Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
analysis
C (The area of water bodies in the administrative city area) and D (Built-
up areas and courtyards in the administrative city area).
Results of MLR taking into account the more detailed data about population
proved a high complexity of the dependence and ambiguity of results from two
different evaluations. They highlighted in
—
fl
uence of population data and suppressed
spatial data showing signi
cant in
fl
uence of recreational and traf
c areas differently
in three analysed periods.
This part of the project con
rmed the results published already in Halounov
á
[
14
] that urban development and its impact on the road traf
c (analysed here as
average road traf
c intensity in cities) of individual cities substantially differs
among cities. The difference was found in unequal value of correlation coef
cients
of individual indicators of individual cities. It was found that each indicator has
both direct and indirect impact in the whole group of cities. These correlation
coef
cients proved that the functional classes and their areas describing residential
areas in core city areas, traf
c and productive areas have the strongest direct impact
to the road traf
c intensity from the whole group view. It was also determined by
All indicators used can be derived or found for all cities at least in the several
previous years. Results of this part of the project showed that prediction of the
impact of the future development of a city on road traf
c intensity should be
analysed rather from the historical development of the last 25 years than from the a
model made from many cities. The analysis should take into account not only
spatial indicators, but also the number of inhabitants, economically active popu-
lation, and number of inhabitants commuting to work.
The future work will be focused on spatial distribution, fractionalisation, road
network density, GDP, etc., in the cities. These phenomena were not taken into
account in this phase of the research.
References
1. Vep
ř
ek K (2009) Metodika hodnocen
í
efektivnosti rozvoje silni
č
n
í
s
í
t
ě
z hlediska urbanizace/
Methodology of evaluation of affectivity of the road traf
c development from the urbanisation
point of view (in Czech only). Prague
2. Litman TA, Steele R (2013) How land use factors affect travel behaviour. Land use impacts on
transport, Transport Policy Institute. Available via DIALOG.
http://www.vtpi.org/landtravel.
3. Jacobson E (2003) The transportation-land use connection. Transportation and Growth
Management, School of Urban Studies and Planning, College of Urban and Public Affairs,
Portland State University, Portland
4. Ristim
ki M, Kalenoja H (2011) Travel-related zones of urban form in urban and peri-urban
areas. In: Track 11, 3rd world planning school congress, Perth
5. Banister D (2011) Cities, mobility and climate change. J Transp Geogr 19:1538
ä
1546
6. Banister D (2011) The trilogy of distance, speed and time. J Transp Geogr 19:950
-
959
7. Banister D, Anderton K, Bonilla D, Givoni M, Schwanen T (2011) Transportation and the
environment. Annu Rev Environ Resour 36:247
-
270
-
Search WWH ::
Custom Search