Open Journal of Energy Efficiency, 2013, 2, 133-138
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojee.2013.23017 Published Online September 2013 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojee)
To Improve Energy Efficiency via Car Driving
Deduction by Land Use Planning
Mohammad Malekizadeh1, M. F. M. Zain1, Amiruddin Ismail2, Ahmad Hami3
1Department of Architecture, Universiti of Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Bangi, Malaysia
2Sustainable Urban Transport Research Centre (SUTRA), Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment,
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Bangi, Malaysia
3Department of Landscape Architecture, Universiti of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
Received December 31, 2012; revised May 31, 2013; accepted July 4, 2013
Copyright © 2013 Mohammad Malekizadeh et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
ABSTRACT
Urban area consumes about main percentage of used energy. Cities need basic review in land management, structure
and form to minimize the use of energy which creating environmental pollution. Urban planners and designers are look-
ing for a solution and essential agreement in urban planning and designing principles that can decrease the pollution
from rapid urbanization. Travelling is essential for daily needs of most people in urban area. Issues arise when one con-
siders the amount of necessary fossil fuels used in the majority of daily commuting for accessibility to services. It is
necessary to design a city to minimize the use of energy which creating environmental pollution. Research conducted in
Subang Jaya in Malaysia in 2012 finds a variable which influences on use of car, propose of use of car and commuting
distance by car. However it tried to find effect of train station and density on use of car for accessibility to this services
and facilities. Findings illustrate neighbourhood distance from train station influences distance to facilities and services
in neighbourhoods. However it illustrates derived distance by car was affected by residential lots distance from restau-
rant, work place, school, park, house area per person, and car ownership.
Keywords: Town & City Planning; Railway Systems; Urban Design; Transport Planning; Pollution; Energy Efficiency
1. Introduction
New form of urbanism took place on the demand for
building. Consequently planning project started to
accommodate the workers and their family near indus-
trial plants after the industrial revolution. Low-income
class community increases and upper-class commu-
nity moved to suburbs, resulting in an urban sprawl
of horizontal magnitude to about every community
throughout the word [1]. In developing country this
process was different; the developing countries mostly
have high economic growths which increases growth
of employment centres. Population move from other
area for working to these centres. Capital of country
and a few cities attracted these employment centres
and population. The cities in developing countries
have been facing with rapid urbanization and land
fragmentation which are always faster than urban
planning and designing. In this manner residential area
takes place without considering facilities in accessible
distance.
1.1. Back Ground Literature
Khattak and Rodriguez 2005 found that auto trip, travel
distance, travel time, regional trip, external trip distance
and trip duration of trip in neo-traditional neighbourhood
residence is less than the conventional neighbourhood
significantly [2]. Inner city zone that has integrated
streets, parks and green spaces structure has more acces-
sibility to facilities and services [3]. Amount of trip of
inner city’s resident is higher with shorter duration, and
residents of this area spend least time in travel; in this
area people walk and bike more and use less car travel.
Residents of inter commuter belt spend the most time in
travel with longest travel time [4]. Key elements of
neighbourhood walkability are proxy and connectivity.
First one come from mixed-land uses and the second one
is related to street pattern. Handy and Cao et al. 2005 in
their study indicated putting resident’s proximity to des-
tinations with alternatives ways to auto usage results to
less driving; this means decrease in driving can be reach
by increase in accessibility. Increasing in accessibility in
C
opyright © 2013 SciRes. OJEE

M. MALEKIZADEH ET AL.
134
existing areas can be possible by policies that include
revitalization traditional neighbourhood design by main
street program design, and filling undeveloped and rede-
veloped shopping centre [5]. Maleki, Zain, & Ismail,
2012 illustrated Street density, house density, house di-
versity, and non-residentia land use, positively and sig-
nificantly influence accessibility to facilities and services.
Distance to shops, distance to high school, distance to
health centre, distance to train station, land diversity,
block length and average lot size negatively and signifi-
cantly influence accessibility to facilities and services [6].
Iacono and Krizek et al. 2009 say money, and other cost
play as impedance role in travel, this impedance in recent
none motorize travel study is distance. He used of dis-
tance and time both for calculating accessibility to rec-
reation, restaurant, shopping, and work by walking and
cycling [7].
1.2. Back Ground of Case Study
Malaysia has experienced continuous economic growth
since 1985; this trend resulted in rapid urbanization es-
pecially in Kuala Lumpur and Klang Valley [8]. This
rapid urbanization increases the need for more housing
and urban development in a larger area. However, it in-
creased economic growth as well as a desire for greater
accessibility and mobility for all. Increases in travel
needs that are not managed efficiently and effectively
result in excess congestion in private motorize travelling
mode. Haphazard growths make residential area develop
without proper planning for acceptable distance to em-
ployment centres and facilities. In poor accessibility con-
dition, residents have to commute long distances to get
their daily needs to their workplace. Whenever facilities
are located further than the walkable distance, residents
use necessarily motorized travel. They prefer to use cars
if public transport is not available. The public transporta-
tion master plan of Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley is illus-
trated as such: The net result of increased car usage has
been a rise in congestion across the region. However
door to door travel times for private vehicles remain
competitive against the use of public transport. Travel
times are typically much higher by public transport re-
sulting in poorer accessibility to jobs and facilities [9].
Malaysia as a developing country in sensitive natural
environment needs to conduct rapid urbanisation growth
in the way that minimise impact of urban development
on local environmental resources. Kuala Lumpur, the
capital of the country and its township like Subang Jaya
are the centres of this growth and thus more attention
needs to be given for environmental protection. The gov-
ernment desires to improve the urban environment and
quality of life, and to ease the pressure on the infrastruc-
ture in general by balancing the development in Kuala
Lumpur and the Klang Valley [10].
1.3. New Approaches in Land Use Management
Sustainability has multidimensional affects on the envi-
ronment and many aspects of human life. An integrated
systematic view of events can leads us to a better under-
standing interaction between urban land use and envi-
ronmental pollution. Most cities grow faster than land
use planning and land use managing. Rational use of
recourses is to consider fairness between current genera-
tion and future generation for use of these recourses [11].
“Efficiency” versus “solidarity” is considered as key un-
certainties in the Sustainability outlook. Efficiency is
doing more with use of fewer materials and recourses. In
land use management for population reduction this
means residents participation in activities with use of less
fossil foul and pollution reduction. The trend towards
more “efficiency” means that decision making is increas-
ingly based on economic rationality and market forces.
This strategy mainly directed to facilitate market proc-
esses with the limited government intervention. The trend
towards more “solidarity” involves decision making
which is determined by values on social equity and soli-
darity, cultural identity and sustainability. Government
coordination is important in solidarity and not restrained.
Supplying services by private investor sector in local
centre shows they made it well, because capital tends to
increase in the best manner. At the same time they in-
crease welfare and level of accessibility of surrounding
residents. They don’t have claim on land value rising
resulting from greater accessibility but they share the
benefit that give rise to capitalization [12].
The compact city model is supported for a number of
reasons which relate to sustainable urban development
and include: conservation of the countryside, less need to
travel by car, thus reduced fuel emissions supports for
public transport and walking and cycling, more efficient
utility and infrastructure provision Burton 2003 and re-
vitalisation and regeneration of inner urban areas [13].
“New urbanism” is a broadly defined movement that
seeks to end the cancerous sprawl and replace this type
of expansion of growth with redesigned cultural residents
that encourage genuine commitment to civic life. It tends
to create new ways of guaranteeing the design of pedes-
trian, public and semi-private spaces, as well as vehicular
movement. The importance of humanly scaled design in
the metropolitan landscape and the city are the stirring
call for New Urbanism. The New Urbanism pays atten-
tion to local condition and adjusted concepts principles,
which will transcend local differences into a unique ur-
ban pattern. In the view of this trend, the physical envi-
ronment is an integrated product of culture, religion, cli-

M. MALEKIZADEH ET AL. 135
mate, socio-economic values and technology. These
concepts had incorporated the following objectives since
1992:
 To minimize energy consumption through proper
orientation and arrangement of the plan layout and
building block forms.
 To optimize layout condition with respect to security,
safety and comfort of the walker rather than the mo-
torized travel. Both must find appropriate definitions
in the layout of the scheme.
 To articulate physical solutions for religious, social
and recreational necessities and unite them within an
integrated neighbourhood concept.
 To decrease the initial and running cost of infrastruc-
ture by minimizing the roads and service lines of wa-
ter, sewage, electricity and telephone [14].
2. Material and Method
2.1. Theoretical Frame Work
The key consideration in cost and energy efficiency is
location and intensity of land usage areas [15]. Urban
forms provide possibility for energy consumption in
transport sector. One of the best ways to reduce vehicle
travel is to build places where people can do more with
less driving. Today’s trend is looking for residential site
which has pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use, high-density
communities, with short and fast accessibility to public
transportation instead of driving. Customer is looking
for smaller housing units and mixed-land used communi-
ties projected in compact living residential sites.
Use of public transportation is the solution for energy
consumption and pollution emission in urban areas.
Compact dense green neighbourhood with energy effi-
ciency and environmental friendly material completes
this process. It is recommended that urbanism and policy
makers should start to make land use which has accepta-
bly lower impact on environment. They must focus on
human scale in urban land use development. This can
support the promoting of transportation that uses energy
resources other than fossil fuel. Integration of connec-
tivity between land use and transportation is necessary to
improve non-motorized mode of transportation as an
important factor in flexibility and adaptability of urban
forms.
Households have wide range of income and dimen-
sions. Sustainable community is the community answer
to this multiplication by providing mixed housing types
for a wide range of incomes and household structures in
greater density with more opportunity for human contact.
The mentioned characteristics with solution for human
reinforcement on controlling use of automobile shaped
about main part of new urbanism and neo traditional
residential design [16].
2.2. Method
This research was conducted on 30 neighbourhoods in
Subang Jaya, Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia. Neighbour-
hoods were selected random from the neighbourhoods
which are near train station and other are far from train
station. Method of this research is survey via questioner
to residents of restrict. A sample of population was 750
persons return rate was 60%. Survey was conducted
since May until July 2011. Researchers meet residents
and asked them to answer to the questions. After data
was prepared, first, Authors explain statistical descriptive
on distance and travel mode; and in the next stage data
was analysed to find relation between variable and in-
fluence of independent variable on commuted distance
by car as indicator of fossil foul consumptions.
3. Results and Discussion
Sustainable accessibility in urban built environment is
the interaction between land use and transportation
modes in such a way that a person or group can partici-
pate in activities within a minimal distance and time
while consuming less non renewable energy and prefer
using renewable energy [17].
3.1. Travelling by Mode of Public Sustainable
Transport
Travel by train is 34% of total travelling in area. The
proposes for travelling by train are work 16%, school 4%,
college/university 12%, city centre 34%, shopping 18%,
entertainment 8%, visit family and friend 4%, and others
4% Figure 1.
3.2. Travelling by Modes and Purposes
Residents were asked to determined which mode they
use for their purposes. Modes of travelling are car, walk-
ing, motorcycle, train, bus, and bicycle. Purposes catego-
rized into 10 category including: post, bank, restaurant,
health, mosque, park, high school, industry, primary
school, shopping, work, and train station. Results illus-
trated that people who are going to train station use car
33%, walking 14%, bus 11% and motorcycle 4% as
Figure 1. Proposes of trave l ling by tr ain in Subang Jay a.

M. MALEKIZADEH ET AL.
136
mode of travelling. They use of car 42%, walking 9%,
train 7%, bus 5%, motorcycle 5%, and bicycle 2% for
travelling to work place. This percents for travelling to
shops are car 38%, walking 16%, bus 5% motorcycle 5%
train 3% and bicycle 2%. Residents mostly walk for ac-
cess to park and green space 34% travelling by car with
18% is second travelling mode for access to park, mo-
torcycle 7%, bus 5% and bicycle 2%. Figure 2 shows
percents of trip by mode of travelling for each purpose.
3.3. Purposes of Travelling by Car and Car
Ownership
Residents were asked to answer how many car they have,
based on their answer, result of this survey shows 69.7%
of residents have at least one car; 58.4% of people have 1
car, 37.7% of people have 2 cars, and 3.7% of people
have 3 cars. Travel to work and shopping are main pro-
pose of use of cars in area. Figure 3 illustrates proposes
of travelling by car for each purpose in Subang Jaya.
Population size and car ownership support railway sig-
nificantly. Railway station which has neighbourhood
with higher average car ownership household has higher
positive patronage level compare with those neighbour-
hoods with lower average car ownership. Car ownership
Figure 2. Travel mode for access to local facilities.
Figure 3. Traveling by care for accessibility to facilities.
associates with park and ride and pick-ups and drop-off
to transit station for longer trip by transit system [18].
3.4. Impact of Train Station on Distance to
Facilities
Travelling by train as sustainable public transportation
influences fossil foul consumption. Accessibility to train
station makes people use more this travel mode directly,
but decrease distances to facilities near station decrease
use of motorized travel indirectly [19]. Researchers
looked to find interaction between nearness to train sta-
tion and variables of distances to facilities and employ-
ment. Correlation coefficient was used in this analysis to
interpret whether a relationship existed between distance
to train station and distance to facilities and employment.
Correlation was also used to test whether the relationship
between distance to train station and distance to facilities
are positive or negative.
The Pearson correlation coefficient, commonly abbre-
viated as “r” measures the degree to which a linear rela-
tionship exists between two variables. A perfect, positive
linear relationship between two variables has a value of
1.00, while a perfect, negative linear relationship has a
value of −1.00. If there is no relationship at all it is re-
corded as 0.00. Correlation coefficients test illustrated
distance to train station and distance to facilities and em-
ployments have correlation significantly Table 1.
3.5. Multiple Regressions
Residents of communities with high-density, mixed-use,
pedestrian-friendly, ideally with ready access to public
transportation, drive a third fewer miles than those who
are living in convection outskirts of a city [20]. Generally
residents select the closest facility to their location. This
selection may come from the fact that most services like
post office, bank and so on are equal or based on hierar-
chy service provider which covers special area. But peo-
ple may travel for other facilities which have differences
in quality or are symbolic like cinemas, special shops and
recreational facilities from their place to other places
[21].
In the final analysis researchers used linear regressions
model to test the contribution of independent variables
that explain the variation in a dependent phenomenon,
explain the nature (positive or negative) and slope of the
relationship, and provide a means to control for inter-
vening factors. In the last stage result of the previous
stage will be used to develop a model of efficient resi-
dential site and neighbourhood via measuring influence
of distance to restaurant, distance to school, distance to
park, house area per person, cars ownership, and pedes-
trian quality as independent variable on derived distance
by car ownership weekly Table 2.

M. MALEKIZADEH ET AL.
137
Table 1. Correlation between distance from residents to train station and distance to facilities.
Work Shop Primary school IndustryHigh schoolPark Mosque Health Restaurant Bank Post
Distance to
train station 0.608** 0.766** 0.554** 0.761** 0.404* 0.110 −0.032 0.660** 0.388** 0.757** 0.742**
** Significant in level P value 0.01 *significant in level P value 0.05.
Table 2. The result of linear regression of distance to facilities on driving by car.
Unstandardized CoefficientsStandardized
Coefficients Collinearity Statistics
Model
B Std. Error Beta
t Sig.
Tolerance VIF
−120.472 62.369 −1.932 0.066
0.065 0.015 0.542 4.346 0.000 0.708 1.412
−0.002 0.001 −0.350 −2.776 0.011 0.694 1.440
0.003 0.001 0.338 2.723 0.012 0.712 1.404
2.673 0.804 0.376 3.323 0.003 0.859 1.164
−0.007 0.003 −0.294 −2.467 0.022 0.773 1.294
104.659 16.418 0.701 6.375 0.000 0.910 1.099
(Constant)
Distance restaurant
Distance work Distance school
House area/person Distance park
Cars ownership Pedestrian quality
−2.594 11.832 −0.026 −0.219 0.829 0.813 1.231
a. Dependent Variable: Derived by cars by km.
4. Conclusions
There is a general agreement that the local shops are im-
portant to the neighbourhood and its stability. The walk-
able nature of the neighbourhood also helps the commer-
cial trip to increase as most residents enjoy walking up to
facilities and daily necessary services of neighbourhood
[22].
Findings of this research illustrate that neighbourhood
distance from train station influences distance to facilities
and services including shops, primary school, high
school, health centre, restaurant, bank, post office, indus-
try and work. These findings show if distance to train
station decrease distance to these facilities and services
decrease and vice versa. However, weekly derived dis-
tance by car was affected by distance to restaurant, work
place, school, park, house area/person, and car owner-
ship.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Kirby, “Current Research on Cities and its contribu-
tion to Urban Studies,” Cities, Vol. 29, Suppl. 1, 2012, pp.
S3-S8.
[2] A. J. Khattak and D. Rodriguez, “Travel Behavior in Neo-
Traditional Neighborhood Developments: A Case Study
in USA,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and
Practice, Vol. 39, No. 6, 2005, pp. 481-500.
doi:10.1016/j.tra.2005.02.009
[3] A. M. L. Stahle and A. Karlström, “Place Syntax Geo-
graphic Accessibility with Axial Lines in GIS,” 5th Space
Syntax Symposium Proceedings, Delft, 1 June 2005, pp.
131-144.
[4] H. Millward and J. Spinney, “Time Use, Travel Behavior,
and the Rural-Urban Continuum: Results from the Hali-
fax STAR Project,” Journal of Transport Geography, Vol.
19, No. 1, 2011, pp. 51-58.
doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.12.005
[5] S. Handy, X. Cao and P. Mokhtarian, “Correlation or
Causality between the Built Environment and Travel Be-
havior? Evidence from Northern California,” Transporta-
tion Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol.
10, No. 6, 2005, pp. 427-444.
doi:10.1016/j.trd.2005.05.002
[6] M. Z. Maleki, M. F. M. Zain and A. Ismail, “Variables
Communalities and Dependence to Factors of Street Sys-
tem, Density, and Mixed Land Use in Sustainable Site
Design,” Sustainable Cities and Society, Vol. 3, 2012, pp.
46-53. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2012.01.005
[7] M. Iacono, K. J. Krizek and A. El-Geneidy, “Measuring
Non-Motorized Accessibility: Issues, Alternatives, and
Execution,” Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 18,
No. 1, 2010, pp. 133-140.
doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.02.002
[8] G. Knaap and E. Talen, “New Urbanism and Smart
Growth: A Few Words from the Academy,” International
Regional Science Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2005, pp. 107-
118. doi:10.1177/0160017604273621
[9] Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat, “Greater Kuala
Lumpur/Klang Valley Public Transport Master Plan,”
2011. http://spad.gov.my/images/stories/esgklkvlptmp.pdf

M. MALEKIZADEH ET AL.
138
[10] I. J. D. Jebasingam, “Creating the Essence of Cities: The
Planning & Development of Malaysia’s New Federal
Administrative Capital, Putrajaya,” 2006.
[11] M. Neuman, “Notes on the Uses and Scope of City Plan-
ning Theory,” Planning Theory, Vol. 4, No. 2, 2005, pp.
123-145. doi:10.1177/1473095205054601
[12] C. Webster, “The Donald Robertson Memorial Prizewin-
ner 2003 the Nature of the Neighbourhood,” Urban Studies,
Vol. 40, No. 13, 2003, pp. 2591-2612.
[13] P. Howley, M. Scott and D. Redmond, “An Examination
of Residential Preferences for Less Sustainable Housing
Exploring Future Mobility among Dublin Central City
Residents,” 2009. www.elsevier.com/locate/cities,
[14] M. A. E. Saleh, 2”Learning from Tradition: The Planning
of Residential Neighborhoods in a Changing World,”
Habitat International, Vol. 28, No. 4, 2004, pp. 625-639.
doi:10.1016/S0197-3975(03)00031-6
[15] F. S. Chapin and E. J. Kaiser, “Urban Land Use Plan-
ning,” University of Illinois, St. Champaign, 1979.
[16] Y. R. Jabareen, “Sustainable Urban Forms: Their Typolo-
gies, Models, and Concepts,” Journal of Planning Educa-
tion and Research, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2006, pp. 38-52.
doi:10.1177/0739456X05285119
[17] C. Curtis and J. Scheurer, “Planning for Sustainable Ac-
cessibility: Developing Tools to Aid Discussion and De-
cision-Making,” Progress in Planning, Vol. 74, No. 2,
2010, pp. 53-106.
[18] B. P. Y. Loo, C. Chen and E. T. H. Chan, “Rail-baSed
Transit-Oriented Development: Lessons from New York
City and Hong Kong,” Landscape and Urban Planning,
Vol. 97, No. 3, 2010, pp. 202-212.
doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.06.002
[19] M. Z. Maleki and M. F. M. Zain, “To Promote Future
Sustainability with Integrated Design of Urban and Trans-
portation System,” 6th Malaysian Universities Transport
Research Forum Conference, School of Housing, Build-
ing & Planning University Sains, Pulau Pinang, 2011.
[20] R. Binsacca, “Builder,” 2008.
http://www.ecohomemagazine.com/news/compact-cure.a
spx?printerfriendly=true 1-3.
[21] P. Naess, “Accessibility, Activity Participation and Loca-
tion of Activities: Exploring the Links between Residen-
tial Location and Travel Behaviour,” Urban Studies, Vol.
43, No. 3, 2006, pp. 627-652.
doi:10.1080/00420980500534677
[22] J. Distasio, “Reacting to Actions: Exploring How Resi-
dents Evaluate Their Neighbourhoods,” University of Mani-
toba (Canada), Winnipeg, 2005.