TADASHI MATSUMOTO - UNECE Homepage · Compact city policies: a comparative assessment TADASHI...

Compact city policies: a comparative assessment

TADASHI MATSUMOTO

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

(OECD)

Presentation at the UNECE-OECD seminar

September 26, 2012, Geneva

Outline of the study

1. To better understand the compact city concept and the implications of today’s urban contexts

2. To better understand potential outcomes, particularly in terms of Green Growth

3. To develop indicators to monitor compact cities

4. To examine current compact city practices in OECD

5. To propose key compact city strategies

Compact City?

Not at a city scale, but the metropolitan scale:

Dense and proximate development patterns

•Urban land is intensively utilised

•Urban agglomerations are contiguous or close together

•Distinct border between urban and rural land use

•Public spaces are secured

Urban areas linked by public transport systems

•Effective use of urban land

•Public transport systems facilitate mobility in urban areas

Accessibility to local services and jobs

•Land use is mixed

•Most residents have access to local services either on foot or using public transport

Concept Potential outcomes Indicators Comparative policy assessment

Recommendations

Misconception?

• Compact urban development as a component of the compact city

• Size of a compact city

• A polycentric urban structure in a compact city

• Building forms and open space in a compact city

Concept Potential outcomes Measuring the performance

Comparative policy assessment

Recommendations

Land is consumed at a faster rate…

0

100 000

200 000

300 000

400 000

500 000

600 000

700 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Urb

an

bu

ilt-

up

are

a (in

km

²)

OECD BRICs Rest of the world


Recommendations

…than population growth

Australia

Austria

Belgium

CanadaChile

Czech Republic

Denmark

Estonia

FinlandFrance

Germany

Greece

Hungary

Iceland

Ireland

Israel

Italy

JapanKorea

Luxembourg

Mexico

Netherlands

New ZealandNorway

Poland

Portugal

Slovak Republic

Slovenia

SpainSweden

Switzerland

Turkey

United Kingdom

United States

-0.2%

0.0%

0.2%

0.4%

0.6%

0.8%

1.0%

1.2%

1.4%

1.6%

1.8%

-0.6% -0.4% -0.2% 0.0% 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 1.0% 1.2% 1.4%

An

nu

al a

ve

rag

e to

tal b

uilt-

up

are

a g

row

th ra

te (

20

00

-20

50

)

Annual average total population growth rate (2000-2050)


Recommendations

Energy price affects location choice

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

Re

al i

nd

ex fo

r in

du

str

y a

nd

ho

use

ho

ld

Coal Electricity (kWh) Oil Products Total energy


Recommendations

More demands for smaller houses… Average household size

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.001980 2008


Recommendations

…and urban living Percentage of one-person households

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%1980 2008


Recommendations

Compact city policies can achieve integrated urban sustainability goals

Compact city characteristics

Environmental benefits

Social benefits Economic benefits

Shorter intra-urban distances

Fewer CO2 emissions, Less pollution from automobiles

Higher mobility of low-income households, due to lower travel costs

Higher productivity due to shorter travel time for workers

Better access to diversity of local services and jobs

- Higher quality of life due to access to local services (shops, hospitals, etc.)

Skilled labour force attracted by high quality of life

Greater productivity due to more diversity, vitality, innovation and creativity

More efficient public service delivery

- – Public service level for social welfare maintained by improved efficiency

– Lower infrastructure investments and cost of maintenance

Source: OECD (2012), Compact City Policies: A Comparative Assessment

•They can generate synergistic impacts:


Recommendations

How compact city policies can contribute to urban sustainability [excerpt]

Lower expenditure on public service


Recommendations

Walkability to local service

Distance to the nearest medical facilities

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 2 000 4 000 6 000 8 000 10 000

Dw

ellin

gs w

ith

in 5

00

m

Population density (persons/km²)

Nagoya

Aichi

Gifu


Recommendations

Major compact city indicators Category Indicator

Indicators related

to compactness

Dense and proximate

development patterns

1. Population and urban land growth

2. Population density on urban land

3. Retrofitting existing urban land

4. Intensive use of buildings

5. Housing form

6. Trip distance

7. Urban land cover

Urban areas linked by

public transport systems

8. Trips using public transport

9. Proximity to public transport

Accessibility to local

services and jobs

10. Matching jobs and homes

11. Matching local services and homes

12. Proximity to local services

13. Trips on foot and by bicycle

Indicators related

to the impact of

compact city

policies

Environmental 14. Public space and green areas

15. Transport energy use

16. Residential energy use

Social 17. Affordability

Economic 18. Public service


Recommendations

Visualise urban land cover Athens (3.4 million) Atlanta (4.6 million)


Recommendations


Recommendations

3-D density map

Population density on urban land

0 0 500 1 000 1 500 2 000 2 500 3 000

Kansas City

Columbus

Saint Louis

Cincinnati

San Antonio

Orlando

Minneapolis

Atlanta

Milwaukee

Seattle

Portland

Cleveland

Houston

Dallas

Denver

Phoenix

Washington

Sacramento-Roseville

Chicago

Detroit

San Diego

Baltimore

Miami

San Francisco

Boston

Philadelphia

Los Angeles

New York

Density in urban land based on LandScan (pop/ km²) Density in total land based on LandScan (pop/ km²)


Recommendations

Population living close to transport stations/network

97.7%

42.2%

13.8%

83.9%

63.7%

29.8%

Within bus service (400 m)

Within FTN (400 m)

Within rapid transit (800 m)



Within rail service (800 m)

Va

nco

uve

rT

oya

ma


Recommendations

Median commute distance

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1996 2006

Me

dia

n c

om

mu

te d

ista

nce

(km

)

Toronto CMA

Calgary CMA

Montreal CMA

Edmonton CMA

Vancouver CMA

Victoria CMA

Canada

for selected metropolitan areas in Canada, 1996-2006



Recommendations

Matching local services and homes



Recommendations


• The country survey – policy practices of 27 OECD countries

• Policy case studies (Melbourne, Paris, Vancouver, Toyama and Portland)



Recommendations

No single, comprehensive compact city model is

applicable to all cities and regions, because each

must take local circumstances into account.

Policy practices in use

Regulatory / informative Fiscal

Public

investment /

partnership

Master plan with explicit compact

city goals / instruments

Urban design guidelines

Urban growth boundary / urban

containment boundary

Greenbelt

Urban service boundary

Agricultural / natural land reserve

Minimum density requirement

Mixed-use requirement

Restriction on green-field

development

Restricting location of facilities

causing high trip frequency

Taxation of under-

density

Congestion tax /

fee / charges

Subsidies for

densification

Tax incentives for

promoting

development near

transit stations

Location Efficient

Mortgage

Split-rate property

tax

Purchasing

land for

natural

reserve

Development

agreement for

dense/mixed-

use

development

Source: OECD compact city survey



Recommendations

The five key policy strategies

1. Set explicit compact city goals

2. Encourage dense and contiguous development at urban fringes

3. Retrofit existing built-up areas

4. Enhance diversity and quality of life in urban centres

5. Minimise adverse negative effects


Recommendations

“Retrofit” existing built-up areas

• Promote brown-field development

• Regenerate existing residential areas – from “NIMBY” to “BIMBY (built-in-my-backyard)”

• Promote transit-oriented development in built-up areas

• Encourage “intensification” of existing urban assets



Recommendations

Intermodal connectivity (LRT, Toyama)

Minimise adverse negative effects

• Counteract traffic congestion

• Encourage the provision of affordable housing

• Promote high-quality urban design – lower “perceived density”

• Encourage greening of built-up areas



Recommendations

Retrofitting built-up areas + housing affordability (Laneway Housing, Vancouver)

Storm water + heat island + perceived density (green street, Portland)

Key governance strategies

• A vision: region-wide, integrated, long-term

• Articulate the roles and responsibilities of all key actors and stakeholders in the vision

• Vertical and horizontal coordination

• Accountability, transparency and reporting


Recommendations

To achieve compact city outcomes at the

functional metropolitan area…

Find out more:

OECD (2012), Compact City Policies: A Comparative

Assessment, OECD Green Growth Studies, OECD

Publishing.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264167865-en

Also visit our website:

www.oecd.org/regional/compactcity

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264167865-en

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264167865-en

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264167865-en

http://www.oecd.org/regional/compactcity

TADASHI MATSUMOTO - UNECE Homepage · Compact city policies: a comparative assessment TADASHI...

Documents

Transcript of TADASHI MATSUMOTO - UNECE Homepage · Compact city policies: a comparative assessment TADASHI...