首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Transport Geography >Advance transit oriented development typology: case study in Brisbane, Australia
【24h】

Advance transit oriented development typology: case study in Brisbane, Australia

机译:先进的公交导向发展类型:澳大利亚布里斯班的案例研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Internationally, transit oriented development (TOD) is characterised by moderate to high density development with diverse land use patterns and well connected street networks centred around high frequency transit stops (bus and rail). Although different TOD typologies have been developed in different contexts, they are based on subjective evaluation criteria derived from the context in which they are built and typically lack a validation measure. Arguably there exist sets of TOD characteristics that perform better in certain contexts, and being able to optimise TOD effectiveness would facilitate planning and supporting policy development. This research utilises data from census collection districts (CCDs) in Brisbane with different sets of TOD attributes measured across six objectively quantified built environmental indicators: net employment density, net residential density, land use diversity, intersection density, cul-de-sac density, and public transport accessibility. Using these measures, a Two Step Cluster Analysis was conducted to identify natural groupings of the CCDs with similar profiles, resulting in four unique TOD clusters: (a) residential TODs, (b) activity centre TODs, (c) potential TODs, and (d) TOD non-suitability. The typologies are validated by estimating a multinomial logistic regression model in order to understand the mode choice behaviour of 10,013 individuals living in these areas. Results indicate that in comparison to people living in areas classified as residential TODs, people who reside in non-TOD clusters were significantly less likely to use public transport (PT) (1.4 times), and active transport (4 times) compared to the car. People living in areas classified as potential TODs were 1.3 times less likely to use PT, and 2.5 times less likely to use active transport compared to using the car. Only a little difference in mode choice behaviour was evident between people living in areas classified as residential TODs and activity centre TODs. The results suggest that: (a) two types of TODs may be suitable for classification and effect mode choice in Brisbane; (b) TOD typology should be developed based on their TOD profile and performance matrices; (c) both bus stop and train station based TODs are suitable for development in Brisbane.
机译:在国际上,公交导向发展(TOD)的特点是中等到高密度开发,具有多种土地利用模式,并且以高频公交站点(公共汽车和铁路)为中心,交通网络良好。尽管已经在不同的环境中开发了不同的TOD类型学,但是它们基于主观评估标准,这些主观评估标准是从构建它们的环境中得出的,并且通常缺乏验证措施。可以说,存在着一些在某些情况下表现更好的TOD特性,并且能够优化TOD有效性将有助于计划和支持政策制定。这项研究利用了布里斯班人口普查收集区(CCD)的数据,并通过六个客观量化的已构建环境指标对不同的TOD属性进行了测量:净就业密度,净居住密度,土地利用多样性,交叉路口密度,死胡同密度,和公共交通的可达性。使用这些措施,进行了两步聚类分析以识别具有相似轮廓的CCD的自然分组,从而得到四个独特的TOD聚类:(a)住宅TOD,(b)活动中心TOD,(c)潜在TOD和( d)TOD不适合。通过估计多项式逻辑回归模型来验证类型,以了解生活在这些地区的10,013个人的模式选择行为。结果表明,与居住在TOD住宅区中的人相比,居住在非TOD集群中的人与汽车相比,使用公共交通工具(PT)(1.4倍)和主动交通工具(4倍)的可能性要小得多。 。与使用汽车相比,居住在被归类为潜在TOD区域的人们使用PT的可能性要低1.3倍,使用主动交通的可能性要低2.5倍。生活在被划分为住宅TOD和活动中心TOD的人们之间,模式选择行为只有很小的差异。结果表明:(a)两种类型的TOD可能适用于布里斯班的分类和效果模式选择; (b)应根据TOD的TOD概况和性能矩阵来制定TOD类型; (c)公交车站和火车站的TOD都适合在布里斯班开发。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号