Transit Oriented Development (TOD), mobility hubs and Shared Autonomous Vehicles (SAVs)

The project aimed to decarbonize transport and decrease oil dependence by offering innovative shared future mobility solutions that work with public transport and enrich the service with first/last mile alternatives.

Project Vision and Approach

The project envisions a future where mobility hubs and electric Shared Autonomous Vehicles (SAVs) are key components of sustainable urban transport. By exploring scenarios and implementation strategies in Swedish and American suburbs, the project seeks to establish mobility hubs as a new type of infrastructure that can inspire the gradual redevelopment and decarbonization of car-dependent areas.

A core focus is on transforming mobility hubs into multifunctional public spaces. For example, a hub could operate as a carpooling center during peak hours and transform into a market or leisure area during the day. This adaptability positions hubs as dynamic elements that are fully integrated into the urban environment.

The project has produced several key outcomes, including:

• A classification of shared transport modes and a typology of mobility hubs that can be used by urban planners and designers.
• An analysis of seamless intermodal transfers from public transport to shared mobility systems at these hubs.
• A critical study of inclusive mobility and mobility of care, with a specific focus on the needs of social groups such as women with children, youths, seniors, etc.
• An urban design handbook aimed at helping planners and municipalities create high-quality public spaces that feature shared mobility systems at transit stations. (Available soon).

Key Findings and Results

The research explored different mobility hub models and the operational feasibility of an integrated SAV-mobility hub system, highlighting important trade-offs between convenience, cost, and efficiency.

A New Typology of Mobility Hubs

The project developed a typology that classifies mobility hubs based on their morphological scale, from a single building to an entire city.

• The typical mobility hub: This model, often promoted by planning and transport consultants and sharing economy advocacy groups, uses a "LEGO® block" principle, where different mobility services like car, bike, and scooter sharing are clustered together in public spaces near transit stations.
• The Munich neighborhood model: This model, known as mobilitätsstation/punkte, focuses on creating neighborhood centers that incorporate shared mobility and street redesign, often supported by placemaking and tactical urbanism experiments, sometimes without a direct link to a transit station.
• The Paris micromobility parking model: This model addresses the chaos caused by e-scooters and e-bikes by creating standardized micromobility parking areas on side streets. These hubs often repurpose one or two car parking spaces in side streets to provide structured parking for bikes and motorcycles, and sshared bikes and scooters.
• The Swedish mobilitetsrum (space for mobility) model: In contrast to the other models, this one focuses on the building itself. It involves converting garage spaces and off-street parking of residential complexes into community-owned spaces that can be used for shared vehicles, bike storage, workshops, and social gatherings.
• The San Francisco robotaxi model: This model is initially based on a curb-side service without dedicated hubs, but it can use the other mobility hub types for passenger pickups and charging.

Simulating SAV and Mobility Hub Operations in Uppsala

A simulation study in Uppsala, Sweden, evaluated how SAVs could function in a suburban setting. The study created a synthetic population to represent realistic travel behavior, paying special attention to the travel patterns of women and individuals aged 60 or older.

The simulation compared a "last-mile hub" model, where SAVs connect users to mobility hubs, with a "taxi service" model that provides more flexible, intra-zonal travel.

Key findings from the simulation include:

• Fleet Size and Cost: The flexible taxi service required a significantly larger fleet—approximately 3.8 to 4.6 times more vehicles—than the last-mile hub model. This highlights the trade-off between user convenience and operational cost.
• Operational Efficiency: The last-mile hub model showed a higher number of passengers served per vehicle hour, making it more attractive for maximizing vehicle utilization and minimizing idle time.
• Inclusive Mobility: Introducing a priority service for mobility-constrained groups (women and individuals aged 60+) significantly reduced their average waiting times. However, this benefit came at a cost, requiring a  20% to 45% increase in fleet size, depending on the service model. Interestingly, this prioritization also reduced waiting times for non-prioritized users.

The project's findings offer a valuable case study on the practical implementation of SAVs and mobility hubs, emphasizing that an effective, inclusive system requires strategic planning and collaboration among stakeholders, including public authorities and private companies.

International Collaboration

The collaboration between Swedish and American academic institutions—including KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm University, the University of Alabama, and UC Berkeley—has bridged theory and practice to advance mobility hub innovations. The project also coordinates an international research network on sustainable mobility with other partners from China and other European countries, fostering continued research and knowledge sharing on TOD.

Take part of results in the handbook 

Do you want to know more?

Our innovation projects

Do you wish to collaborate?