A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Mobility evaluation for urban public transportation
This paper has reported on a study of relative opportunity—not absolute opportunity. Minimum absolute standards for mobility or accessibility are difficult to justify. Some additional study into the development and application of absolute mobility standards may be warranted.
The application of the mobility evaluation model has primarily focused upon a corridor line‐haul system. Conclusions suggest that such a system will not markedly improve existing transit mobility levels in either the peak hour or the off‐peak. The experimental work has verified this conclusion, and more importantly, it has detailed quantitatively the exact levels and spatial distribution of mobility improvements. However, this study does not include a comprehensive analysis of all methods of mobility enhancement, nor does it undertake a comparison of alternative means of mobility improvement. Certainly other methods to improve access to opportunities should be explored before policy considerations are finalized. These methods include other transit solutions, land use alternatives, socio‐economic policies, and other‐mode transportation alternatives. The accessibility technique and mobility indices approach appears to have general applicability in the analysis of optimal strategies for system evaluation.
Of interest is an examination of alternative feeder transit systems to the corridor line. Additional research with the model might point out the maximum mobility effects expected through improved collector service in the suburbs, with corridor line‐haul to the CBD.
The indices are also readily available for a comparison of mobility patterns for different urban areas. Application of the program to transit and socio‐economic data for a set of cities would yield an indication of the relative mobility levels provided. Such data might be considered as an evaluation criterion for future transit funding by federal officials.
In addition, the model is currently being considered by UMTA as a tool to aid in the evaluation of the equitable distribution of transit system benefits as defined in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.25 The mobility output would serve as an indicator of the levels‐of‐service provided to certain disadvantaged urban groups. For this application the computer model is being altered to achieve compatability with the Transportation Planning System (UTPS) computer model package developed by UMTA.
Mobility evaluation for urban public transportation
This paper has reported on a study of relative opportunity—not absolute opportunity. Minimum absolute standards for mobility or accessibility are difficult to justify. Some additional study into the development and application of absolute mobility standards may be warranted.
The application of the mobility evaluation model has primarily focused upon a corridor line‐haul system. Conclusions suggest that such a system will not markedly improve existing transit mobility levels in either the peak hour or the off‐peak. The experimental work has verified this conclusion, and more importantly, it has detailed quantitatively the exact levels and spatial distribution of mobility improvements. However, this study does not include a comprehensive analysis of all methods of mobility enhancement, nor does it undertake a comparison of alternative means of mobility improvement. Certainly other methods to improve access to opportunities should be explored before policy considerations are finalized. These methods include other transit solutions, land use alternatives, socio‐economic policies, and other‐mode transportation alternatives. The accessibility technique and mobility indices approach appears to have general applicability in the analysis of optimal strategies for system evaluation.
Of interest is an examination of alternative feeder transit systems to the corridor line. Additional research with the model might point out the maximum mobility effects expected through improved collector service in the suburbs, with corridor line‐haul to the CBD.
The indices are also readily available for a comparison of mobility patterns for different urban areas. Application of the program to transit and socio‐economic data for a set of cities would yield an indication of the relative mobility levels provided. Such data might be considered as an evaluation criterion for future transit funding by federal officials.
In addition, the model is currently being considered by UMTA as a tool to aid in the evaluation of the equitable distribution of transit system benefits as defined in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.25 The mobility output would serve as an indicator of the levels‐of‐service provided to certain disadvantaged urban groups. For this application the computer model is being altered to achieve compatability with the Transportation Planning System (UTPS) computer model package developed by UMTA.
Mobility evaluation for urban public transportation
Popper, Robert Jay (author) / Hoel, Lester A. (author)
Transportation Planning and Technology ; 3 ; 131-141
1976-01-01
11 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
Evaluation of Performance of Riyadh Urban Public Transportation Services
| British Library Online Contents | 1994
Sustainable Urban Mobility : Transportation Solutions for Future Urban Environments
| BASE | 2018
Sustainability and Urban Public Transportation
| Online Contents | 2003
Urban Public Transportation Research 1990
| NTIS | 1990