Siedentop PDF

Institute of Regional Development Planning Universitt Stuttgart
Settlement and transport: how does the

constructed city influence our travel behaviour?
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Stefan Siedentop

5th World Congress of the global network Cities for Mobility
Stuttgart, July 4th 2011
A good transportation system minimizes unnecessary
transportation; and in any event, it offers a change of
speed and mode to fit a diversity of human purposes.
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City (1963)
Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

www.uni-stuttgart.de/ireus Prof. Dr.-Ing. Stefan Siedentop
The Predict and Provide Paradigm
Conventional predict and provide transportation planning has

stimulated further growth of motorized traffic volumes
Prediction of future vehicle Improved accessibility for

Traffic Expansion of road and Traffic
traffic demand based on car drivers and land use
growth parking capacity growth
extrapolations change
Projection

Has Made Our Cities More Auto Dependent
Cycle of Automobile Dependency
Transport development
Urban development
and costs of transport
behavioral attitudes
leads to allow/favor
Choice of peripheral
Longer distances
(auto-dependent) sites
Result: Motorization
Increasing auto and auto-
enforce oriented
dependency and
traffic volumes transport
Increasing planning
motorization and Deacresing
road capacity spatial sensitivity
expansion influence influence
Source: Gutsche et al. 2006

Technology Alone is Not Enough (!)
Compensation of (technology based) efficiency gains by demand

growth (rebound effect)
150%
140% Vehicle km travelled Change of motorized

transport and fuel
130%
consumption in Germany
120% since 1990 (1990=100)
110%
100%
Fuel consumption (liter / 100 km)
90%
80%
70% adapted from Faulstich 2010

1990 2000 2007

Technology Alone is Not Enough (!)
Measure 1: Measure 2: Measure 3:

more efficient climate-friendly integrated urban
cars fuel planning
liter (gallon) Carbon Vehicle km (miles)

GHG emissions = x x
km (mile) liter (mile) travelled
Fuel consumption Carbon content Activity
Sustainable Transport Sustainable Urbanism

Technology
adapted from Cercero/Murakami 2010

Agenda
1. 5 D variables: how does urban form influence travel?
2. Urban growth management: how to counteract automobile

dependency?
- Urban containment
- Transit oriented development
3. Summary and conclusions

1. 5 D Variables how does urban form
influence travel?

Relevant Characteristics of the Built Enviroment
Urban form features (variables) that significantly influence travel

- activity density (people and jobs per hectare)
- diversity (spatial mix of land uses)
- destination accessibility (accessibility of trip destinations)
- urban design (street network characteristics)
- distance to transit (distance to nearest transit stop)
The individual effect of these variables may be limited, the

combined effect is not (!)

5 D-Variables Activity Density
Higher urban densities reduce transport energy demand
Atlanta und Barcelona two cities with

comparable population figures but
extreme differences in urban form
Transport energy demand (per capita and year):

- Atlanta: ~ 3.000 liter gasoline
- Barcelona: ~ 350 liter gasoline
50 km Source: Bertaud 2004

70
Relation between urban density
and gasoline consumption
60
data for 32 cities from allover the world
Gasoline consumption (Gj per capita)
50
The lower is the density, the higher is the motorized
transport demand
There is a fundamental threshold of urban density of
40
around 30 40 residents per hectare
30
20
10
City
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Source: adapted from Newman/Kenworthy 1989
Urban density (inhabitants per hectare)

70 North-American Cities
Density 14 people / ha
60 Motorization 533 cars per 1.000 inh
Gasoline consumption (Gj per capita)
Car-km per capita 8.700 km

50
40
Asian Cities
30
Density 160 people / ha
Motorization 88 cars per 1.000 inh
20
Car-km per capita 1.100 km
10
City
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Source: adapted from Newman/Kenworthy 1989
Urban density (inhabitants per hectare)

5 D-Variables Diversity
Mixed used urban environments encourage walking and transit use

Mode choice in neighborhoods of varying urbanity (mixed use)
(selected German cities)
High 38 10 15 37
Mixed use / urbanity
Moderate 29 10 10 52
Low 23 9 6 62
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
walking cycling PT Car Source: Beckmann 2011

5 D-Variables Destination Accessibility
The influence of location to activity centers (CBD, secondary centers)
Car-kilometer per capita
40 km
Historical Urban Inner Outer

inner city expansion suburban suburban
districts until WW2 ring ring
Source: Gutsche/Schiller 2005

5 D-Variables Destination Accessibility
Site specific variations in trip frequencies and mode choice cannot

be explained with differences in wealth
Differences in wealth and travel patterns in metropolitan Melbourne
Core Inner Middle Fringe

Percentage of household earning
12 11 10 6
> A$ 70,000 per year
Car use (trips/day/capita) 2.12 2.52 2.86 3.92
Public transport (trips/day/capita) 0.66 0.46 0.29 0.21
Walk/bike (trips/day/capita) 2.62 1.61 1.08 0.81
Source: Newman 2006

5 D-Variables Urban Design
Residential road networks strongly influences trip lengths and

mode choice
Typical suburban network Transport efficient network

5 D-Variables Distance to Transit
S-/U-Bahnstrecke
U U
800m 800m
Indicator Atlanta Barcelona

Metro network (km) 74 99*
Share of population within
800-m-radius of a station 4% 60 %
Trips made by public
transport 4,5 30
* excluding tram network adapted from Bertaud 2004,
Images from Google Earth

5 D-Variables Distance to Transit
S-/U-Bahnstrecke
U U U
800m 800m 800m
Indicator Atlanta Barcelona Stuttgart

Metro network (km) 74 99* 153
Share of population within
800-m-radius of a station 4% 60 % 47 %
Trips made by public
transport 4,5 30 22
* excluding tram network adapted from Bertaud 2004,
Images from Google Earth

2. Urban growth management: how to counteract
automobile dependency?

Urban Containment
Urban containment aims to limit the development of land outside a

defined urban area, while encouraging infill development and
redevelopment inside the urban area
Urban containment policies achieve a minimum urban density and a

compact urban form (compact city)
The most important containment policies are

- infill development, Brownfield redevelopment
- urban growth boundaries, greenbelts

Urban Containment the Toronto Experience
Growth plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Toronto (2006)

Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
Allocation of new development around transport stations

- density varies according to the distance to public transport stations
Station
Density
1 km
A key feature of TOD is high density near to public
transport stations
moderate high moderate

TOD The Copenhagen Experience
The Finger Plan for the Copenhagen Metro Region (1948)
New urban development,

1990-2006

TOD The Stuttgart Experience
The Stuttgart Regional Plan (2009)

3. Summary and Conclusions

Summary and Conclusions (1)
Land use based growth management policies could play an important

role in reducing motorized transport demand; sustainable transport
policies must incorporate sustainable urbanism
Higher densities, a compact urban form and a pedestrian friendly

urban design create opportunities to use non-motorized transport
modes and public transport
The alternative to automobile dependency is not a car-free city;

its a multi-modal transport system that offers various transport
options

Summary and Conclusions (2)
In fast growing cities, regionalized growth management approaches

seem to be more appropriate than the compact (contained) city
A poly-centric metropolis with vibrant suburban sub-centers that are

well connected with the CBD could be a promising strategy
Regionalized growth management approaches demand for an

institutional capacity building (regional planning institutions)
Finally: its much easier to keep the city compact than

redesigning an automobile dependent city (!)

Closing Note
And the first lesson we have to learn is that a city exists, not for the
constant passage of motorcars, but for the care and culture of men.
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City (1963)

Thank you very much for your kind attention!


Siedentop PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Siedentop PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Institute of Regional Development Planning Universitt Stuttgart

Settlement and transport: how does the

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Stefan Siedentop

Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City (1963)

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Conventional predict and provide transportation planning has

Prediction of future vehicle Improved accessibility for

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Cycle of Automobile Dependency

Source: Gutsche et al. 2006

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Compensation of (technology based) efficiency gains by demand

140% Vehicle km travelled Change of motorized

70% adapted from Faulstich 2010

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Measure 1: Measure 2: Measure 3:

liter (gallon) Carbon Vehicle km (miles)

Sustainable Transport Sustainable Urbanism

adapted from Cercero/Murakami 2010

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

1. 5 D variables: how does urban form influence travel?

2. Urban growth management: how to counteract automobile

3. Summary and conclusions

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Urban form features (variables) that significantly influence travel

The individual effect of these variables may be limited, the

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Higher urban densities reduce transport energy demand

Atlanta und Barcelona two cities with

Transport energy demand (per capita and year):

50 km Source: Bertaud 2004

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Car-km per capita 8.700 km

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Mixed used urban environments encourage walking and transit use

walking cycling PT Car Source: Beckmann 2011

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

The influence of location to activity centers (CBD, secondary centers)

Car-kilometer per capita

Historical Urban Inner Outer

Source: Gutsche/Schiller 2005

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Site specific variations in trip frequencies and mode choice cannot

Differences in wealth and travel patterns in metropolitan Melbourne

Core Inner Middle Fringe

Source: Newman 2006

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Residential road networks strongly influences trip lengths and

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Indicator Atlanta Barcelona

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

800m 800m 800m

Indicator Atlanta Barcelona Stuttgart

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Urban containment aims to limit the development of land outside a

Urban containment policies achieve a minimum urban density and a

The most important containment policies are

Cities for Mobility, Stuttgart, July 4th 2011

Growth plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Toronto (2006)