Travel behaviour Location of activities Travel surveys

Public transport zone Pedestrian zone Urban form

Home environment

UZ

Commuting area

Travel profile Car-oriented zone

Travel-related zones of urban form Low mobility

COST case studies

Examples ( Mika Ristimäki and Lena Halounova)

Helsinki-Lahti / Praha-Liberec Tampere-Ostrava Proposal for the future cooperation –

Processing of three various cities in each country having similar conditions for analyzing sustainable development:

–

number of inhabitants – for comparable city scale for land use, transport systems,

–

economical orientation – for comparable economical and social conditions,

–

distance to Helsinki/Prague boundary/centre – for comparable conditions for external employment sources and other economical sources concentrated in prevailing part in both capitals .

UZ

UZ Tampere and Ostrava:

Lahti and Liberec

–

similar number of inhabitants - 300 000

–

similar number of inhabitants - 100 000

–

heavy industry,

–

–

university towns

textile and jewelry industry, and wood processing in Liberec, wood processing, in Lahti

–

transport system, Ostrava tram and bus system, Tampere bus system

–

transport system, Liberec tram system, Lahti bus system

–

distance to capitals – more than 100 km (300 km to Prague – 3 hours by train, 200 km to Helsinki – 2 hours by train, highway connections)

–

distance to capitals – about 100 km (100 km to Prague – 1 hours by bus, 100 km to Helsinki – 1 hour by train, highway connections)

–

winter and summer sport centers

–

–

–

Recreational town pairs including their neighborhood

–

Lahti City , recreational resort/town Vierumäki , Pajulahti in Finland

–

Liberec and Jablonec mountainous touristic region in the Czech Republic

Methods

UZ

–

Method description and data exchange for the partner to be able to apply it for his already processed case city.

–

Mapping the urbanization with long time series in two cities in Finland and Czech Republic using methods and determine new information found by the partner´s one.

–

Definition of urban forms and transport relationships.

–

Urban classifications used in urban planning in the case cities according to already approved proposals and approved decisions.

–

Analyses of leisure time activities in urban and regional level focused also on aging population taking into account also green infrastructure and green corridors in urban form as the cheapest and the most natural human physical activity – walking.

Anticipated outcomes and deliverables

UZ

–

Comparison of two methods for land use determination in urban areas – their mutual relations, advantages, disadvantages, resolutions, scales, derived information, etc. as a case study.

–

Land use urban area types in Finland – cities with relatively new urban policy (19th – 21st century - and Czech Republic – cites with history since medieval period – intensity population, comparison of relation between areas of production and residential areas, city centers and subcenters (if exist) and recommendation for a sustainable urban planning policy for European towns – in the northern and central Europe

–

Transport systems in the different city pairs– types, intensity, distances to public city transport network, connection to their capitals – examples and recommendations for the spatial distribution for an efficient public city transport system.

–

Determination of indicators for suitable localization of recreational places for the aging part of population living in cities – in prevailing part in their suburb areas.

Trip production

Travel behaviour Location of activities Travel surveys

Public transport zone Pedestrian zone Urban form

Home environment

UZ

Commuting area

Travel profile Car-oriented zone

Travel-related zones of urban form Low mobility

Travel-related Zones of Urban Form in Urban and Peri-Urban areas, Case Helsinki-Lahti corridor Mika Ristimäki Senior Researcher Finnish Environment Institute Unit of Built Environment Helsinki, Finland

COST Case study, Helsinki- Lahti

UZ

– travel related zones of urban form from the hole corridor can be utilised – describe and interpret the urban form and travel patterns in urban , peri-urban areas and rural areas in corridor – pedestrian zones are strongest within areas of high level of public transport service and weakest in outer peri-urban areas. Sustainability urban design (SUD) analyses around railways stations in corridor – there is almost no potential to increase the public transport use in outer peri-urban areas without large scale public transport investments and location of intensified land use – rail-based inner peri-urban region has been successful in creating more polycentric urban form with less car-dependent life style – zones can be generalized to a planning method, which can be used to assess the effects of land use and transportation system development – Planning policy analyses in corridor – Future scenarios in corridor and assesments using IA methods

UZ

Travel related zones of urban form

Pedestrian zones Public transport zones

Car-oriented zones

Travel related zones of urban form • based on commonly known methodology applied in many countries (e.g. ABC planning policy) • development of planning tool for land use and transport system planning • definition of criteria for zones • definition of urban form and mobility profiles for each zone type • created in co-operation with land use and transport planners

UZ General criteria for the travel related zones of urban form Criteria for travel related zones is based on • distance to CBD area • distance to public transport stop • headway for public transport services • location of subcentra

Public transport zones are on more than 2 km distance of the CBD area and there is high level of service of public transport. 1. Intensive public transport zone 2. Public transport zone

Pedestrian zones Public transport zones

1. Pedestrian zone is limited in 1,0–2,0 km radius of CBD area

2. Pedestrian zone is surrounded by a fringe zone of the radius of 2-5 km radius of the pedestrian zone 3. In the metropolitan area the subcentres form an independent pedestrian zone

Car-oriented zones

The area outside the pedestrian and public transport zones is car-oriented zone. Usually in large urban areas there is also some public transport supply in car-oriented zones, but the public transport level of service is not as high as on public transport zones. In small urban areas the public transport supply of car-oriented zones is modest.

Travel related zones in Helsinki Metropolitan Region Travel related zones of urban form on urban and peri-urban area • implementation of the zones on national level in 250x250 m grid cells •pedestrian zones describe the polycentric nature of Metropolitan Region Data • MUFFS data (Finnish Monitoring System of Urban Form and Spatial Structure) • public transport supply data • regional travel survey data

UZ

UZ Urban, peri-urban and rural areas in Helsinki Metropolitan Region Helsinki Urban Region Inner Peri-Urban area, good rail connection Inner Peri-Urban area Helsinki Urban Mid-sized cities,Region good rail connection Inner area, of good rail connection OtherPeri-Urban mid-sized cities region Inner Peri-Urban area Outer Peri-Urban area Mid-sized cities, good rail of connection Small towns in the fringe region Other mid-sized of of region Rural areas in thecities fringe region Outer Peri-Urban area Small towns in the fringe of region Rural areas in the fringe of region

0

400 000

Helsinki Urban Region Inner Peri-Urban Area, good rail connection Inner Peri-Urban Area Outer Peri-Urban Area

800 000

1 200 000 1 004 800

107 800 67 700 92 200

Peri-urban areas have altogether 268 000 inhabitants

Helsinki –Lahti corridor

UZ

Travel related zones in Lahti Region

UZ

Trip production

Travel behaviour Location of activities Travel surveys

Public transport zone Pedestrian zone Urban form

Home environment

UZ

Commuting area

Travel profile Car-oriented zone

Travel-related zones of urban form Low mobility

Features of Helsinki-Lahti corridor

UZ

Examples of typical areal profiles of the zones Work place density (work places/ hectar)

Areal density rate (floor area/ land area)

Household density (number of hh/ hectar)

Population density (inhab./ hectar)

Commercial work places / hectar

Pedestrian zone

1,35

60

101

160-190

12,4

Fringe of pedestrian zone

0,53

36

59

56

1,4

Intensive public transport zone

0,25

18

34

19

1,0

Public transport zone

0,16

12

26

9

0,5

Pedestrian zone of a subcentre

0,35

25

46

26

3,1

Car oriented zone

0,07

4

11

3

Helsinki Urban Region

Inner Peri-Urban area, good rail connections Pedestrian zone

0,16

12

24

8

Fringe of pedestrian zone

0,06

4

10

2

Public transport zone

0,10

8

17

3

Car oriented zone

0,02

1

3