Measuring Non-motorized

Accessibility: Issues,
Alternatives, and Execution

Kevin J. Krizek
University of Colorado
www.kevinjkrizek.org
 Accessibility:
a “HOT” topic in policy circles

…has the potential to radically inform how

we think about the structure of
metropolitan areas

…loosely throw around terms and concepts

…without further refinement, however, run

the risk of focusing on a topic w/o much
meaning
 1995
Jobs Schools Parks Shopping
2000 Automobile
Transit Jobs Schools Parks Shopping
2005 Automobile
Bicycling
Transit
Walking Jobs Schools Parks Shopping
Bicycling
Automobile
Walking
Transit
Bicycling
Walking
What’s unique about measuring access for
Transit, Walking, Cycling?

Peculiarities: -Scale of analysis

-Availability of data
Balance:
Useful measures w/
policy relevance

Robust &
reliable science
 Gravity-based accessibility

Aim = accessibility at i by
mode m
Aim = ∑ O j f (Cijm ) 1. Oj = opportunities at j
j 2. C = measure of travel
cost
3. ij m = measure of the
ease or attractiveness
of travel between i & j
– Knowing travel times
– Knowing behaviors
Units are in minutes
 What destinations?
Mode Shopping Neigh- Employ- Recreatio Education Entertainme Gym/Heal Airport Restaurant
borhood ment n/ -University nt (includes th Club
retail Parks -Primary bars)

Walk

Bicycle

Transit

Auto
Data Sources for Land use Database
• Metropolitan Council
– Land use
– Parcel points and polygons

• Dunn & Bradstreet

– Business locations and types (2005)
– Records for 135,928 Metro area businesses
– Detailed business data includes:
• Location
• Industry classification (NAICS and SICS)
• Sales
• Employees
General Destination Categories
• Shopping • Post Offices

• Food, Groceries, and

• Financial Services
Restaurants • Other Personal Services
• Fitness and Recreation • Professional Services
• Entertainment
• Airports
• Education
• Transportation
• Health Care
• Other
• Parks

Based on North American Industrial Classification System codes and land use classification
 Example of Specific Destinations
Supermarkets and Grocery Stores
Food, Groceries, and (Retail, 5-digit)

Restaurants Convenience Stores

(Retail, 5-digit)
Warehouse Clubs and Supercenters
(Retail, 5-digit)
Specialty Food Stores
(Retail, Manufacturing, 6-digit)
Full-Service Restaurant
(Accommodation & Food Service, 6-digit)
Snack and Nonalcoholic Beverage Bars
(i.e. coffee shops)
(Accommodation & Food Service, 6-digit)
Other Food Service
(Accommodation & Food Service, 4-digit)
Bars/Nightclubs
(Accommodation & Food Service, 4-digit)

(NAICS industries and level of disaggregation used in parenthesis)

 Data Cleaning
Fixed Records
- Many misspellings & abbreviations
- Assign street address to mall businesses

Removed Records
- 815 P.O. Boxes
- 8,377 Not in 7-County Metro Area
- 7,000 Bad / Missing Address Data
(no zip code, street name,
building number, etc.)
Matching Summary
Detailed Land Use Data
…but is Accessibility all about supply?
NO!

A hypothetical…

Ideally, accessibility measures should

incorporate BOTH supply AND demand.
 Estimating Decay Functions
• Fitting decay curves
– Modes: Auto, transit, bike, walk
– Purposes: Work, shopping, school,
restaurant, recreation, trail access (bicycling)
 Functional Form
• Types of decay functions
– Negative power: f(c) = c(-β)
– Negative exponential: f(c) = e(-βc)
– Combined: f(c) = c(α)e(-βc)

• We focus on the negative exponential

function
• Definition of “impedance”
– Time vs. network distance
Flexible
Forms
Impedance: Distance vs. Time
• Both have limitations as impedance
measures
• Distance
– Cannot validate route choice, shortest path
– Difficult to validate speeds
• Time
– Duration data are self-reported, subject to
perception error
 Data Sources
• 4 Data sources used for analysis:
– Met Council TBI HIS files
– Met Council transit on-board survey
– Hennepin County trail use survey
– Non-Motorized Pilot Project (NMPP) survey
 Distance Decay: Walking
40%

Work
Shopping
Restaurant
Entertainment
Expon. (Work)
30% Expon. (Entertainment)
Expon. (Shopping)
Expon. (Restaurant)
Percent of Trips

20%

10%

0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Distance (km)
 Distance Decay: Bicycling
50%

Work
Shopping
School
Entertainment
40%
Trail
Expon. (Work)
Expon. (Shopping)
Expon. (School)
Expon. (Entertainmen t)
Expon. (Trail)
30%
Percent of Trips

20%

10%

0%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (km)
 Work Shopping School
Distance Time Distance Time Distance Time
Walk y = .486e-1.683x y = .511e-.106x y = .469e-2.106x y = .368e-.094x y = .524e-.106x
Bike y = .402e-.203x y = .146e-.040x y = .343e-.514x y = .434e-.107x y = .458e-.122x y = .424e-.100x
Transit y = .667e-.093x y = .346e-.092x y = .406e-.116x
Drive Alone y = .504e-.088x y = .379e-.117x y = .371e-.122x
-.076x
Shared Ride y = .237e y = .381e-.130x y = .160e-.096x
Notes:
1) For impedance functions where distance is the measure of separation, kilometers are the relevant units.
Where time is the measure of separation, units are in minutes.
2) The dependent variable (y) measures the fraction of trips covering a given distance.
3) All grayed cells represent impedance functions that could not be estimated due to limited data.
4) Cells shaded blue can be calculated given available data, but have not been needed thus far.
5) Cells shaded red represent the recently acquired health care data. An impedance function can be calculated
with these data, but the mode cannot be specified.

Restaurant Recreation Trail Access Health Care

Distance Time Distance Time Distance Time Distance Time
-1.397x -.093x -.769x -.100x
y = .388e y = .373e y = .327e y = .556e
y = .367e-.375x y = .293e-.071x y = .119e-.333x

y = .318e-.119x y = .336e-.103x
y = .426e-.140x y = .333e-.093x
 How we proceeded
• New networks
– GIS street layer; assumptions about speeds
• New zones
– Census block level
• Detailed land use/activity data
– Parcel-level land use merged with:
– Establishment level (D & B) business data
– Contains location, sales, employment,
industrial classification