Abstract
In growing cities, the evolution of urban form is partially motivated in principle by travel distance benefits. Evidence from travel data can support the categorisation of activity organisation as monocentric, polycentric or dispersed. We consider centricity measures at a fine geographical scale for Sydney, Australia using two data sets: Census journey-to-work transit data and commute trips from Opal transit smartcards. Only a few top-order centres are detected, and there is a significant level of dispersed activity in areas that are not centres. Further, most top-order centres that are detected are clustered spatially. Thus, we find that a comparison of the data sets does not support the polycentric model but instead a legacy monocentric model combined with dispersal.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
