City of Worcester Area Accessibility Audit: An Example of Applying GIS Techniques to Explore Accessibility Using Traditional Transport Modelling Perceptions. Keith Drew – Halcrow Group Martin Rowe – Worcestershire County Council

Martin Rowe Principle Transport Policy & Strategy Officer Worcestershire County Council Responsible for strategic transport planning and the development of Worcestershire’s LTP3 Currently jointly project managing the development of the multimodal Worcester Transport Strategy Major Scheme Bid Jolly nice bloke Keith Drew Senior Consultant, Halcrow Group, Manchester Responsible for providing specialist GIS support to Transport Planning projects across the United Kingdom Over the last twelve months majority of time working in Worcestershire on GIS / Accessibility Planning projects GMPTE 2001 – 2007 Who are we?

Proposes a hybrid accessibility model mixing Accessibility Planning with Transport Modelling concepts, using a case study of The City of Worcester, that: Incorporates a gravity based model, based upon generalised time Has the specific purpose of testing for social equity for future decision making At the core is the application of a Geographical Information System for analysis and display Our paper

Not a new concept to the Transport Planner.. Accessibility Planning As this image demonstrates 1914 isochrone map for City Centre Manchester… 2003 Making the Connections report (SEU) 2004 The development of Accession software 2005 Inclusion of accessibility indicators as part of the LTP2 submission

City of Worcester was chosen as one of 3 sustainable travel towns by the Department for Transport Known that accessibility was poor in the City of Worcester, but extent was unknown – desire to understand by service providers existing and potential future accessibility in City of Worcester Provided part of the evidence base for the Worcester Transport Strategy Major Scheme Bid Study Background

The objectives To measure the current accessibility within the City of Worcester and surrounding hinterlands. To measure how accessibility could be affected over the next twenty years without an intervention strategy To measure how many people reside within acceptable distance from the PT network (bus stops) that serve key destinations. To measure how journey times increase by mode to the City Core (City Centre).

Using a combination of Accession and GIS, assess the quality of access provided by passenger transport in Worcester City Take account of the weightings applied to various elements of a journey (e.g. access, wait, in-vehicle, interchange, egress) Be undertaken on the basis of weighted measures of accessibility All times of day Take account of the effects of traffic congestion The brief

Congestion tests Base Case = Current accessibility by all modes to WCC defined key destinations Intermediate Case (by 2018) = assumed in-vehicle time increase of 15% in the peak, 10% other times Worse Case (by 2028) = assumed in-vehicle time increase of 30% in the peak, 15% other times

Accession…weighting… ????????

Methodology Accession software used to calculate base journey times GIS techniques adopted to split the Accession runs into journey time elements of walk, wait, in-vehicle, interchange and egress) to create weighted journey times Zone system adopted to understand direct journeys/walk times/wait times – see next slide Deterrence values (from Department of Transport technical guidance) applied to calculate ‘opportunity’ at both an origin and destination

Assumptions If a direct journey is possible: 1. route taken ; and; 2. wait time based on half headway (max. 10 minutes) If a direct journey is not possible: 1. Only one interchange takes place (10 minute penalty); and; 2. Wait time = half headway (average across services origin + destination) Walk time (origin and destination end) = average time taken to get to nearest set of stops.

Formula: Simplified the formula for generalised time in this research is: Generalised time (no interchange) = X + A + CH + B (with interchange) = X + A + C H i + C H ii + B + (Interchange penalty)

Analysis Results presented at high level (study area) down to individual addresses… Example for ‘Access to Education’ in the Weekday AM Peak At study level, by ward, by destination (all tabular) and by addresses, shown by using GIS…

Example results: BY STUDY AREA

Base to Worse CaseCarBus PeakOtherMF AM PeakMF DaytimeMF PM Peak Arboretum-4.2%-2.1%-8.9%-4.2%-8.2% Battenhall-4.4%-2.2%-8.3%-4.0%-8.0% Bedwardine-5.7%-2.9%-13.4%-6.3%-12.0% Bowbrook-14.2%-7.4%-33.7%-15.2%-32.1% Broadheath-9.4%-4.8%-31.7%-18.2%-27.7% Cathedral-3.8%-1.9%-7.6%-3.8%-7.1% Claines-5.9%-3.0%-14.8%-7.9%-14.5% Gorse Hill-7.0%-3.6%-17.9%-9.6%-17.5% Hallow-8.6%-4.4%-78.4%-74.3%-73.4% Kempsey-9.6%-4.9%-76.2%-70.7%-74.3% Etc…………… Example results: BY WARD

Example results: BY DESTINATION

Example results: BY ADDRESSES (actual)

Example results : BY ADDRESSES (change)

Example results: BY ADDRESSES (indexed)

Access to the City Centre

A ‘do nothing’ scenario will have a significant effect on accessibility/opportunities to all key destinations. The hardest ‘hit’ areas being around Warndon, Shrub Hill and the outer areas of the study area. Bus users will be hardest hit (in terms of percentage change to opportunity) rather car drivers. Headline results

Congestion will not have significant effect on opportunities available to car users (excluding access to Employment), When considering access to employment (by Public Transport) opportunity is greatest in and around the central area of the City provided by the rail services Fast bus links to the City’s railway stations crucial to maintain and improve employment opportunities. Headline results

Study Conclusions Access to the City Centre is vital to maintain accessibility levels Access to the Worcestershire Royal Hospital an area of concern Cycling offers good alternative accessibility Without intervention strategies the City of Worcester will become significantly less attractive as a place to live, work and visit…

Outcomes shared with key service providers (Acute Hospitals Trust, Education Providers, Employers etc) Focused development of Major Scheme Bid technical work to solve known accessibility ‘black spots’ Provided necessary evidence to guide politicians away from road building and towards more sustainable solutions How has the study been taken forward?

The study demonstrated a technically robust approach to accessibility planning which: Brought about service provider buy-in to the process Identified areas of poor accessibility to key HELERT services and facilities Provided a strong evidence base to support technical development of the Worcester Transport Strategy Major Scheme Bid Overall Conclusions