Measuring Accessibility for People with a Disability

This paper discusses some of the inherent problems associated with measuring accessibility for people on a landscape of surfaces, barriers, and travel modes. Along with this discussion we propose a new perspective for measuring accessibility with a focus on people with differing abilities. Even though our focus is on people with a physical disability, such an approach can be easily extended and is able to be generalized to other needs and differences. Traditional measurements of accessibility are flawed, as they fail to directly account for mobility and physical differences among people. They ignore structural barriers and individual mobility limitations that affect travel time, effort, and even successful completion. To make sense of this dilemma, we propose an accessibility measurement framework that includes measures of absolute access, gross access, closest assignment access, single and multiple activity access, probabilistic choice access, and relative access. Most of these measures of access have been proposed by others, but our framework attempts to codify an approach that helps to overcome weaknesses in using only the absolute access measurement currently used in ADA compliance. Such measures can be used to map accessibility as well as to help select the mitigation or renovation projects that yield the greatest increase in accessibility for people with disabilities. We argue that for many urban and building design problems providing absolute access for people with physical disabilities should be accompanied by the use of a relative access measurement, so that removing barriers can be done in the order that provides the greatest improvement in access for a given level of expenditure.

[1]  M. Wachs,et al.  PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY AS A SOCIAL INDICATOR , 1973 .

[2]  James R. Marston,et al.  Investigating travel behavior of nondriving blind and vision impaired people: The role of public transit , 1997 .

[3]  Debbie A. Niemeier,et al.  Measuring Accessibility: An Exploration of Issues and Alternatives , 1997 .

[4]  R. Golledge Geography and the disabled: a survey with special reference to vision impaired and blind populations , 1993 .

[5]  S. Hanson GETTING THERE: URBAN TRANSPORTATION IN CONTEXT. , 1995 .

[6]  Richard L. Church,et al.  The Nested Hierarchical Median Facility Location Model , 1991 .

[7]  L. Anselin,et al.  Assessing Spatial Equity: An Evaluation of Measures of Accessibility to Public Playgrounds , 1998 .

[8]  S. Hanson,et al.  Accessibility and Intraurban Travel , 1987 .

[9]  D. R. Ingram The concept of accessibility: A search for an operational form , 1971 .

[10]  Stan C. M. Geertman,et al.  GIS and Models of Accessibility Potential: An Application in Planning , 1995, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[11]  R. L. Hodgart Optimizing Access to Public Services: A Review of Problems, Models and Methods of Locating Central Facilities , 1978 .

[12]  Tom de Jong,et al.  Location profile-based measures as an improvement on accessibility modelling in GIS , 1996 .

[13]  Donald G. Janelle,et al.  Information, Place, and Cyberspace: Issues in Accessibility , 2000 .

[14]  Torsten Hägerstraand WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE IN REGIONAL SCIENCE , 1970 .

[15]  J. Pooler,et al.  Measuring geographical accessibility: a review of current approaches and problems in the use of population potentials. , 1987, Geoforum; journal of physical, human, and regional geosciences.

[16]  James A. Pooler,et al.  THE USE OF SPATIAL SEPARATION IN THE MEASUREMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACCESSIBILITY , 1995 .

[17]  Harry J. P. Timmermans,et al.  Multistop-Based Measurements of Accessibility in a GIS Environment , 1994, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[18]  Fahui Wang,et al.  Modeling Commuting Patterns in Chicago in a GIS Environment: A Job Accessibility Perspective , 2000 .

[19]  S. L. Hakimi,et al.  Optimum Locations of Switching Centers and the Absolute Centers and Medians of a Graph , 1964 .

[20]  W. Recker,et al.  Measuring the Impact of Efficient Household Travel Decisions on Potential Travel Time Savings and Accessibility Gains , 2000 .

[21]  P. Forer,et al.  Computational agents and urban life spaces : a preliminary realisation of the time - geography of student lifestyles , 1998 .

[22]  James R. Marston,et al.  Towards an Accessible City: Empirical Measurement and Modeling of Access to Urban Opportunities for those with Vision Impairments, Using Remote Infrared Audible Signage , 2002 .

[23]  Frank Southworth Multi-destination, multi-purpose trip chaining and its implications for locational accessibility: A simulation approach , 1985 .

[24]  S. Stouffer Intervening opportunities: a theory relating mobility and distance , 1940 .

[25]  Alan M. Hay Transport for the Space Economy: A Geographical Study , 1973 .

[26]  J. Weibull An axiomatic approach to the measurement of accessibility , 1976 .

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

[28]  Harvey J. Miller,et al.  Modelling accessibility using space-time prism concepts within geographical information systems , 1991, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[29]  Gordon Pirie,et al.  Measuring Accessibility: A Review and Proposal , 1979 .

[30]  Pip Forer,et al.  Space, Time and Sequencing: Substitution at the Physical/ Virtual Interface , 2000 .

[31]  S. Hanson,et al.  The Geography Of Urban Transportation , 1986 .

[32]  M. Kwan Gender and Individual Access to Urban Opportunities: A Study Using Space–Time Measures , 1999 .

[33]  Harvey J. Miller,et al.  Measuring Space‐Time Accessibility Benefits within Transportation Networks: Basic Theory and Computational Procedures , 1999 .

[34]  A. Hay,et al.  Transport for the Space Economy , 1973 .