Urban structural hierarchy and the relationship between the ridership of the Seoul Metropolitan Subway and the land-use pattern of the station areas

Cities

Volumn 35, Issue , 2013, Pages 69-77

  Lee, Seungil ^a   Yi, Changhyo ^a   Hong, Soung Pyo ^b  

^a University of Seoul   (South Korea)

^b Korea Transport Institute (KOTI)   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Accessibility; Multiple regressions; Subway ridership; The Seoul Metropolitan Subway; TOD; Urban structural hierarchy

Indexed keywords

ACCESSIBILITY; ESTIMATION METHOD; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; LAND USE PLANNING; METROPOLITAN AREA; URBAN AREA;

SEOUL [SEOUL (ADS)]; SEOUL [SOUTH KOREA]; SOUTH KOREA;

EID: 84882780507     PISSN: 02642751     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2013.06.010     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Bourne L. Urban spatial structure: An introductory essay on concepts and criteria. Internal structure of the city: Readings on Urban form, growth, and policy 1982, 28-45. Oxford University Press, New York. 2nd ed. L. Bourne (Ed.).
2. Calthrope P. The next American metropolis: Ecology, community, and the American dream 1993, Princeton Architectural Press, New York.
3. Calthrope Associates Transit-oriented development design guidelines 1992, Land Guidance System, City of San Diego.
4. Cervero R. Mixed land-uses and commuting: evidence from the American housing survey. Transportation A 1996, 30:361-377.
5. Cervero R. Walk-and-ride: Factors influencing pedestrian access to transit. Journal of Public Transportation 2001, 3(4):1-23.
6. Cervero R., Kockelman K. Travel ridership and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research D 1997, 2(3):199-219.
7. Cervero R., Murphy S., Ferrel C., Goguts N., Tsai Y., Arrington G.B., Boroski J., Smith-Heimer J., Golem R., Peninger P., Nakjima E., Chui E., Dunphy R., Myers M., McKay S., Witenstein N. Transit-oriented development in the United States: Experiences, challenges, and prospects. TCRP report 102 2004, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
8. Charnes A., Cooper W., Lewin A. Data envelopment analysis: Theory, methodology and applications 1994, Kluwer Academic, Boston.
9. Chiu, T., Fang, D., Chen, J., Wang, Y., & Jeris, C. (2001). A robust and scalable clustering algorithm for mixed type attributes in large database environment. In Proceedings of the seventh ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pp. 263-268.
10. Cooper W., Seiford L., Tone K. Data envelopment analysis-a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software, 2nd. ed. 2007, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, New York.
11. Dittmar H., Poticha S. Defining transit-oriented development: The new regional building block. The new transit town: Best practices in transit oriented development 2004, 19-39. Island Press, Washington, DC. H. Dittmar, G. Ohland (Eds.).
12. Evans J.E., Pratt R.H., Stryker A., Kuzmyak J.R. Transit oriented development report 95 2007, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
13. Gibbs J.P., Martin W.T. Urbanization, technology and the division of labor. American Sociological Review 1962, 27:667-677.
14. Go J.Y., Lee S. An appraisal of the urban scheme for sustainable urban transport. International Journal of Urban Sciences 2012, 16(3):261-278.
15. Halden D., McGuigan D., Nisbet A., McKinnon A. Accessibility: Review of measuring techniques and their application 2000, Report to the Scottish Executive, Central Research Unit.
16. Handy S. A cycle of dependence: Automobile, accessibility, and the evolution of the transportation and retail hierarchies. Berkeley Planning Journal 1993, 8:21-43.
17. Handy S., Clifton K. Evaluating neighborhood accessibility: Possibilities and practicalities. Journal of Transportation and Statistics 2001, September/December:67-78.
18. Handy S., Mokhtarian P.L., Kwong K. The role of attitude and neighborhood characteristics in explaining transit use: A study of eight northern California neighborhoods 2006, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
19. Hansen W.G. How accessibility shapes land use?. Journal of the American Planning Association 1959, 25(1):73-76.
20. Judith B. Group enmity and accord: The commercial press in three American cities. American Social Science History 2000, 242:395-413.
21. Kawabata M., Shen Q. 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 2006, 33:115-130.
22. Keeble D., Owens P.L., Thompson C. Regional accessibility and economic potential in the European community. Regional Studies 1982, 16:419-432.
23. Kim T.Y. A study on the delimitation and spatial change of the transition zone: A case of Daegu. Journal of the Korea Planners Association 2008, 43(4):149-164. (in Korean).
24. Kim N.J. Estimating the subway station influence area by the distribution of walking distance and the change of housing sale prices. Journal of the Korea Planners Association 2012, 47(6):29-38. (in Korean).
25. Kim D.O., Ryu Y.G., Choi H.G. A study on the setting up method of subway access/egress area by walking and its application. Journal of the Korea Planners Association 2002, 37(5):177-186. (in Korean).
26. Koenig J.G. Indicators of urban accessibility: Theory and application. Transportation 1980, 9:145-172.
27. Krygsman S., Dijst M., Arentze T. Multimodal public transport: An analysis of travel time elements and the interconnectivity ratio. Transport Policy 2004, 11:265-275.
28. Lee C.M., Kim H.S., Kim M.K. Transit oriented development and spatial restructuring of the Seoul metropolitan area. Journal of the Korea Planners Association 2007, 42(6):67-88. (in Korean).
29. Levinson D. Accessibility and the journey to work. Journal of Transport Geography 1998, 6(1):11-21.
30. Lin J.J., Gau C.C. A TOD planning model to review the regulation of allowable development densities around subway stations. Land Use Policy 2006, 23:353-360.
31. Litman T. London congestion pricing: Implications for other cities 2006, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Victoria, Canada, Working paper.
32. Litman T. Valuing transit service quality improvements: Considering comfort and convenience in transport project evaluation 2008, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Victoria, Canada.
33. Lund H.M., Cervero R., Willson R.W. Travel characteristics of transit-oriented development in California 2004, California State Polytechnic University, California.
34. Olszewski P., Wibowo S.S. Using equivalent walking distance to assess pedestrian accessibility to transit stations in Singapore. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2005, 1927:38-45.
35. Parker T., McKeever M., Arrington G.B., Smith-Heimer J. Statewide transit-oriented development study: factors for success in California (final report) 2002, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento.
36. Rietveld P., Bruinsma F. Is transport infrastructure effective? Transport infrastructure and accessibility: Impacts on the space economy 1998, Springer Verlag, Berlin.
37. Ryan S., Frank L.F. Pedestrian environments and transit ridership. Journal of Public Transportation 2009, 12(1):39-57.
38. Schürmann, C., Spiekermann, K., & Wegener, M. (1997). Accessibility indicators. Berichte aus dem Institut für Raumplanung, SASI Deliverable D5. Report to the European Commission, Universität Dortmund, Dortmund.
39. Shin S.Y. The relationship between land use and automobile dependence: The case of Seoul. Seoul Studies 2004, 5(1):71-93. (in Korean).
40. Sohn J. Are commuting patterns a good indicator of urban spatial structure?. Journal of Transport Geography 2005, 13:306-317.
41. Sung H., Oh J.T. Transit-oriented development in a high-density city: Identifying its association with transit ridership in Seoul, Korea. Cities 2011, 28(1):70-82.
42. Sung H., Rho J.H., Kim T.H., Park J.H. A study on the effects of land use on travel pattern in the rail station areas of a dense city: A case of Seoul. Journal of the Korea Planners Association 2006, 41(4):59-75. (in Korean).
43. Transportation Research Board Bus rapid transit volume 1: Case studies in bus rapid transit 2003, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
44. Transportation Research Board Effects of TOD on housing, parking, and travel. Report 128 2008, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
45. Wegener M. Description of the Dortmund region model, Arbeitspapier 8 1983, Institut für Raumplanung Universität Dortmund, Dortmund.
46. 2 emissions of transport by reorganisation of urban activities. Transport, land-use and the environment 1996, 103-124. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. Y. Hayashi, J. Roy (Eds.).
47. Yun D.S., Ko J.J. Analysis of Daegu citizens' subway use characteristics and access area of subway station. Journal of the Korean Regional Science Association 2006, 22(2):251-274. (in Korean).