This research aids in tackling one important part of accessibility metrics—measuring land use. It introduces complementary strategies to effectively measure a variety of different destination types at a highly detailed scale of resolution using secondary data. The research describes ways to overcome common data hurdles and demonstrates how existing data in one metropolitan area in the U.S. – the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul – can be exploited to aid in measuring accessibility at an extremely fine unit of analysis (i.e., the parcel). Establishment-level data containing attribute information on location, sales, employees, and industry classification was purchased from Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. The research process involved cleaning and tailoring the parcel dataset for the 7-county metro area and integrating various GIS datasets with other secondary data sources. These data were merged with parcel-level land use data from the Metropolitan Council. The establishment-level data were then recoded into destination categories using the 2 to 6-digit classifications of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The development of important components of this research is illustrated with a sample application. The report concludes by describing how such data could be used in calculating more robust measures of accessibility. This was done for capturing accessibility metrics for non-auto modes such as walking and cycling.
[1]
W. G. Hansen.
How Accessibility Shapes Land Use
,
1959
.
[2]
Debbie A. Niemeier,et al.
Measuring Accessibility: An Exploration of Issues and Alternatives
,
1997
.
[3]
Harvey J. Miller,et al.
GIS Software for Measuring Space-Time Accessibility in Transportation Planning and Analysis
,
2000,
GeoInformatica.
[4]
Harvey J. Miller,et al.
Computational Tools for Measuring Space-Time Accessibility within Transportation Networks with Dynamic Flow
,
2001
.
[5]
M. Wachs,et al.
PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY AS A SOCIAL INDICATOR
,
1973
.
[6]
S Baradaran,et al.
Performance of accessibility measures in Europe
,
2001
.
[7]
Susan L Handy,et al.
Accessibility- vs. Mobility-Enhancing Strategies for Addressing Automobile Dependence in the U.S
,
2002
.
[8]
R. Vickerman.
Accessibility, Attraction, and Potential: A Review of Some Concepts and Their Use in Determining Mobility
,
1974
.
[9]
H Neuburger,et al.
USER BENEFIT IN THE EVALUATION OF TRANSPORT AND LAND USE PLANS
,
1971
.
[10]
M. Ben-Akiva,et al.
Disaggregate Travel and Mobility-Choice Models and Measures of Accessibility
,
2022,
Behavioural Travel Modelling.