|
Name
|
Description
|
Current
Consideration
|
|
Transport Demand
|
The amount of mobility and access that people and
businesses would choose under various conditions (times, prices, levels of
service, etc).
|
Motorized travel demand is well studied, but nonmotorized
demand is not. Travel demand is often considered exogenous rather than
affected by planning decisions.
|
|
Mobility
|
The distance and speed of travel, including personal
mobility (measured as person-miles) and vehicle mobility (measured
as vehicle-miles).
|
Conventional transport planning primarily evaluates
mobility, particularly vehicle mobility.
|
|
Transportation Options
|
The quantity and quality of access options, including
walking, cycling, ridesharing, transit, taxi, delivery services, and telecommunications.
Qualitative factors include availability, speed, frequency, convenience,
comfort, safety, price and prestige.
|
Motor vehicle options and quality are usually considered,
using indicators such as roadway level-of-service, but other modes lack such
indicators and some important service quality factors are often overlooked.
|
|
User information
|
The quality (convenience and reliability) of information
available to users on their mobility and accessibility options.
|
Frequently considered when dealing with a particular mode
or location, but often not comprehensive.
|
|
Integration
|
The degree of integration among transport system links and
modes, including terminals and parking facilities.
|
Automobile transport is generally well integrated, but
connections between other modes are often poorly evaluated.
|
|
Affordability
|
The cost to users of transport and location options
relative to incomes.
|
Automobile operating costs and transit fares are usually
considered.
|
|
Mobility Substitutes
|
The quality of telecommunications and delivery services
that substitute for physical travel.
|
Not usually considered in transport planning.
|
|
Land Use Factors
|
Degree that factors such as land use density and mix
affect accessibility.
|
Considered in land use planning, but less in transport
planning.
|
|
Transport Network Connectivity
|
The density of connections between roads and paths, and
therefore the directness by which people can travel between destinations.
|
Conventional planning seldom considers the effects of
roadway connectivity on accessibility.
|
|
Roadway Design and Management
|
How road design and management practices affect vehicle
traffic, mobility and accessibility.
|
Some factors are generally considered, but others are not.
|
|
Prioritization
|
Various strategies that increase transport system
efficiency.
|
Often overlooked or undervalued in conventional planning.
|
|
Inaccessibility
|
The value of inaccessibility and external costs of
increased mobility.
|
Not generally considered in transport planning.
|
Where transportation planning meets urban food systems and everything in between
17 March 2013
Factors Affecting Accessibility
16 March 2013
Transit Level-of-Service Rating Factors
|
Feature
|
Description
|
Indicators
|
|
Availability
|
Where
and when transit service is available.
|
§ Annual service-kilometers per capita.
§ Daily
hours of service.
§ Portion of
destinations located within 500 meters of transit service.
§ Hours of
service.
|
|
Frequency
|
Frequency
of service and average wait time.
|
§ Trips per
hour or day.
§ Headways
(time between trips).
§ Average
waiting times.
|
|
Travel
Speed
|
Transit
travel speed.
|
§ Average
vehicle speeds.
§ Transit
travel speed relative to driving the same trip.
§ Door-to-door travel time.
|
|
Reliability
|
How
well service actually follows published schedules.
|
§ On-time
operation.
§ Portion of
transfer connections made.
§ Mechanical
failure frequency.
|
|
Boarding
speed
|
Vehicle
loading and unloading speed.
|
§ Dwell
time.
§ Boarding
and alighting speeds.
|
|
Safety
and security
|
Users
perceived safety and security.
|
§ Perceived
transit passenger security.
§ Accidents
and injuries.
§ Reported
security incidents.
§ Visibility
and lighting.
§ Absence of
vandalism.
|
|
Price
and affordability
|
Fare
prices, structure, payment options, ease of purchase.
|
§ Fares
relative to average incomes.
§ Fares
relative to other travel mode costs.
§ Payment
options (cash, credit cards, etc.).
§ Ticket
availability (stations, stores, Internet, etc.).
|
|
Integration
|
Ease
of transferring between transit and other modes.
|
§ Quality of connections between transit routes.
§ Quality of connections between transit and other modes
(train stations, airports, ferry terminals, etc.).
|
|
Comfort
|
Passenger
comfort
|
§ Seating
availability and quality.
§ Space
(lack of crowding).
§ Quiet (lack of excessive noise).
§ Fresh air
(lack of unpleasant smells).
§ Temperature
(neither too hot or cold).
§ Cleanliness.
§ Washrooms
and refreshments (for longer trips).
|
|
Accessibility
|
Ease
of reaching stations and stops.
|
§ Distance from transit stations and stops to destinations.
§ Walkability
(quality of walking conditions) in areas serviced by transit.
|
|
Baggage
capacity
|
Accommodation
of baggage.
|
§ Ability, ease and cost of carrying baggage, including
special items such as pets.
|
|
Universal
design
|
Accommodation
of diverse users including special needs.
|
§ Accessible
design for transit vehicles, stations and nearby areas.
§ Ability to
carry baggage.
§ Accommodation of people who cannot read or understand the
local language.
|
|
User
information
|
Ease
of obtaining user information.
|
§ Availability and accuracy of route, schedule and fare
information.
§ Real-time transit vehicle arrival information.
§ Information available to service people with special needs
(audio or visual disabilities, inability to read or understand the local
language, etc.).
|
|
Courtesy
and responsiveness
|
Courtesy
with which passengers are treated.
|
§ How
passengers are treated by transit staff.
§ Ease of
filing a complaint.
§ Speed and
responsiveness with which complaints are treated.
|
|
Attractiveness
|
The
attractiveness of transit facilities.
|
§ Attractiveness
of vehicles and facilities.
§ Attractiveness
of documents and websites.
|
|
Marketing
|
Effectiveness
of efforts to encourage public transport.
|
§ Popularity
of promotion programs.
§ Effectiveness at raising the social status of transit
travel.
§ Increases
in public transit ridership in response to marketing efforts.
|
Source: Introduction to Multi-Modal Transportation Planning, Victoria Transport Policy Institute. 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)