Amsterdam has a housing shortage issue. To solve this problem, Amsterdam Municipality aims to provide 52.500 housing units by 2025. Reaching this number is achieved through newly constructed and repurposed houses converted from other functions. The comparison between these two strategies, at the building scale, is the focus of several important research, from the energy consumption in the construction process, to the structural features of the repurposed buildings and their compatibility with the housing plan. However, the urban scale has seldom been studied when comparing new and repurposed housing projects. In this research we test whether new and repurposed buildings have access different access to urban amenities, based on their location in the city. For this, we use the 15-minute city concept as a framework and measure access to amenities within a 15-minute walking distance from each housing project. Based on data from 554 residential buildings (38.061 housing units ) built between 2015 and 2019, we compare the number and diversity of amenities within 15-minute walkshed of repurposed and new house buildings. Our results contribute to policymakers and urban planners in evaluating how new and repurposed housing projects benefit from urban amenities.

In previous research, we have developed a method for urban diversity mapping. As applications of this method, we have demonstrated how to map the diversity of urban activities, building materials, and architectural styles, as well as the diversity of news coverage about any urban area. We are now further expanding this previous research by taking urban mobility into account when estimating experienced diversity in urban space. Technically, in our initial research, we estimated the diversity of each point in geographical space by looking at a fixed-size area around the point in question. For example, our initial question was: how diverse is the 1000x1000m2 -area around each point in urban space. Our new question is: How far can a person get in 15 minutes from each point in urban space, and how much diversity does this person then encounter? Evidently, each point we now study is surrounded by a uniquely-shaped so-called “15-min isochrone”. The scale of analysis is no longer a 1000x1000m2 grid, it is a dynamic set of 15-min isochrones. Thus, using the isochrones as a scale of analysis, we make a connection between urban mobility and experienced diversity. As a practical application of this method, we now look at Tel Aviv. The city is building a new light rail. We calculate 15-minutes isochrones for several thousand locations before and after the light rail is built. We then use this information to estimate diversity before and after. In a final step, we use these estimates to create a diversity map that shows how the experienced diversity is changing in response to changes in urban mobility. Thus, our approach does not stop at studying urban mobility alone. We link the study of urban mobility to that of urban diversity. From the study of urban mobility, we can draw direct conclusions about changes in perceived urban diversity. Our results will fit into the topic of the present conference because diversity mapping is closely tied to nonlinear modeling and is a good way to describe the nonlinear or "messy" aspects of urban life, which this conference is dedicated to.

A restructuring of the urban mobility system is essential to achieve the climate targets for transportation and sustainable transportation systems. A good mobility transition requires changes in all areas, such as the built environment, prices and regulations, mobility behaviour, and propulsion systems. Nevertheless, there is a limited understanding of the policy measures that residents endorse or oppose prior to their implementation. We draw on the construct of public acceptability to investigate this phenomenon. The term refers to measures that haven't been implemented yet, and includes all the issues that need to be considered to make a policy measure publicly acceptable. This is why we pose the following research question: What is the public acceptability of policy measures to restructure urban mobility systems? Four policy measures are included, which cover three domains: the built environment, regulation, and pricing mechanisms. For the built environment, we select bicycle expressways and investments into public transport infrastructure. For regulation, we use speed limits. For pricing mechanisms, we focus on parking fees and a reform of the public transport ticket pricing system. For the evaluation of the proposed policy measures, we draw on a survey among respondents living in the 25 largest German cities (n=2500) and use fixed quotas for age and gender. The survey was open to all residents over the age of 18 years old. To gain insight into the public acceptability of these potential measures, four dimensions are considered: attitudes regarding mobility, mobility behaviour in terms of mode choice and general travel frequencies, mobility tools, particularly the number of private cars, and socio-demographics. To measure the impact of these four dimensions on the public acceptability of the respective policy measures, factor analysis, clustering, and logistic regression analysis are conducted. The survey revealed that the city of residence plays a significant role in determining support for the policy initiatives. The respondents who reside in cities with high cycling rates, such as Bremen, Karlsruhe, Münster, and Hannover, are more favorable towards the implementation of parking fees, the construction of bicycle expressways, and the establishment of speed limits compared to those who reside in cities with high car usage, such as Bochum, Duisburg, and Mönchengladbach. The subsequent phase of the analysis scrutinizes the fundamental structural configurations of these cities. What is the relationship between the infrastructure configurations of these cities and the public acceptability of policy measures to restructure the urban mobility system? Adding this extra step to the analysis can help us uncover the crucial elements that affect the acceptability of policy actions, going beyond merely individual preferences.

Car dependency leads to a variety of societal problems and challenges, not least environmental ones. Even in countries with high-quality public transport and bike infrastructure, such as the Netherlands, the majority of trips and trip-kilometres are performed by cars (Ton et al., 2020). It is therefore not only paramount but also critical, to understand the underlying determinants of car ownership and usage-related choices. Among those contributing factors, the role of subjective factors is often acknowledged to be important, yet not well understood. In this work, we conduct a systematic review of the literature regarding the effect of such motives on car ownership and usage. Based on the commonalities found in the reviewed articles, we identify and describe the five most relevant subjective factors in detail: (i) instrumental motives and autonomy, (ii) affective motives, (iii) symbolic motives, (iv) social norms, and (v) environmental motives. People primarily consider instrumental reasons and autonomy when choosing a car over other transport modes. Additionally, users develop affective connections with their cars. In a broader societal context, individuals have symbolic motives related to the image they want to project and the influence of social norms. We also observed a growing focus on environmental concerns, particularly related to sustainability-oriented behaviours. Based on the synthesis of these findings, we propose a car ownership/use motives model, that communicates the interaction between individuals, transport modes, family and society, and the environment, as illustrated in Figure 1. We discuss implications for public policy, such as implications on car-free and car-sharing policies, and outline directions for future research, such as the relationship between electrification and car-related motives and the bi-directional complexities between the use of cars and personal attitudes. Notes This research was supported by the Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Metropolitan Solutions (AMS Institute) where the first author was a Research Fellow and a Postdoctoral researcher at the TU Delft. This paper is currently published open access at Transportation Reviews: Jaime Soza-Parra & Oded Cats (2023) The role of personal motives in determining car ownership and use: a literature review, Transport Reviews DOI: 10.1080/01441647.2023.2278445