Plan4Better’s Post

🚦 𝗜𝗺𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀: 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗴𝗼 𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘆 𝗶𝗳 𝘄𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗮 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗽 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝟰,𝟵𝟱𝟲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆, 𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝟭,𝟰𝟰𝟭 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗶𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻 𝟱 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝘂𝘁𝗲𝘀. This is the difference between using simple 𝗕𝘂𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿 and the 𝗖𝗮𝘁𝗰𝗵𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗔𝗿𝗲𝗮 𝘁𝗼𝗼𝗹. You’ve probably seen simple Buffers—basic radius zones around a feature—used to explain accessibility. While quick and easy, they overlook real-world factors like roads, barriers, and travel modes. The result? A misleading picture of accessibility that can impact crucial planning decisions. ✅ 𝗖𝗮𝘁𝗰𝗵𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗔𝗿𝗲𝗮 𝘁𝗼𝗼𝗹: 𝗔 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗶𝗰𝗲 Catchment Areas use 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹-𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 to calculate actual accessibility based on travel time or distance, factoring in transport networks and modes. 📊 Using 𝗚𝗢𝗔𝗧, we compared a simple Buffer and a Catchment Area around a public transport stop in Munich for a 𝟱-𝗺𝗶𝗻𝘂𝘁𝗲 𝘄𝗮𝗹𝗸. The Buffer suggested 𝟰,𝟵𝟱𝟲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 could be reached, but the Catchment Area revealed the true number - 𝟭,𝟰𝟰𝟭. This highlights the importance of precision when making planning decisions. Even if Catchment Areas are more accurate here, Buffers can still be useful in other scenarios. 𝗪𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗵 𝘁𝗼𝗼𝗹 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗻𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁? #Accessibility #Planning #GOAT

  • No alternative text description for this image
  • No alternative text description for this image

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore topics