Transportation is, in many ways, the most important segment of community’s infrastructure (R. Freilich) and a community’s transportation has a profound influence on its land use pattern and rate of growth. Ch. Zegrass believes transportation network is the “Shaper of the urban form” and argues that “no one can understand the urban development, unless know enough about the movements”.

In this “200 words report”, I am going to highlight the significance of TOD (as an “appreciable ridership bonus in U.S.”, R. Cervero) phenomena in suburbanized America.

What is the role of 1956 in sprawling the Americans? And how America’s suburbs impacted by Edsel Ford’?

What is the transportation investment impact on suburbanization and how transportation policies influenced by suburbanians?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post war II era, could be called as golden years for America. Escalading GDP, low unemployment rates and peace. Then, U.S. immediately welcomed baby boomers, 800 $ Ford sedan and 18 cents/Gal fuel.

Cities expanded, inevitably. Cheap transportation and lands, expanded families and boomed middle class.

P. Muller called 1940s as “Freeway Era”. Those years was not sparked by a revolution in urban transportation. Rather, it represented the coming of age of the “Automobile Culture”(D.G. Janelle) which coincided with the lavish investment on freeways. Given impetus by 1956 interstate highways act, new suburbs flourished in every corner of urban America.

In less than three decades, in late 1970s suburbanians founded themselves trapped.

They had “Vehicle-depended mobility” with poor “independent accessibility” (J Moore).

 Mobility and accessibility are related, but analytically distinct and “complementary” concepts (J Dunn).

Then, they worked on accessibility. They started with high-density oriented land-use policies and mixed land use idea in 1980s, followed the density pattern by TOD in 90s and early 2000s and now are experiencing “poly-centric Metropolitans” (William T. Bogart).

What is the next?

Are suburban going to get absorbed in the main core of cities or they will agglomerate economy and attract more amenity, wealth and jobs?

Endnotes:

-      Cervero R, 2007, "Transit-oriented development’s ridership bonus: a product of self-selection and public policies" Environment and Planning A 39(9) 2068 – 2085 

-      The New Transit Town: Best Practices In Transit-Oriented Development, dited by Hank Dittmar, Gloria Ohland

-      California Department of Transportation; subconsultant to Cambridge Systematics on designing data base and evaluation of transit-oriented developments (TODs) in California, October 2000-June 2001.

-          Green TODs, International journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, Vol 18, 2011

-          Are Suburban TOD overparker? Journal of Public Transportation, Vol 13, 2010

-          Suburbanization and Transit Oriented Development in China, Transportation Policy, Vl 15, 2008

-          Making Transit workin the Suburbs. TRR/TRB 1451, 1994

-          Suburban Employment Centers, Probing the Influence of Site Features On the Journey-to work. , Journal of Planning, 1989

-          Zegras. C. et al, Forthcoming by Commuting or Design? Age restricted neighborhoods. (Local Travel behaviors, Boston), Aug 2011

-      G Giuliano, “What Can We Really Achieve with Community Design Standards?” 

Conference on Urban Growth: Addressing the Reality of Suburbia, Drachman

Institute and Fannie Mae Foundation, Phoenix, AZ

-      Giuliano, G. (2005) “Low income, public transit and mobility,” Transportation Research Record 1927, 63-72.

-      The geography of urban transportation, S Hanson and G Giuliano

-      Jaek-Ik Kim, "The Suburbanization of Firms with Multiple  Labor Inputs:  From Monocentricity to Policentricity,"  School of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Southern California