1 / 18

Parcel-level Measure of Public Transit Accessibility to Destinations

Parcel-level Measure of Public Transit Accessibility to Destinations. Brian H. Y. Lee Urban Design & Planning University of Washington 19 Nov 2004 TransNow Student Conference Portland State University. Outline. Problem Current solutions Proposed method Test case Final words.

vincent-moody
Download Presentation

Parcel-level Measure of Public Transit Accessibility to Destinations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Parcel-level Measure ofPublic Transit Accessibilityto Destinations Brian H. Y. Lee Urban Design & Planning University of Washington 19 Nov 2004 TransNow Student Conference Portland State University

  2. Outline • Problem • Current solutions • Proposed method • Test case • Final words

  3. Public Transit Accessibility • Fundamentally differentmode of urban transport • Complex spatial &temporal components • Multi-modal,walking

  4. Measurement Approaches • Access to & frompublic transit network • Spatial focus • Zonal aggregation (e.g., TAZ)

  5. Implications • Exaggerate benefits • Incomplete picture • Estimations & forecastsevaluations & policies

  6. Current Techniques • Area buffers(400m radius)Area ratios 1. Stop & Station Catchment: • Network buffersBedroom ratios(Zhao et al., 2003)

  7. Current Techniques, cont. 2. Accessibility to Destinations: • Most gravity-based • Zonal approach • Broad categoriesof destinations

  8. Conceptual Framework • Classification of land uses • Total travel time • Single type of destination orCombination of different types • E.g., accessibility togrocery stores

  9. Measurement process (A) Identify destinations Transit Walk (B1) Identify all stops (within 400m) (C1) Identify all accessible parcels (within 1,000m) (B2) Calc. walk time from each stop (B3) Calc. travel time from upstream stops (B4) Calc. avg. wait time at each stop(1/2 headway) (B5) Identify all accessible parcels(within 400m) (B6) Calc. walk access time from parcels (C2) Calc. walk access time (B7) Sum total travel time (D) Choose min. travel time (E) Associate other data

  10. Test Case Application • King County Metro - Buses • One grocery store location • Accessibility measurement & population estimate • Area buffer & ratio: “Area ratio” • Parcel-level – spatial: “Simplified parcel” • Parcel-level – spatial & temporal: “Proposed parcel”

  11. Area Ratio Method

  12. Simplifed Parcel Method(res. only)

  13. Proposed Parcel Method(res. only) } 45+ min

  14. Simplified Parcel Proposed Parcel Area Ratio

  15. Limitations • Land use classifications • Estimation of waiting times • Monetary costs • Other transit service characteristics

  16. Conclusions & Recommendations • Informative graphical results • Realistic (conservative) estimates • Potentials for modeling applications • Streamline data management & processing

  17. THE END

More Related