Pedestrian mobility and accessibility planning: some remarks towards the implementation of travel time maps.
Abstract
The objective of the paper is to propose a methodology for evaluating pedestrian accessibility in urban areas.
Accessibility is a quite recurring topic in the scientific literature, and emphasizes the strong interrelationships between land use and mobility. In the last decade, dependence on GIS-based approaches for accessibility assessment and management has grown considerably, and the crucial role of GIS techniques for the analysis of accessibility is nowadays well established.
With particular reference to the Organic Urban Planning vision developed in Italy in the ‘60s in Italy, the paper focuses on pedestrian accessibility as major mobility mode at the scale of the neighborhood.
But how is it possible to measure the level of pedestrian accessibility of a given territory and to map the results in a GIS environment?
First of all, there is a need to collect the different layers of information related to pedestrian mobility for the area, with particular reference to the road network, the location of pedestrian paths and sidewalks as well as the presence of physical barriers in the area that impede pedestrian permeability (built environments, railways, waterways surface...).
The proposed assessment methodology is based on the detailed discretization of the area being analyzed in a uniform grid of cells. In this grid a calculation algorithm is applied. This algorithm, on the basis of the information layers that overlap in each cell, assigns each cell a pedestrian travel time and evaluates the existing connections between the cell in question, and the cells adjacent to it. This model allows the creation of thematic maps that show the timing of pedestrian access to each cell.
Keywords
Read the full text
Download PDFReferences
Banister D. (2008), The sustainable mobility paradigm, Transport Policy, Elsevier, 15 (2008): 73-80.
Bertolini L. (2012), Integrating Mobility and Urban Development Agendas: a Manifesto, disP – The Planning Review, Routledge, 48:1, 16-26.
Bertolini L., Le Clercq F. (2003), Urban Development without more mobility by car? Lessons from Amsterdam, a multimodal urban region, Environment and Planning, 35(A 2003): 575-589.
Bonotti R., Rossetti S., Tiboni M., Tira M. (2015): Analysing Space-Time Accessibility Towards the Implementation of the Light Rail System: The Case Study of Brescia, Planning Practice & Research, DOI: 10.1080/02697459.2015.1028254.
Brainard J.S., Lovett A.A., Bateman I.J., Using isochrone surfaces in travel-cost models, Journal of Transport Geography, Volume 5, Issue 2, June 1997, pp.117-126, ISSN 0966-6923, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6923(96)00074-9.
Busi R. (2005), La città sicura: elementi per l’individuazione di obiettivi metodi di ricerca, in Baraboni R.M. (editor), Città e criminalità, Metauro, Pesaro.
Busi R. (2013), L’accessibilità come valore etico e sociale, in Pezzagno M. (editor), Living and Walking in Cities. Cultures and Techniques for Accessibility, Egaf, Forlì.
Busi R. (2011), Methods, Techniques and Policies for Mobility in the Friendly City, TeMA, Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, 4(2):7-18.
Busi R. (2009), For a Safer City. A Friendlier City. And a More Beautiful City, in TeMALab journal of Mobility, Land Use and Environment, Selected Papers 2009, 3(2010): 39-46.
Calderon E.J., Arce Ruiz R.M., Henar S.-O. M., Ortega E. (2014), Isochrones and contour measures for leisure facility in Madrid, in Te Brömmelstroet M., Silva C., Bertolini L. (eds.), Assessing Usability of Accessibility Instruments, COST office, Brussels.
Columbo V. (1966), La ricerca urbanistica, Giuffrè, Milano.
Curtis C., Scheurer J. (2010), Planning for sustainable accessibility: developing tools to aid discussion and brainadecision-making, Progress in Planning, 72(2): 53-106.
Dalvi M.Q. (1978), Behavioural modelling accessibility, mobility and need: concepts and measurement, in Hensher D.A., Stopher P.R. (editors), Behavioural Travel Modelling., Croom Helm, London.
Delamater P.L., Messina J.P., Shortridge A.M., Grady S.C., Measuring geographic access to health care: raster and network-based methods, International Journal of Health Geographics 2012, 11: 15, doi:10.1186/1476-072X-11-15.
Geurs K., Eck J. (2001), Accessibility measures: review and applications, RIVM Report for the Directorate-General for Environment Protection of the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, Utrecht.
Gould P.R. (1969), Spatial Diffusion, Resource Paper 17, Association of American Geographers, Washington, D.C.
Handy S. (2002), Accessibility vs Mobility. Enhancing Strategies for Addressing Automobile Dependence in the U.S, Institute for Transportation Studies, UC Davies.
Hansen W.G. (1959), How Accessibility Shapes Land Use, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 25(2):73-76.
Hull A., Silva C., Bertolini L. (eds.) (2012), Accessibility Instruments for Planning Practice in Europe, COST Office, Brussels.
Leonardi G. (1978), Optimum facility location by accessibility maximizing, in Environment and Planning A, 10(11): 1287 – 1305.
Litman T. (2011), Evaluating Accessibility for Transportation Planning, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Victoria.
Marshall S. (2001), The challenge of sustainable transport, in Layard A., Davoudi S., Batty S. (editors), Planning for a sustainable future, Spon, London, pp. 131-147.
Papa E., Angiello G. (2012), Glossary, in Hull A., Silva C., Bertolini L., Accessibility Instruments for Planning Practice in Europe, Clássica Artes Gráficas SA, Portugal.
Pulawska S, Rossetti S. (eds.) (2014), Applying Accessibility Tools to Address Urban and Transport Planning, Maggioli, Rimini.
Silva C. (2013), Accessibility Instruments for Planning Practice, presentation held during the 2nd COST Action Tu1002 Summer Training School, June 2013, Valença-Tui.
Tiboni M., Rossetti S. (2014), Achieving People Friendly Accessibility. Key Concepts and a case Study Overview, TeMA Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, Special Issue, June 2014.
Tiboni M., Rossetti S. (2012), L’utente debole quale misura dell’attrattività urbana, L’utente debole quale misura dell’attrattività urbana, TeMA Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, vol. 5, n. 3, pp. 91-102.
Tira M. (2011), L’indispensabile integrazione fra pianificazione urbanistica e della mobilità: l’esempio del Transit Oriented Development, Mterritorio, Ancona.
Tira M. (1999), Comfort, sicurezza e accessibilità, in Paesaggio Urbano, May - June 1999, pp. 58-63, Maggioli, Rimini.
U.S. Department of Environment (1996), Planning Policy Guidance: Town Centres and Retail Developments, PPG 6.
Wegener M., Fürst F. (1999), Land-Use Transport Interaction: State of the Art, IRPUD, Dortmund.
Wirth N. (1976), Algorithms + Data Structures, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2001), Mobility 2001. World mobility at the end of the twentieth century and its sustainability, Atar Roto Presse, Geneva.
Wu B.M., Hine J.P. (2003), A PTAL approach to measuring changes in bus service accessibility, Transport Policy 10 (2003): 307-320.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12896/cse20150010047
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
CSE Journal - City Safety Energy is a semiannual journal (Two ISSUES per Year) published by Le Penseur in Brienza (PZ) - Italy | ISSN print edition 2283-8767 | ISSN online edition 2284-3418 - Journal registerd at the Court of Potenza (Italy) n. 219/2014