FUTURE CHANGES IN
ACCESSIBILITY PATTERNS
IN THE HELSINKI REGION
Maria Salonen
University of Helsinki
10.7.2015
Modal hotspots…
Toivonen et al. 2014
… and shopping center accessibility…
1100000
Kamppi
1000000
900000
700000
600000
1100000
500000
Jumbo
1000000
400000
900000
300000
200000
Public transport
100000
Private car
800000
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Travel time (minutes)
35
40
45
Inhabitants
Inhabitants
800000
700000
600000
500000
400000
300000
200000
Public transport
100000
Private car
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Travel time (minutes)
35
40
Salonen, Toivonen & Vaattovaara (2012) : Arkiliikkumisen vaihtoehdoista monikeskuksistuvassa metropolissa: Kaksi näkökulmaa
palvelujen saavutettavuuteen pääkaupunkiseudulla. Yhdyskuntasuunnittelu 3/2012, 8-27.
45
NMT_PT_car
Total
… are at least partly reflected by
residents’ travel behaviour
19
577
Modal shares (incl. m
Car 42.1 % ; PT 37.3
SDE size (sq.km): 1
SDE rotation: 152.5
Shopping
(n = 1377; 29.5 %
Chosen travel No of
mode
trips
Car
464
PT
87
NMT
513
Other
9
PT_car
16
PT_other
1
NMT_car
202
NMT_PT
62
NMT_PT_car
23
Total
1377
Modal shares (incl. m
Car 51.2 % ; PT 13.7
SDE size (sq.km): 3
SDE rotation: 157.0
Errands
(n = 808; 17.3 %
Salonen, Broberg, Kyttä & Toivonen (2014) : Do suburban residents prefer the fastest or low-carbon travel modes? Combining public
participation GIS and multimodal travel time analysis for daily mobility research. Applied Geography, 53: 438–448.
Why study future accessibility patterns?
Aims and
legislation
globally, on
EU, national
and regional
levels
2011 EC White paper on
transport
• Cut 60% of transport
sector’s CO2 emissions
(compared to 1990 level)
• phase out conventionally
fuelled (oil dependent)
vehicles in cities by 2050.
Metropolitan vision
A truly polycentric network
city where the different centers
have a compact mixed-use
structure and where the daily
mobility of people is largely
based on environmentally
friendly travel modes,
particularly rail-based public
transport.
Why study future accessibility patterns in
Helsinki?
• An example of a rapidly growing European urban region, trying to base the
future daily mobility of its inhabitants on more sustainable grounds
• 2014 - 2050
NMT
A truly polycentric
network city where the
different centers have a
compact mixed-use
PT
•
•
45 % increase in
population (from
1.4 to ca. 2 million
inhabitants)
46 % increase in
jobs (from 700000
to ca. 1.05 million
jobs)
Car
structure and where the daily
mobility of people is largely
based on environmentally
friendly travel modes,
particularly rail-based
public transport.
• Good (open) data sources for transport-related analyses
A few future-oriented case studies
• How many people reach certain destinations within
certain travel times by PT (and by car) now and in
future?
• What does the change tell about
– (a) overall level of accessibility?
– (b) equity of travel modes and competitiveness of PT?
• Testing the usability of the available data in
understanding future development in accessibility
Analysis approach
Open data and
door-to-door
approach in
analysis
Current
population
distribution
Present day
car
Reached
population
Current car
network
and speed
limits
Regional
sub-centers
modal
travel time
difference
Current
public
transport
network
PT
travel time
Comparison of modal travel time
differences between the years
Current car
network
and future
speed limits
Origin
Projections
of
population
distribution
Travel timein(minutes)
6
2050
Future
3
Distance (meters) 420 0
CO2 (grams)
0
0
Current
public 15
transport
network
+
15000
new rail
infra1200
Reached
population
Door-to-door approach:
Open data and
door-to-door
approach in
analysis
Regional
sub-centers
car
modal
travel time
difference
Destination
PT
4
11
5
0
14600
350
0
0
0 time
travel
(Sum: 44 min)
(Sum: 30370 m)
(Sum: 1200 g)
transport
network
travel time
Comparison of modal travel time
differences between the years
Current car
network
and future
speed limits
Projections
of
population
distribution
in 2050
Future
Current
public
transport
network +
new rail
infra
Reached
population
Open data and
door-to-door
approach in
analysis
Regional
sub-centers
car
modal
travel time
difference
PT
travel time
City-level / regional
vision & plans for
transition
Door-to-door approach:
Origin
Destination
Travel time (minutes)6
15
4
11
5
Distance (meters) 420 0
15000
0
14600
350
CO2 (grams)
1200
0
0
3
0
0
0
(Sum: 44 min)
(Sum: 30370 m)
(Sum: 1200 g)
A near-future example:
Länsimetro
Figure: Länsimetro
Public transport analysis 2014
Accessibility to Tapiola library,
30 min: 115 000 inhabitants
Public transport analysis 2016
Accessibility to Tapiola library,
30 min: 160 000 inhabitants
Looking towards 2050:
Light-rails and urban boulevards
Figure: 3D Render/Helsingin kaupunkisuunnitteluvirasto
Changing population patterns and
transport networks
New (light) rail-based infrastructure
Data provided by Helsinki city planning office / Regional council of
Uusimaa
Potential future accessibility to
Helsinki city centre
a)
Key messages:
Car - Present vs Future
30 min: +108 000 inhabitants
- In absolute terms, the city
center will in future be
reached by more people
within shorter travel times
by both travel modes.
Car - Present vs Future
20 min: +25 000 inhabitants
PT - Present vs Future
- Car will remain
clearly more
competitive BUT
30 min: +126 000 inhabitants
b)
PT - Present vs Future
20 min: +30 000 inhabitants
Car - Present vstravel
Future
- The modal
time gap
30 min: -10 %
is diminishing, leading to
increasing equity of the
mobility system and
30 min: Travel
mode gap will
increasing
lucrativeness
decrease 14 %-points
in
the future
of
public transport,
potentially supporting mode
shift from car to public
transport.
PT - Present vs Future
30 min: + 4 %
Potential future accessibility to
major shopping centres
Travel time to shopping centers in 2013 (minutes)
Travel time to shopping centers in 2050 (minutes)
How many people can be reached?
2013 vs 2050
How many people can be reached?
2013 vs 2050
2013 vs 2050
30 min: +175 000 inhab.
How many people can be reached?
2013 vs 2050
2013 vs 2050
30 min: +175 000 inhab.
2013 vs 2050
30 min: 30 % more people
(population growth = 20 %)
As a curiosity:
“Potential CO2 future”
Door-to-door approach:
Origin
Destination
Travel time (minutes)6
15
4
11
5
Distance (meters) 420 0
15000
0
14600
350
CO2 (grams)
1200
0
0
3
0
0
0
(Sum: 44 min)
(Sum: 30370 m)
(Sum: 1200 g)
Total CO2 emissions
(1000 tons)
As a curiosity:
“Potential CO2 future”
Cut
~80 %
Key messages:
- Future developments in
infrastructure, modal
shares, and emission
levels could lead to
substantial cut in CO2
emissions (within this study
setting, given the assumptions)
- Largest CO2 savings
occur in areas where
the current public
transport connections
Uncertainties in analyses
• The future is very uncertain in all aspects
• Public and political acceptance of
different policies
• Many current trends are contradictory to
the desired future development paths
• Human behavior and societies’ values
particularly challenging to predict
Thank you!
[email protected]
MetropAccess-Saavutettavuusseminaari 4.2.2013