A., Upchurch C. Factors influencing light-rail station boardings in the United States. Transport. Res. A-Pol. 2004, 38:223-247.
24. Levinson J., Kumar A. Density and the journey to work. Growth Change 1997, 28:147-172.
25. Leung Y., Mei C.L., Zhang W.X. Testing for spatial autocorrelation among the residuals of the geographically weighed regression. Environ. Plann. A 2000, 32(5):871-890.
26. Loo B.P.Y. How would people respond to a new railway extension? The value of questionnaire surveys. Habitat Int. 2009, 33:1-9.
27. Loo B.P.Y., Chow A.S.Y. Changing urban form in Hong Kong: what are the challenges on sustainable transportation?. Int. J. Sustain. Transport. 2008, 2(3):177-193.
28. Loo B.P.Y., Lam W.W.Y. Railway-based transit-oriented development in Hong Kong: factors affecting its success. Transportation Systems: Engineering and Management 2007, 655-664. Hong Kong Society for Transportation Studies, Hong Kong. C.H. Cheng, S.C. Ho, J.M.Y. Leung (Eds.).
29. Lund H. Reasons for living in a transit-oriented development, and associated transit use. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 2006, 72(3):357-366.
30. Lund, L., Cervero, R., Willson, R., 2004. Travel characteristics of transit-oriented development in California. Caltrans Transportation Grant, Statewide Planning Studies.
31. McMillen D.P. Spatial autocorrelation or model misspecification?. Int. Regional Sci. Rev. 2003, 26(2):208-217.
32. MTA NYC Transit, 2008a. MTA NYC transit info, subways. Retrieved September 30, 2008, from http://mta.info/nyct/facts/ffsubway.htm.
33. MTA NYC Transit, 2008b. Subway and bus ridership statistics 2007. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://www.mta.info/nyct/facts/ridership/index.htm.
34. MTR Corporation, 2008. Patronage updates. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://www.mtr.com.hk/eng/investrelation/patronage.php.
35. Newman P., Kenworthy J. Gasoline consumption and cities: a comparison of US Cities with a Global Survey. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 1989, 55(1):24-37.
36. Newman P., Kenworthy J., Vintila P. Can we overcome automobile dependence? Physical planning in an age of Urban Cynicism. Cities 1995, 12(1):53-65.
37. Planning Department, 2003. Stage II study on review of metroplan and the related Kowloon density study review: final report. Planning Department, Hong Kong.
38. Porter D. Transit-focused development: a progress report. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 1998, 64(4):475-488.
39. Richardson A.J., Ampt E.S., Meyburg A.H. Survey Methods for Transport Planning 1995, Eucalyptus Press, Parkville.
40. Sassen S. The Global City 2001, Princeton University Press, New York, London, Tokyo, Princeton, N.J.
41. Tong C.O., Wong S.C. The advantages of a high density, mixed land use. Linear Urban Dev. Transport. 1997, 24:295-307.
42. The American Community Survey, 2005. The American community survey. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://www.census.gov/acs/www/.
43. Transport Department Travel Characteristics Survey 2002, Transport Department, Hong Kong.
44. Transport Department Annual Traffic Census 2006, Transport Department, Hong Kong.
45. Transport Department, 2009. Transport in Hong Kong, transport figures. Retrieved June 8, 2009, from http://www.td.gov.hk/transport_in_hong_kong/transport_figures/monthly_traffic_and_transport_digest/index.htm.
46. Yoh A., Haas P., Taylor B. Understanding transit ridership growth: case studies of successful transit systems in the 1990s. Transport. Res. Rec. 2003, 1835:111-120.