KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Journal of Innovative Transportation / 2026 / Volume: 5 Issue: 1

Investigation of the road network structure around rail transit stations

Oruç Altıntaşı(İzmir Katip Çelebi Üniversitesi)0000-0002-4217-1890
Alper Kundakci(İZMİR KATİP ÇELEBİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0002-7009-958X
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2024-07-31
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

In contrast, stations such as Ataşehir and Mavişehir, where intersection densities were lower, demonstrated significant connectivity challenges, underscoring the necessity for targeted urban planning interventions.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study examined the connectivity of road networks around rail transit stations in İzmir, Türkiye, using intersection density and connected node ratio metrics.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The analysis was conducted within 800 m, 600 m, and 400 m catchment areas around these stations, which were considered reasonable walking distances.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:In contrast, stations such as Ataşehir and Mavişehir, where intersection densities were lower, demonstrated significant connectivity challenges, underscoring the necessity for targeted urban planning interventions.
🔬Tür:Research Article
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:intersection density · rail transit · road network connectivity

Abstract

This study examined the connectivity of road networks around rail transit stations in İzmir, Türkiye, using intersection density and connected node ratio metrics. The analysis was conducted within 800 m, 600 m, and 400 m catchment areas around these stations, which were considered reasonable walking distances. Rail transit stations and road networks were digitized using ArcGIS Pro software. The research identified variations in connectivity scores among different stations and buffer zones. Stations in high-density areas like Konak and those near the ferry port showed higher connectivity scores, indicating well-integrated street networks that support multimodal transportation. In contrast, stations such as Ataşehir and Mavişehir, where intersection densities were lower, demonstrated significant connectivity challenges, underscoring the necessity for targeted urban planning interventions.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Altıntaşı, O., Kundakci, A. (2024). Investigation of the road network structure around rail transit stations. Journal of Innovative Transportation, Volume: 5 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.53635/jit.1501395

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (22)

  1. Yang, H., & Liang, Y. (2023). Examining the Connectivity between Urban Rail Transport and Regular Bus Transport. Sustainability, 15(9), 7644. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097644
  2. Çapalı, B., & Ceylan, H. (2020). Effect of walking and waiting times on travel time. Journal of Innovative Transportation, 1(2), 1202.
  3. Terzi, S., & Erten, K. M. (2020). The effect of big data analysis for sustainable transportation. Journal of Innovative Transportation, 1(1), 1102.
  4. May, A. D. (2015). Encouraging good practice in the development of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans. Case studies on transport policy, 3(1), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2014.09.001
  5. Yue, Y., Wang, W., Chen, J., & Du, Z. (2021). Evaluating the capacity coordination in the urban multimodal transport network. Applied Sciences, 11(17), 8109. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11178109
  6. Friedrich, M. (2016). Evaluating the service quality in multi-modal transport networks. Transportation Research Procedia, 15, 100-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.06.009
  7. Song, J., Abuduwayiti, A., & Gou, Z. (2023). The role of subway network in urban spatial structure optimization–Wuhan city as an example. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 131, 104842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2022.104842
  8. Guo, Y., Yang, L., Lu, Y., & Zhao, R. (2021). Dockless bike-sharing as a feeder mode of metro commute? The role of the feeder-related built environment: Analytical framework and empirical evidence. Sustainable Cities and Society, 65, 102594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102594
  9. Wu, X., Lu, Y., Gong, Y., Kang, Y., Yang, L., & Gou, Z. (2021). The impacts of the built environment on bicycle-metro transfer trips: A new method to delineate metro catchment area based on people's actual cycling space. Journal of transport geography, 97, 103215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.103215
  10. Li, S., Yang, H., Zhang, G., Ling, Z., Xiong, Y., & Li, Y. (2019, July). What is the best catchment area of a metro station? A study based on station level ridership modeling. In 2019 5th International Conference on Transportation Information and Safety (ICTIS) (pp. 1239-1244). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTIS.2019.8883789
  11. El-Geneidy, A., Grimsrud, M., Wasfi, R., Tétreault, P., & Surprenant-Legault, J. (2014). New evidence on walking distances to transit stops: Identifying redundancies and gaps using variable service areas. Transportation, 41, 193-210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-013-9508-z
  12. O'Sullivan, S., & Morrall, J. (1996). Walking distances to and from light-rail transit stations. Transportation Research Record, 1538(1), 19-26.
  13. Kim, T., Sohn, D. W., & Choo, S. (2017). An analysis of the relationship between pedestrian traffic volumes and built environment around metro stations in Seoul. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 21, 1443-1452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-016-0915-5
  14. Pekdemir, M. I., Altintasi, O., & Ozen, M. (2024). Assessing the Impact of Public Transportation, Bicycle Infrastructure, and Land Use Parameters on a Small-Scale Bike-Sharing System: A Case Study of Izmir, Türkiye. Sustainable Cities and Society, 101, 105085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.105085
  15. Maas, S., Attard, M., & Caruana, M. A. (2020). Assessing spatial and social dimensions of shared bicycle use in a Southern European island context: The case of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 140, 81-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.08.003
  16. Wu, Y., Li, W., Yu, Q., & Li, J. (2022). Analysis of the Relationship between Dockless Bicycle‐Sharing and the Metro: Connection, Competition, and Complementation. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2022(1), 5664004. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5664004
  17. Tresidder, M. (2005). Using GIS to measure connectivity: An exploration of issues. Portland State University: Field Area Paper, 1-43.
  18. Zacharias, J., & Zhao, Q. (2018). Local environmental factors in walking distance at metro stations. Public Transport, 10, 91-106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-017-0174-y
  19. Gan, Z., Yang, M., Feng, T., & Timmermans, H. J. (2020). Examining the relationship between built environment and metro ridership at station-to-station level. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 82, 102332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102332
  20. Sun, G., Zacharias, J., Ma, B., & Oreskovic, N. M. (2016). How do metro stations integrate with walking environments? Results from walking access within three types of built environment in Beijing. Cities, 56, 91-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.03.001
  21. Zhao, J., Deng, W., Song, Y., & Zhu, Y. (2013). What influences Metro station ridership in China? Insights from Nanjing. Cities, 35, 114-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.07.002
  22. Dill, J. (2004). Measuring network connectivity for bicycling and walking. In 83rd annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (pp. 11-15).