Does accessibility require density or speed?

Journal of the American Planning Association

Volumn 78, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 157-172

  Shen, Qingyun ^a   Levine, Jonathan ^a   Grengs, Joe ^a   Shen, Qng ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

accessibility; mobility; proximity; speed; transportation planning

Indexed keywords

ACCESSIBILITY; INNOVATION; LAND USE PLANNING; METHODOLOGY; METROPOLITAN AREA; MOBILITY; TRAFFIC CONGESTION; TRANSPORTATION PLANNING;

EID: 84861030552     PISSN: 01944363     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01944363.2012.677119     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Allen, W. B., Liu, D., and, Singer, S. 1993. Accessibility measures of U.S. metropolitan areas. Transportation Research B, 27B (6): 439-449. (Pubitemid 24387288)
2. Benenson, I., Rofe, Y., Martens, K., and, Kwartler, A. 2010. Public transport versus private car GIS-based estimation of accessibility applied to the Tel Aviv metropolitan area. The Annals of Regional Science,: 1-17.
3. Cervero, R. 1996. Paradigm shift: From automobility to accessibility planning (Working Paper No. 677, Institute of Urban and Regional Development), Berkeley, CA: University of California.
4. Cervero, R., Rood, T., and, Appleyard, B. 1999. Tracking accessibility: Employment and housing opportunities in the San Francisco Bay area. Environment and Planning A, 31: 1259-1278. (Pubitemid 29412297)
5. Cheng, J., Bertolini, L., and, le Clercq, F. 2007. Measuring sustainable accessibility. Transportation Research Record, 2017: 16-25. (Pubitemid 351322120)
6. Curtis, C., and, Scheurer, J. 2010. Planning for sustainable accessibility: Developing tools to aid discussion and decision-making. Progress in Planning, 74: 53-106.
7. Downs, A. 1992. Stuck in traffic: Coping with peak-hour traffic congestion, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
8. Edwards, J. D. Jr., ed. 1992. Transportation planning handbook, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
9. Ewing, R. 1994. Characteristics, causes and effects of sprawl: A literature review. Environmental and Urban Issues, 21 (2): 1-15.
10. Ewing, R. 1995. Measuring transportation performance. Transportation Quarterly, 49 (1): 91-104.
11. Galster, G., Hanson, R., Ratcliffe, M. R., Wolman, H., Coleman, S., and, Freihage, J. 2001. Wrestling sprawl to the ground: Defining and measuring an elusive concept. Housing Policy Debate, 12 (4): 681-717. (Pubitemid 33600110)
12. Grengs, J. 2004. Measuring change in small-scale transit accessibility with geographic information systems: The cases of Buffalo and Rochester. Transportation Research Record, 1887: 10-17. (Pubitemid 40400521)
13. Grengs, J. 2010. Job accessibility and the modal mismatch in Detroit. Journal of Transport Geography, 18: 42-54.
14. Grengs, J., Levine, J., Shen, Q., and, Shen, Q. 2010. Intermetropolitan comparison of transportation accessibility: Sorting out mobility and proximity in San Francisco and Washington, DC. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 29 (4): 427-443.
15. Hgerstrand, T. 1970. What about people in regional science?. Papers in Regional Science, 24 (1): 7-24.
16. Handy, S. L., and, Niemeier, D. A. 1997. Measuring accessibility: An exploration of issues and alternatives. Environment and Planning A, 29: 1175-1194.
17. Hansen, W. G. 1959. How accessibility shapes land use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 25 (2): 73-76.
18. Hine, J., and, Mitchell, F. 2001. Better for everyone? Travel experiences and transport exclusion. Urban Studies, 38 (2): 319-332. (Pubitemid 32152556)
19. Isard, W. 1960. Methods of regional analysis: An introduction to regional science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Kawabata, M., and, Shen, Q. 2006. Job accessibility as an indicator of auto-oriented urban structure: A comparison of Boston and Los Angeles with Tokyo. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 33 (1): 115-130. (Pubitemid 43293047)
21. Kenworthy, J., and, Laube, F. 2002. Urban transport patterns in a global sample of cites and their linkages to transport infrastructure, land use, economics, and environment. World Transport Policy and Practice, 8 (3): 5-19.
22. Kwan, M. 1998. Space-time and integral measures of individual accessibility: A comparative analysis using a point-based framework. Geographical Analysis, 30 (3): 191-216. (Pubitemid 28525760)
23. Lee, B. 2007. Edge or edgeless cities? Urban spatial structure in U.S. metropolitan areas, 1980 to 2000. Journal of Regional Science, 47 (3): 479-515. (Pubitemid 47039956)
24. Meyer, M. D., and, Miller, E. 2001. Urban transportation planning: A decision oriented approach (2 nd ed.), New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
25. Miller, H. 1999. Measuring space-time accessibility benefits within transportation networks: Basic theory and computational procedures. Geographical Analysis, 31 (2): 187-212. (Pubitemid 29328667)
26. Mitchell, R. B., and, Rapkin, C. 1954. Urban traffic: A function of land use, New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
27. Niemeier, D. A. 1997. Accessibility: An evaluation using consumer welfare. Transportation, 24: 377-396.
28. Salomon, I., and, Mokhtarian, P. L. 1998. What happens when mobility-inclined market segments face accessibility-enhancing policies?. Transportation Research D, 3 (3): 129-140. (Pubitemid 28441648)
29. Schrank, D., and, Lomax, T. 2007. The 2007 urban mobility report, College Station, TX: Transportation Institute. Texas
30. Scott, D. M., and, Horner, M. W. 2008. Examining the role of urban form in shaping people's accessibility to opportunities: An exploratory spatial data analysis. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 1 (2): 89-119.
31. Shen, Q. 1998. Location characteristics of inner-city neighborhoods and employment accessibility of low-wage workers. Environment and Planning B-Planning and Design, 25: 345-365. (Pubitemid 28358876)
32. Staley, S. 2008. Mobility first: A new vision for transportation in a globally competitive twenty-first century, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
33. Thomson, J. M. 1977. Great cities and their traffic, London, UK: Gollancz.
34. Transportation Research Board. 1994. Highway capacity manual, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
35. Transportation Research Board. 1995. Expanding metropolitan highways: Implications for air quality and energy use (Special Report No. 245), Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
36. Transportation Research Board. 2010. Highway capacity manual 2010, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
37. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. 2008. Highway statistics 2008,. Retrieved April 4, 2012, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2008/
38. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration and Urban Mass Transportation Administration. 1977. An introduction to travel demand forecastingA self-instructional text. Retrieved from http://ntl.bts.gov/Docs/UT.html
39. Wachs, M., and, Kumagai, T. G. 1973. Physical accessibility as a social indicator. Socio-Economic Planning Science, 7: 437-456.
40. Wilson, A. G. 1971. A family of spatial interaction models, and associated developments. Environment and Planning, 3 (1): 1-32.