隨著大眾運輸導向發展（Transit Oriented Development, TOD）概念興起，捷運站周邊步行環境與空間之整合逐漸受到重視。捷運站出入口連通道作為串聯車站與周邊建築之重要介面，不僅能提升步行可及性與使用舒適性，亦有助於改善都市景觀、引導人流與促進周邊商業發展。惟相較香港、日本等地已形成成熟之連通發展網絡，臺北都會區捷運連通道由民間所發起之案例仍相對稀少，相關政策推動成效亦與其原先願景存在落差。然過去研究較少從開發者與利害關係人角度探討影響連通申請意願之因素，因此本研究試圖補足相關理論與政策面缺口。
本研究以臺北都會區捷運站出入口連通道為研究對象，透過文獻回顧與半結構式訪談法，分析影響開發者申請捷運連通道之關鍵因素，並探討其於TOD發展脈絡下之機會與挑戰。首先，研究綜整國內外捷運連通道相關文獻，整理其功能、型態、發展模式及與大眾運輸聯合開發（Transit Joint Development, TJD）之關係，並歸納影響開發意願之可能因素；其次，透過與利害關係人訪談，從開發者、公部門及相關參與者觀點，分析捷運連通道於建置、管理與使用層面之實務困境。
研究結果顯示，捷運連通道之發展具有交通、經濟與都市環境整合等多重效益，包括提升步行環境品質、增加商業可及性、改善人流分布，以及降低傳統箱型出入口對都市空間之壓迫。然而，其推動亦面臨多項挑戰，包括高額建置與維護成本、公私部門權責分工不明、連通空間管理制度爭議、既有建築物理條件限制，以及不同土地使用型態對連通效益認知差異等問題。此外，本研究亦發現都市發展條件、地區商業成熟度及使用者步行偏好，皆會影響開發者對捷運連通之意願與連通成效。
基此，本研究建議未來政策應朝向建立更具彈性與誘因之制度設計，包括強化跨部門協調機制、提升獎勵措施透明性與公平性，並將捷運連通道納入都市永續發展與TOD整體規劃架構中，以提高私部門參與意願。透過兼顧環境永續(E)、使用者福祉(S)與治理機制(G)之整合，捷運連通道將有助於塑造更具連續性與韌性的都市立體步行網絡。

With the growing emphasis on Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), metro station entrance connectors have become an important means of integrating transit stations with surrounding urban spaces. These connectors can improve pedestrian accessibility and comfort, enhance urban environments, guide pedestrian flows, and support nearby commercial activities. However, compared with cities such as Hong Kong and Japan, the development of privately initiated metro connectors in the Taipei metropolitan area remains limited. Existing studies have paid relatively little attention to the factors influencing developers’ willingness to participate in such projects.
This study focuses on metro station entrance connectors in the Taipei metropolitan area. Through a literature review and semi-structured interviews, it analyzes the key factors influencing developers’ willingness to apply for metro connectors and explores their opportunities and challenges within the TOD context. The literature review examines the functions, development patterns, and relationship between metro connectors and Transit Joint Development (TJD), while stakeholder interviews investigate practical challenges in their construction, management, and use.
The findings suggest that metro connectors generate multiple benefits, including improved pedestrian environments, increased commercial accessibility, better pedestrian flow distribution, and more efficient use of urban space. Nevertheless, several challenges remain, such as high construction and maintenance costs, unclear responsibilities between public and private sectors, management issues, physical constraints of existing buildings, and differing perceptions of development benefits among land-use types. In addition, urban development conditions, local commercial maturity, and pedestrian preferences significantly influence both development intentions and project outcomes.
The study recommends adopting more flexible incentive mechanisms, strengthening interdepartmental coordination, and incorporating metro connectors into broader TOD and urban sustainability strategies. By integrating environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations, metro connectors can contribute to a more continuous and resilient three-dimensional pedestrian network.

一、中文文獻:
1. 胡幼慧、姚美華 （1996）。一些質性方法上的思考：信度與效度？如何抽樣？如何收集資料、登錄與分析？載於胡幼慧編：質性研究：理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。141-158。臺北：巨流。
2. 張芬芬 （2010）。質性資料分析的五步驟: 在抽象階梯上爬升. 初等教育學刊。
3. 張美華 （1996）。捷運車站及地下街出入口由人行道宜設置建築基地處理模式探討，捷運技術，1（14），97-105。
4. 梁正芳、高文彥、邱靖棠（2007）。捷運聯合開發位於都市更新地區運作實務之探討，捷運技術，1（36），61-72
5. 陳向明 （2002）。社会科學質的硏究.五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
6. 陳建仁 （2017）。對營運中車站轉乘連通之施工規劃-以南京復興站為例，捷運技術，1（52），68-75。
7. 陳秋成、廖一峰、尚妹娥 （2007）。聯合開發與捷運設施連通對設計影響之探討－以忠孝復興站為例，捷運技術，1（36），85-100。
8. 楊紹遠 （2021）。開發案例，捷運開發大樓基本設計概要（捷運工程叢書精進版 第18冊），86-92。
9. 廖進雄 （1992）。捷運設施構設於私有建物（連通）之探討，捷運技術，1（6），97-101。
10. 顏志偉 （2021）。捷運車站及地下街出入口由人行道宜設置建築基地處理模式探討捷運車站規劃與設計實務，捷運車站規劃與設計實務（捷運工程叢書精進版 第2冊），301-317。

二、外文文獻:
1. Allen, J. G. （1986）. Public-private joint development at rapid transit stations. Transportation Quarterly, 40（3）.
2. Belzer, D., & Autler, G. （2002）. Transit oriented development: moving from rhetoric to reality （pp. 06-15）. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.
3. Bernick, M., & Cervero, R. （1997）. Transit villages in the 21st century
4. Brugha, R., & Varvasovszky, Z. （2000）. Stakeholder analysis: a review. Health policy and planning, 15（3）, 239-246.
5. Bukowski, B., Boatman, D., Ramierz, K., & Du, M. （2013）. A comparative study of transit-oriented development in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Institute of Education: Hong Kong, China.
6. Calthorpe, P. （1993）. The next American metropolis （Vol. 23）. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
7. Carltrop, P. （1993）. The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream. New York City.
8. Cervero, R. （1992）. Land market impacts of urban rail transit and joint development: An empirical study of rail transit in Washington, DC and Atlanta.
9. Cervero, R. （1995）. Mixed land-uses and commuting: Evidence from the American Housing Survey. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 30（5）, 361-377.
10. Cervero, R. （1998）. The transit metropolis: a global inquiry.
11. Cervero, R. （2004）. Transit-oriented development in the United States: Experiences, challenges, and prospects.
12. Cervero, R. （2006）. Office development, rail transit, and commuting choices. Journal of Public Transportation, 9（5）, 41-55.
13. Cervero, R., & Kockelman, K. （1997）. Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation research part D: Transport and environment, 2（3）, 199-219.
14. Cervero, R., & Murakami, J. （2008）. Rail+ Property Development: A model of sustainable transit finance and urbanism.
15. Cervero, R., & Murakami, J. （2009）. Rail and property development in Hong Kong: Experiences and extensions. Urban studies, 46（10）, 2019-2043.
16. Cervero, R., Bernick, M., & Gilbert, J. （1994）. Market opportunities and barriers to transit-based development in California.
17. Cervero, R., Ferrell, C., & Murphy, S. （2002）. Transit-oriented development and joint development in the United States: A literature review. TCRP research results digest, （52）.
18. Cervero, R., Hall, P., & Landis, J. （1990）. Transit joint development in the United States.
19. Cervero, R., Sarmiento, O. L., Jacoby, E., Gomez, L. F., & Neiman, A. （2009）. Influences of built environments on walking and cycling: lessons from Bogotá. International journal of sustainable transportation, 3（4）, 203-226.
20. Chatman, D. G., Xu, R., Park, J., & Spevack, A. （2019）. Does transit-oriented gentrification increase driving?. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39（4）, 482-495.
21. Chava, J., Newman, P., & Tiwari, R. （2018）. Gentrification of station areas and its impact on transit ridership. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 6（1）, 1-10.
22. Cui, J., & Lin, D. （2016）. Utilisation of underground pedestrian systems for urban sustainability. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 55, 194-204.
23. Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. （2010）. Travel and the built environment: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American planning association, 76（3）, 265-294.
24. Feldman, S., Lewis, P., & Schiff, R. （2012）. Transit-oriented development in the Montreal metropolitan region: developer's perceptions of supply barriers. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 21（2）, 25-44.
25. Feng, B. （2001） Hundred Years History of Hong Kong Properties.Hong Kong, China: Joint Publishing Co.
26. Goodwill, J., & Hendricks, S. J. （2002）. Building transit oriented development in established communities. Tampa: National Center for Transit Research, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida.
27. Guthrie, A., & Fan, Y. （2016）. Developers' perspectives on transit-oriented development. Transport Policy, 51, 103-114.
28. Handy, S. （1996）. Methodologies for exploring the link between urban form and travel behavior. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 1（2）, 151-165.
29. He, J., Zacharias, J., Geng, J., Liu, Y., Huang, Y., & Ma, W. （2016）. Underground pedestrian network for urban commercial development in Tsim Sha Tsui of Hong Kong. Procedia Engineering, 165, 193-204.
30. Hess, D. B., & Lombardi, P. A. （2004）. Policy support for and barriers to transit-oriented development in the inner city: Literature review. Transportation research record, 1887（1）, 26-33.
31. Keefer, L. E. （1985）. Joint development at transit stations in the United States. Transportation, 12（4）, 333-342.
32. Lam, W. H., Morrall, J. F., & Ho, H. （1995）. Pedestrian flow characteristics in Hong Kong. Transportation research record, 1487, 56-62.
33. Landis, J., Cervero, R., & Hall, P. （1991）. Transit joint development in the USA: an inventory and policy assessment. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 9（4）, 431-452.
34. Levine, J., & Inam, A. （2004）. The market for transportation-land use integration: Do developers want smarter growth than regulations allow?. Transportation, 31, 409-427.
35. Loukaitou-Sideris, A. （2000）. Transit-oriented development in the inner city: A Delphi survey. Journal of Public Transportation, 3（2）, 75-98.
36. Lu, Y., Gou, Z., Xiao, Y., Sarkar, C., & Zacharias, J. （2018）. Do transit-oriented developments （TODs） and established urban neighborhoods have similar walking levels in Hong Kong?. International journal of environmental research and public health, 15（3）, 555.
37. Maki, F. （1964）. Investigations in collective form.
38. Maria Kockelman, K. （1997）. Travel behavior as function of accessibility, land use mixing, and land use balance: evidence from San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation research record, 1607（1）, 116-125.
39. Mathur, S., & Gatdula, A. （2023）. Review of planning, land use, and zoning barriers to the construction of Transit-oriented developments in the United States. Case studies on transport policy, 12, 100988.
40. Miller, W. L. & Crabtree, B. F. （1992）. Doing qualitative research. sage.
41. Murakami, J., Villani, C., & Talamini, G. （2021）. The capital value of pedestrianization in Asia's commercial cityscape: Evidence from office towers and retail streets. Transport policy, 107, 72-86.
42. Noland, R. B., Weiner, M. D., DiPetrillo, S., & Kay, A. I. （2017）. Attitudes towards transit-oriented development: Resident experiences and professional perspectives. Journal of Transport Geography, 60, 130-140.
43. Porter, D. R. （1997）. Transit-focused development.
44. Pucher, J. （1988）. Urban travel behavior as the outcome of public policy: the example of modal-split in Western Europe and North America. Journal of the American Planning Association, 54（4）, 509-520.
45. Pucher, J., & Renne, J. L. （2003）. Socioeconomics of urban travel: evidence from the 2001 NHTS. Transportation quarterly, 57（3）, 49-77.
46. Rangarajan, K., Long, S., Tobias, A., & Keister, M. （2013）. The role of stakeholder engagement in the development of sustainable rail infrastructure systems. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 7, 106-113.
47. Renne, J. L., Bartholomew, K., & Wontor, P. （2011）. Transit-oriented and joint development: case studies and legal issues （No. 36）.
48. Schneider, J. （2012）. Public private partnership for urban rail transit: Forms, regulatory conditions, participants. Springer Science & Business Media.
49. Searle, G., Darchen, S., & Huston, S. （2014）. Positive and negative factors for transit oriented development: Case studies from Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney. Urban policy and research, 32（4）, 437-457.
50. Sun, G., Webster, C., & Zhang, X. （2019）. Connecting the city: A three-dimensional pedestrian network of Hong Kong. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 48（1）, 60-75.
51. Suri, H. （2011）. Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis. Qualitative research journal, 11（2）, 63-75.
52. Tan, W., Bertolini, L., & Janssen-Jansen, L. （2014）. Identifying and conceptualising context-specific barriers to transit-oriented development strategies: the case of the Netherlands. Town Planning Review, 85（5）, 639-663.
53. Tang, B. S., Chiang, Y. H., Baldwin, A. N., & Yeung, C. W. （2004）. Study of the integrated rail-property development model in Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
54. Villani, C., Talamini, G., & Xue, C. Q. （2022）. Pedestrian access to transit in evolution: unfolding the spatialization of rapid-transit planning. Journal of Urban Design, 27（6）, 669-691.
55. Xue, C. Q. （2016）. Rail village and mega-structure. Hong Kong Architecture 1945-2015: from colonial to global, 139-168.
56. Xue, C. Q., & Sun, C.（2022）.High-rise buildings and transit-oriented development: the case of Hong Kong. In Sustainable High-Rise Buildings: Design, technology, and innovation （pp. 489-513）. Institution of Engineering and Technology.
57. Xue, C. Q., Ma, L., & Hui, K. C. （2012）. Indoor ‘Public’Space: A study of atria in mass transit railway （MTR） complexes of Hong Kong. Urban Design International, 17, 87-105.
58. Yamamoto, M., Ishizuki, M., & Aoki, T. （2010）. Passenger flow simulation to evaluate the degree of discomfort for walking in stations. Quarterly Report of RTRI, 51（3）, 138-145.
59. Zacharias, J., & He, J. （2018）. Hong Kong’s urban planning experiment in enhancing pedestrian movement from underground space to the surface. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 82, 1-8.
60. Zhao, Z., Yan, J. B., Liang, D., & Ye, S. Q. （2014）. Pedestrian flow characteristic of typical metro station near the commercial property. Procedia engineering, 71, 81-86.
61. Zhu, M., Sze, N. N., Newnam, S., & Zhu, D. （2023）. Do footbridge and underpass improve pedestrian safety? A Hong Kong case study using three-dimensional digital map of pedestrian network. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 186, 107064.
62. 上野純平, & 岸本達也. （2008）. スペース・シンタックスを用いた複雑多層空間における歩行者流動の分析 渋谷駅を対象として. 都市計画論文集, 43, 49-54.
63. 大野隆造, 小倉麻衣子, 添田昌志, & 片山めぐみ. （2006）. 地下鉄駅における主観的な移動距離および深さに影響する環境要因. 日本建築学会計画系論文集, 71（610）, 87-92.
64. 北川貴巳, 黒瀬武史, 窪田亜矢, & 西村幸夫. （2015）. 東京都心部における地下鉄駅出入口の変遷と実態に関する研究 接続性に着目した評価. 日本建築学会計画系論文集, 80（709）, 677-687.
65. 臼井幸彦, & 上浦正樹. （1999）. 鉄道駅の機能複合化とその変遷に関する基礎的研究 札幌駅を事例として. 都市計画論文集, 34, 595-600.
66. 村上清徳, 中村英夫, & 大沢昌玄. （2022）. 地下駅出入口との連絡建物の特徴及び都市開発諸制度の適用による連絡施設の導入に関する研究 東京都区部の全地下駅を事例に. 都市計画論文集, 57（3）, 1369-1376.
67. 菊地良範, 西淳二, 池田征史, 清木隆文（1999）. 地下鉄出入口の設置特性に関する基礎的研究.地下空間シンポジウム論文・報告集, 4, 27-36
 
三、其他：
1. 臺北市政府（2018），臺北市大眾運輸導向都市發展公會座談會簡報。
2. 臺北市政府（2024），擬定「臺北市開發基地體感降溫專案」細部計畫案。