Between Dec 19, 2024 and Jan 2, 2025, datasets can be submitted to DRUM but will not be processed until after the break. Staff will not be available to answer email during this period, and will not be able to provide DOIs until after Jan 2. If you are in need of a DOI during this period, consider Dryad or OpenICPSR. Submission responses to the UDC may also be delayed during this time.

Dr. David M. Levinson

Persistent link for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/11299/179806

Browse

Now showing 1 - 20 of 279

1920-1995 Twin Cities State Highway Network
(2014-03-21) Chen, Wei; Levinson, David M; dlevinson@umn.edu; Levinson, David M.
Illustrates the development of the highway network in the Twin Cities metropolitan region. GIS maps of the state highway network were created for 1920-1995 (these were not previously digitized). These were used to build Markov Chain Cellular Automata models of land use change and network growth.
1958 Twin Cities Land Use Map from the Twin Cities Metropolitan Planning Commission, GIS Data Files
(2013-11-22) Chen, Wei; Levinson, David M; dlevinson@umn.edu; Levinson, David M.
High-quality GIS land use maps for the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area for 1958 that were developed from paper maps (no GIS version existed previously).
1968 Twin Cities Land Use Map from the Twin Cities Metropolitan Planning Commission, GIS Data Files
(2014-03-03) Levinson, David M; Chen, Wei; dlevinson@umn.edu; Levinson, David M.
High-quality GIS land use maps for the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area for 1968 that were developed from paper maps (no GIS version existed previously).
1978 Twin Cities Land Use Map from the Twin Cities Metropolitan Planning Commission, GIS Data Files
(2014-03-03) Levinson, David M; Chen, Wei; dlevinson@umn.edu; Levinson, David M.
High-quality GIS land use maps for the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area for 1978 that were developed from paper maps (no GIS version existed previously).
Access (Chapter 9 in The Oxford Handbook of Urban and Regional Planning )
(Oxford University Press, 2012) Krizek, Kevin J; Levinson, David M
ANNUALLY, traffic-weary residents across the United States eagerly wait for the arrival of their news source to learn about the latest congestion report card from the Texas Transportation Institute. This Urban Mobility Report makes headlines, especially in places with worsening congestion. Even smaller areas, possibly not yet victims what some might consider serious traffic, lament their annual increase in levels of congestion, yet secretly enjoy their emerging big-city status. Traffic engi- neers, planners, and politicians take more than feigned interest because, to date, such ratings are the only available measure to assess progress toward a concern central to livability that is front and center in the minds of many residents. Traffic congestion is a serious issue, undoubtedly, particularly in major met- ropolitan areas worldwide. But is congestion the problem or the solution? Taylor (2003) argues that traffic congestion is a solution to the problem ofhow to allocate scarce road space. (In contrast, economists argue for road pricing to allocate road space, but clearly there are factors limiting its widespread deployment.) Even if we agree that congestion wastes time, is minimizing congestion the most appropriate public policy goal (Taylor 2003)? Do measures of congestion provide the basis for policy prescriptions? We argue elsewhere (Levinson and Krizek 2008) that mobil- ity (or lack thereof because of inadequate networks or congestion) is an element of the larger goal-ensuring accessibility. Recent years have witnessed more than a handful of conferences or work- shops whose central themes focused on the concept of accessibility. For example, the University of Minnesota sponsored two conferences, prodUcing an array of recent scholarly publications on the topic in 2004 (Levinson and Krizek 2005) and 2007 (Axhausen 2008; Bruegmann 2008; Crane 2008; Lo, Tang, and Wang 2008; Ottensmann and Lindsey 2008; Scott and Horner 2008); in 2007, the European Science Foundation hosted a workshop, How to Define and Measure Access and Need Satisfaction in Transport (Becker, Bohmer, and Gerike 2008). The Network on European Communications and Transport Activities Research (NECTAR) con- tinues to sponsor activities focUSing on accessibility. Accessibility has even been touted as a civil rights issue (Sanchez 1999). As judged by the level of discussion, mention, and focus in specialized work- shops, interest in accessibility is high. Previous writings have focused on defining the concept of accessibility generally, starting from Hansen (1959), but also involv- ing other extensions (Dalvi 1979; Ingram 1971; Kau 1979; Rutherford 1979), measur- ing the concept using different approaches (Handy and Niemeier 1997), various data needs (Krizek 2008),8 or its use in explaining behavior (Levinson and Krizek 2005; Levinson 1998). This chapter recommends that policy decisions be based on important and reliable performance measures. Robust measures that simultaneously assess the performance of the transportation and land use dimensions of cities, however, are mostly missing from such discussions (Levinson 2003). At the heart of the pro- posed approach lies the concept of accessibility: the ability of people to reach the destinations that they need to visit in order to meet their needs. A focus on accessi- bility-rather than congestion or mobility- would produce a more complete and meaningful picture ofmetropolitan transport and land use. This chapter aims to articulate a clear role for measures of metropolitan acces- sibility and to demonstrate the utility of these measures in informing and influ- encing policy. It reviews necessary definitions, comments on the nature of past research, and suggests strategies to adapt such research into means. It endeavors to place accessibility in a position ofprominence as a performance measure; thus, this chapter has four parts and functions, as follows: • To describe the use and measurement of accessibility for metropolitan areas, • To appraise the current state ofknowledge and literature, • To identify issues about measurement, • To offer prescriptions for resolving those issues, given political contexts, and • To point to future directions.
Access Across America: Auto 2015
(Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, 2016-09) Owen, Andrew; Murphy, Brendan; Levinson, David
Accessibility is the ease of reaching valued destinations. It can be measured across different times of day (accessibility in the morning rush might be lower than the less-congested midday period). It can be measured for each mode (accessibility by walking is usually lower than accessibility by transit, which is usually lower than accessibility by car). There are a variety of ways to measure accessibility, but the number of destinations reachable within a given travel time is the most comprehensible and transparent as well as the most directly comparable across cities. This report focuses on accessibility to jobs by car. Jobs are the most significant nonhome destination, but it is also possible to measure accessibility to other types of destinations. The automobile remains the most widely used mode for commuting trips in the United States. This study estimates the accessibility to jobs by auto for each of the 11 million U.S. census blocks and analyzes these data in the 50 largest (by population) metropolitan areas. Travel times are calculated using a detailed road network and speed data that reflect typical conditions for an 8 a.m. Wednesday morning departure. Additionally, the accessibility results for 8 a.m. are compared with accessibility results for 4 a.m. to estimate the impact of road and highway congestion on job accessibility. Rankings are determined by a weighted average of accessibility, with a higher weight given to closer, easier-to access jobs. Jobs reachable within 10 minutes are weighted most heavily, and jobs are given decreasing weights as travel time increases up to 60 minutes. The report presents detailed accessibility and congestion impact values for each metropolitan area as well as blocklevel maps that illustrate the spatial patterns of accessibility within each area. It also includes a census tract-level map that shows accessibility patterns at a national scale.
Access Across America: Transit 2014 Data
(2014-12-05) Owen, Andrew; Levinson, David M; aowen@umn.edu; Owen, Andrew; University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies, Accessibility Observatory
This data was created as part of a study that examined the accessibility to jobs by transit in 46 of the 50 largest (by population) metropolitan areas in the United States. It is the most detailed evaluation to date of access to jobs by transit, and it allows for a direct comparison of the transit accessibility performance of America's largest metropolitan areas.
Access Across America: Transit 2015
(Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, 2016-12) Owen, Andrew; Murphy, Brendan; Levinson, David M.
Accessibility is the ease of reaching valued destinations. It can be measured across different times of day (accessibility in the morning rush might be lower than the less-congested midday period). It can be measured for each mode (accessibility by walking is usually lower than accessibility by transit, which is usually lower than accessibility by car). There are a variety of ways to measure accessibility, but the number of destinations reachable within a given travel time is the most comprehensible and transparent as well as the most directly comparable across cities. This report examines accessibility to jobs by transit in 49 of the 50 largest (by population) metropolitan areas in the United States. Transit is used for an estimated 5 percent of commuting trips in the United States, making it the second most widely used commute mode after driving. This report complements Access Across America: Auto 2015, a report of job accessibility by auto in 50 metropolitan areas and follows the Access Across America: Transit 2014 report. A separate publication, Access Across America: Transit 2015 Methodology, describes the data and methodology used in this evaluation. Rankings are determined by a weighted average of accessibility, giving a higher weight to closer jobs. Jobs reachable within ten minutes are weighted most heavily, and jobs are given decreasing weight as travel time increases up to 60 minutes.
Access Across America: Transit 2015 Data
(2017-02-02) Owen, Andrew; Levinson, David M; Murphy, Brendan; aowen@umn.edu; Owen, Andrew
These data were created as part of a study that examined the accessibility to jobs by transit in 49 of the 50 largest (by population) metropolitan areas in the United States. It is the most detailed evaluation to date of access to jobs by transit, and it allows for a direct comparison of the transit accessibility performance of America's largest metropolitan areas. These data are part of a longitudinal study; Access Across America: Transit 2014 data are available at http://hdl.handle.net/11299/168064.
Access Across America: Transit 2016
(Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, 2017-11) Owen, Andrew; Murphy, Brendan; Levinson, David M.
Accessibility is the ease and feasibility of reaching valued destinations. It can be measured for a wide array of transportation modes, to different types of destinations, and at different times of day. There are a variety of ways to measure accessibility, but the number of destinations reachable within a given travel time is the most comprehensible and transparent as well as the most directly comparable across cities. This study estimates the accessibility to jobs by transit and walking for each of the United States’ 11 million census blocks, and analyzes these data in 49 of the 50 largest (by population) metropolitan areas. Transit is used for an estimated 5 percent of commuting trips in the United States, making it the second most widely used commute mode after driving. Travel times by transit are calculated using detailed pedestrian networks and full transit schedules for the 7:00 – 9:00 a.m. period. The calculations include all components of a transit journey, including “last-mile” access and egress walking segments and transfers, and account for minute-by-minute variations in service frequency. This report presents detailed accessibility values for each metropolitan area, as well as block-level maps that illustrate the spatial patterns of accessibility within each area. A separate publication, Access Across America: Transit 2016 Methodology, describes the data and methodology used in this evaluation.
Access Across America: Transit 2016 Data
(2018-03-28) Owen, Andrew; Murphy, Brendan; aowen@umn.edu; Owen, Andrew; University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies, Accessibility Observatory
These data were created as part of a study that examined the accessibility to jobs by transit in 49 of the 50 largest (by population) metropolitan areas in the United States. It is the most detailed evaluation to date of access to jobs by transit, and it allows for a direct comparison of the transit accessibility performance of America's largest metropolitan areas. These data are part of a longitudinal study; Access Across America: Transit 2015 data are available at https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/183801. Access Across America: Transit 2014 data are available at http://hdl.handle.net/11299/168064.
Access Across America: Walk 2014 Data
(2015-08-21) Owen, Andrew; Murphy, Brendan; Levinson, David M; aowen@umn.edu; Owen, Andrew; University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies, Accessibility Observatory
These data were created as part of a study that examined the accessibility to jobs by walking in the 53 largest (by population) metropolitan areas in the United States. It is the most detailed evaluation to date of access to jobs by walking, and it allows for a direct comparison of the walking accessibility performance of America's largest metropolitan areas.
Access Across America: Walking 2014
(Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, 2015-05) Owen, Andrew; Levinson, David; Murphy, Brendan
Accessibility is the ease of reaching valued destinations. It can be measured for various transportation modes, to different types of destinations, and at different times of day. There are a variety of ways to define accessibility, but the number of destinations reachable within a given travel time is the most comprehensible and transparent, as well as the most directly comparable across cities. This study estimates the accessibility to jobs by walking in the 50 largest (by population) metropolitan areas in the United States, and is a companion study to our Access Across America: Transit 2014 report. Rankings are determined by a weighted average of accessibility, giving a higher weight to closer jobs. Jobs reachable within ten minutes are weighted most heavily, and jobs are given decreasing weights as travel time increases up to 60 minutes. This report presents detailed accessibility values for each metropolitan area, as well as block-level maps which illustrate the spatial patterns of accessibility within each area. A separate publication, Access Across America: Walking 2014 Methodology, describes the data and methodology used in this evaluation: http://dx.doi.org/10.13020/D6D598
Accessibility Analysis of Risk Severity
(2015) Cui, Mengying; Levinson, David, M
Risk severity in transportation network analysis is defined as the effects of a link or network failure on the whole system. Change accessibility (reduction in the number of jobs which can be reached) is used as an integrated indicator to reflect the severity of a link outage. The changes of accessibility before-and-after the removing of a freeway segment from the network represent its risk severity. The analysis in the Minneapolis - St. Paul (Twin Cities) region show that links near downtown Minneapolis have relative higher risk severity than those in rural area. The geographical distribution of links with the highest risk severity displays the property that these links tend to be near or at the intersection of freeways. Risk severity of these links based on the accessibility to jobs and to workers at different time thresholds and during different dayparts are also analyzed in the paper. The research finds that network structure measures: betweenness, straightness and closeness, help explain the severity of loss due to network outage.
Accessibility and Centrality Based Estimation of Urban Pedestrian Activity
(2015) Murphy, Brendan; Levinson, David, M; Owen, Andrew
Non-motorized transportation, particularly including walking and bicycling, are increasingly becoming important modes in modern cities, for reasons including individual and societal wellness, avoiding negative environmental impacts of other modes, and resource availability. Institutions governing development and management of urban areas are increasingly keen to include walking and bicycling in urban planning and engineering; however, proper placement of improvements and treatments depends on the availability of good usage data. This study attempts to predict pedestrian activity at 1123 intersections in the Midwestern, US city of Minneapolis, Minnesota, using scalable and transferable predictive variables such as economic accessibility by sector, betweenness network centrality, and automobile traffic levels. Accessibility to jobs by walking and transit, automobile traffic, and accessibility to certain economic job categories (Education, Finance) were found to be significant predictors of increased pedestrian traffic, while accessibility to other economic job categories (Management, Utilities) were found to be significant predictors of decreased pedestrian traffic. Betweenness centrality was not found to be a significant predictor of pedestrian traffic, however the specific calculation methodology can be further tailored to reflect real-world pedestrian use-cases in urban areas. Accessibility-based analysis may provide city planners and engineers with an additional tool to predict pedestrian and bicycle traffic where counts may be difficult to obtain, or otherwise unavailable.
Accessibility and the choice of network investments in the London Underground
(University of Minnesota, 2016) Levinson, David M; Giacomin, David J; Badsey-Ellis, Anthony
In 1863, the Metropolitan Railway of what came to be known as the London Underground successfully opened as the world’s first subway. Its high ridership spawned interest in additional links. Entrepreneurs secured funding and then proposed new lines to Parliament for approval, though only a portion were actually approved. While putative rail barons may have conducted some economic analysis, the final decision lay with Parliament, which did not have available modern transportation economic or geographic analysis tools. How good were the decisions that Parliament made in approving Underground Lines? This paper explores the role accessibility played on the decision to approve or reject proposed early London Tube Schemes. It finds that maximizing accessibility to population (highly correlated with revenue and ridership) largely explains Parliamentary approvals and rejections.
Accessibility and the Evaluation of Investments on the Beijing Subway
(University of Minnesota, 2016) Jiang, Haibing; Levinson, David M
This study measures the job and population accessibility via transit for Beijing using the cumulative opportunity metric. It is shown that transit accessibility varies widely across Beijing, but is highly focused on subway stations. Early lines added far more accessibility than more recently planned lines.
Accessibility and the Journey to Work
(Pergamon, 1998) Levinson, David M
This study analyzes the effect of accessibility to jobs and houses at both the home and work ends of trips on commuting duration for respondents to a household travel survey in metropolitan Washington, DC. A model is constructed to estimate the effects of demographics and relative location on the journey to work. Analysis finds that residences in job-rich areas and workplaces in housing-rich areas are associated with shorter commutes. An implication of this study is that, by balancing accessibility, the suburbanization of jobs maintains stability in commuting durations despite rising congestion, increasing trip lengths, and increased work and non-work trip making.
Accessibility and the Ring of Unreliability
(2016) Cui, Mengying; Levinson, David, M
This study measures the variability of job accessibility via automobile for the Minneapolis-St. Paul region. The accessibility analysis uses cumulative opportunity measures. The travel times on the network are tested at various level (10th percentile speed, 50th percentile speed, 90th percentile speed) using the TomTom speed data for 2010. It is shown that accessibility varies widely day-to-day as travel speeds on the network vary. Some parts of the region (a ring around the core) have more volatility in accessibility (and are thus less reliable) than others.
Accessibility and Transit Performance
(2015) Ermagun, Alireza; Levinson, David, M
This study disentangles the impact of financial and physical dimensions of transit service operators on net transit accessibility for 46 of the 50 largest metropolitan areas in the United States. To investigate this interaction along with the production efficiency of transit agencies, two types of analysis are used: a set of linear and quadratic regressions and a data envelopment analysis. We find that vehicle revenue kilometers and operational expenses play a pivotal role in enhancing the accessibility to jobs by transit. The bivariate linear regression models indicate a 1% increase in operational expenses and vehicle revenue kilometers increase the number of jobs that can be reached within 30 minutes by 0.96 and 0.95%, respectively. The results of the quadratic functional form, also, show transit services may have both increasing and decreasing accessibility returns to scale depending on system size, and the results are sensitive to the model used. Overall, the highest system efficiency (access produced per input) is found in the New York, Washington, and Milwaukee metropolitan areas, while Riverside, Detroit, and Austin perform with the lowest efficiency.