USING POTENTIAL ACCESSIBILITY MEASURE FOR URBAN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PLANNING: A CASE STUDY OF DENIZLI, TURKEY

Policy makers and planners evaluate the implementation of the urban public transport (UPT) planning studies in terms of some objective measures such as load factor, mean volume per trip, capacity usage ratio and total capacity. In some cases, improving these measures may lead an unforeseen decrease on accessibility to the opportunities in terms of UPT users. Thus, this study aims to evaluate Potential Accessibility (PA) as an efficiency measure in decision stage of UPT planning. It widely depends on fieldwork, surveys, data inventories and existing plans. In this context, a comprehensive UPT planning has been carried out through VISUM traffic simulation software by taking the PA into account, and a four-step UPT planning procedure has been proposed. The results showed that PA may alternatively be used as an evaluation instrument in decision stage of UPT planning while the objective measures are insufficient to represent the effectiveness of alternative scenarios.

[1]  Soner Haldenbilen,et al.  Genetic Algorithm Approach to Evaluate Bus and Paratransit Public Transport in Urban Areas , 2004 .

[2]  Huseyin Ceylan,et al.  Impact of utility-based accessibility measures on urban public transportation planning: A case study of Denizli, Turkey , 2013 .

[3]  Kevin M. Curtin,et al.  A new method for determining the population with walking access to transit , 2010, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[4]  Parcel-Level Modeling to Analyze Transit Stop Location Changes , 2009 .

[5]  Margareta Friman.  IMPLEMENTING QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT , 2004 .

[6]  Fang Zhao,et al.  Forecasting Transit Walk Accessibility: Regression Model Alternative to Buffer Method , 2003 .

[7]  Avishai Ceder,et al.  Public Transit Planning and Operation , 2007 .

[8]  J. G. Koenig,et al.  Indicators of urban accessibility: Theory and application , 1980 .

[9]  Peter Nijkamp,et al.  Options for sustainable passenger transport: an assessment of policy choices , 1996 .

[10]  Graham Currie,et al.  Quantifying spatial gaps in public transport supply based on social needs , 2010 .

[11]  Giuseppe Inturri,et al.  Accessibility and Centrality for Sustainable Mobility: Regional Planning Case Study , 2013 .

[12]  Constantinos Antoniou,et al.  Public transit user satisfaction: Variability and policy implications , 2008 .

[13]  Yonggang Wang,et al.  Access for Performance of Transportation Planning and Operations: Case Study in Beijing Metropolitan Region , 2012 .

[14]  Luis Ferreira,et al.  PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ACCESS , 1998 .

[15]  Jay A Goodwill,et al.  Best Practices in Transit Service Planning , 2009 .

[16]  Robin Haynes,et al.  Car travel time and accessibility by bus to general practitioner services: a study using patient registers and GIS. , 2002, Social science & medicine.

[17]  R. Vickerman.  Accessibility, Attraction, and Potential: A Review of Some Concepts and Their Use in Determining Mobility , 1974 .

[18]  S. Mavoa,et al.  GIS based destination accessibility via public transit and walking in Auckland, New Zealand , 2012 .

[19]  Laura Eboli,et al.  Performance indicators for an objective measure of public transport service quality , 2012 .

[20]  Anna Černá,et al.  BUS ROUTE DESIGN IN SMALL DEMAND AREAS , 2011 .

[21]  Bert van Wee,et al.  Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions , 2004 .

[22]  Oswaldo Lima Neto,et al.  Efficiency Analysis of Public Transport Systems: Lessons for Institutional Planning , 2008 .

[23]  W. G. Hansen.  How Accessibility Shapes Land Use , 1959 .

[24]  Luigi dell’Olio,et al.  Bus Stop Location under Different Levels of Network Congestion and Elastic Demand , 2011 .

[25]  Karst Teunis Geurs,et al.  Accessibility measures: review and applications. Evaluation of accessibility impacts of land-use transportation scenarios, and related social and economic impact , 2001 .

[26]  Ahmed M El-Geneidy,et al.  Using GIS to Measure the Effects of Service Area and Frequency on Passenger Boardings at Bus Stops , 2007 .

[27]  J. Q. Stewart.  Empirical Mathematical Rules concerning the Distribution and Equilibrium of Population , 1947 .

[28]  Richard L. Church,et al.  Mapping transit‐based access: integrating GIS, routes and schedules , 2010, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[29]  Olav Holst,et al.  ACCESSIBILITY AS THE OBJECTIVE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PLANNING: AN INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE MODEL , 1979 .

[30]  Robert L. Bertini,et al.  Generating Transit Performance Measures with Archived Data , 2003 .

[31]  Gabriela Beirão,et al.  Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car: A qualitative study , 2007 .

[32]  Laura Eboli,et al.  On the Asymmetric User Perception of Transit Service Quality , 2011 .

[33]  Laura Eboli,et al.  A methodology for evaluating transit service quality based on subjective and objective measures from the passenger’s point of view , 2011 .

[34]  Juan Carlos García-Palomares,et al.  Distance-Measure Impacts on the Calculation of Transport Service Areas Using GIS , 2008 .

[35]  Avishai Ceder,et al.  Urban Transit Scheduling: Framework, Review and Examples , 2002 .

[36]  Hiroyuki Iseki,et al.  Style versus Service? An Analysis of User Perceptions of Transit Stops and Stations in Los Angeles , 2010 .

[37]  Jian Lu,et al.  Use of Geographic Information System for Analysis of Transit Pedestrian Access , 1997 .

[38]  Elizabeth Deakin.  Sustainable Development and Sustainable Transportation: Strategies for Economic Prosperity, Environmental Quality, and Equity - eScholarship , 2001 .