4.7 Article

TOD in regional urban growth boundaries (UGBs): A case of transit adjacent development or a strategic housing solution?

期刊

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT GEOGRAPHY
卷 113, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2023.103714

关键词

Green Belt; Housing affordability; TOD; Strategic planning; Peripheral urban growth; rural-urban fringe

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper discusses the feasibility and policies of transit-oriented development (TOD) in the Green Belt in England through a case study in the West Midlands. It emphasizes the need to focus on regional variations in public transport provision and advocates for greater strategic integration of land-use and transport planning.
The Green Belt in England is probably the most longstanding and internationally recognised Urban Growth Boundary (UBG). However, developers, think tanks and academics often accuse UGB's of being the leading cause of the housing affordability problems around the world and articulate an alternative vision of Transit-Oriented Development (TOD). This paper, based upon a regional case study of the West Midlands and 74 interviews with planners and planning stakeholders, argues that the debate around TOD in the Green Belt needs to be more cognisant of regional geographical variation in public transport provision. Moreover, drawing upon the views of planners who play a key a role in allocating land for development, the paper underlines that decisions regarding TOD need to made strategically as reflecting the policy's purpose as a regional growth management policy. Reflecting on the broader academic literature, it highlights the need for greater strategic integration of transport and land-use planning alongside reviving strategic planning to evaluate various spatial blueprints for urban growth management. The paper has broader relevance to international debates about the feasibility and potential of TOD, especially in addressing housing affordability problems around the world.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据