Scientific Seminar SIDT 2011
6.10.2011 - Venezia
Land use and public transport
interactions in the city of Rome
Stefano Gori, Marco Petrelli
ROMA TRE UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
Introduction
Aim of the study
Land use and public transport characteristics
analysis in the case study of the city of Rome
Why?:
 To understand if there is a link between land-use and
public transport;
 To quantify the impact of land-use characteristics in
order to reach a suitable transit modal split;
 To understand how to connect land use and supply
characteristics.
Literature review
Introduction
Requirements for successful transit system:
 Connection between land use design and transport
system planning; (Cervero, 1998; Beimborn et al., 1992)
 Density of residents and employees; (Sinha, 2003; Facchinetti,
2007; Banister, 2005 and 2006)
 Variation of density in the urban area; (Eidlin, 2005)
 High quality access system to transit stops; (Schlossberg
and Brown, 2004; Gori et al., 2006)
 Transport policies more than density; (Mees, 2009)
 Improve transit service non only increasing density;
(Sung and Ho, 2009)
 Mode choice also depending on cultural preferences;
(Buehler, 2011)
The City of Rome
Case study
Demand characteristics:
 552,000 trips in the morning peak hour;
 30% transit modal split (TLZ + lack of parking spaces);
 high level of automobile ownerships (more than 700
for 1,000 persons);
 large diffusion of motorcycles.
Supply characteristics:
 2 metro lines of 36 km length radial with a unique
interchange in the city centre (Termini rail station);
 5 rail lines only partially useful for urban trips and with
low frequency service.
Land use characteristics:
 3 millions of inhabitants and 1.1 millions of employees;
 a compact central area respect to the surrounding
zones characterized by very low densities.
Infrastructural and land use
scenarios
Case study
Simulation of different future scenarios:
 Scenario 1: supply modifications according to the plans
of local administration
 extensions of the existing 2 metro lines
 2 new additional metro lines
 11 new rapid feeder services corridors to improve the
adduction
Increase of transit modal split: 5%
 Land use scenarios: trips concentrated along the
coverage area of the metro network to realize "transitvillages” (~250÷300pop-emp/ha)
 Scenario 2: 12 TOD in generation 4%
 Scenario 3: 5 TOD in attraction 5%
Analysis of land use and public
transport demand
Case study
Subdivision in 4 macro areas
Indicators for macro areas
Case study
Zone
[ha]
Inhab.
Empl.
Inhab. [%] Empl. [%]
1
1,427
96,472 194,461
3.76%
17.57%
2
3,327
300,344 239,570
11.72%
21.64%
3
29,638 1,588,518 527,690
61.98%
47.67%
4
93,931
22.54%
13.13%
Zone Inhab/
ha
577,601 145,299
Empl/ Generated
ha
trips/ha
Attracted Generation
trips/ha
Transit
Modal
Share
Attraction
Transit
Modal
Share
1
68
136
15.5
60.5
40.78%
52.29%
2
90
72
23.5
37.9
35.44%
42.34%
3
54
18
10.3
8.5
29.34%
19.67%
4
6
2
1.4
0.7
21.99%
8.63%
Indicators for 130 districts in Rome
Transit modal split [%]
Case study
Pop.
Min.
Emp.
Pop/ha Emp/ha Generation Attraction
Rail
stops
163
48
0.04
0.008
2.34
0.10
0
Average 17,452
7,834
66
32
26.84
18.72
2
77,927 57,306
256
342
54.33
61.62
7
Max.
 Not so high density values (pop. and emp.)
 In attraction lower transit modal split
 Connection between transit modal split and supply
level
Density variation
Gini coefficient for the city of Rome:
Case study
Gini coefficient (G)
Residences
0.48
Activities
0.62
Los Angeles: Gini coefficient = 0.65
Transit modal share = 6.7% (work
trips)
n


(
n

1

i
)
y


i 
1

G
n  1  2 i 1 n

n
yi



i 1


where:
n=traffic zones
y=density
New York: Gini coefficient = 0.77
Transit modal share = 26.6% (work
trips)
Density and transit modal split
Case study
Analysis respect to generation and attraction
Effects of the access/
egress phase
Case study
Impact of the access/egress phase
 for generated trips
Transit modal split
Distance to rail stop [m]
< 500
500-1000 1000-1500 >1500
Average
35.45%
21.80%
18.96% 8.69%
St. Dev.
8.80%
11.49%
1.13% 3.89%
 for attracted trips
Transit modal split
Distance to rail stop [m]
< 500
500-1000 1000-1500 >1500
Average
29.29%
12.07%
7.86% 3.03%
St. Dev.
14.68%
10.94%
2.51% 2.05%
Inconsistent development of supply
Case study
Future metro network
Large increase of service coverage but transit
travel times (TTT) are not competitive
TTT is twice over auto travel times:
- for 55% of trips between areas within metro service
coverage area
- for trips with origin or destination within metro service
coverage area
Case study
Development of transport and land use
Large difference between land use and transport system
in terms of:
 design and building time of facilities
 budget at disposal (public funds against funds from
financial market)
Project
Length
[km]
Building costs
[mld €]
Forecasted date
of works end
Years of work
(design+
building)
Metro C
25,5
3,00
2015
20
Metro D
20
3,00
2018
16
Metro B1
3,6
0,62
2011
8
Ponte di Nona districts in Rome:
housing for 12.000 people completed in 2 years
Synthesis of analysis
Conclusions
 Strong connection land-use and transport:
o Correlation between density and use of transit
system, mainly activities density;
o Need for good accessibility, especially in the
egress phase;
o Density and Transit villages are not enough.
 Need
to
create
a
configuration synergic
characteristics
transit
network
with land use
 Need to develop LU and PT as a unique
complex system