Getting Charlie off the MTA: a multiobjective optimization method to account for cost constraints in public transit accessibility metrics

References

• Anderson, P., Levinson, D., and Parthasarathi, P., 2013. Accessibility futures. Transactions in GIS, 75(2), 683–705. doi:10.1111/tgis.12024
   Google Scholar
• Antsfeld, L. and Walsh, T., 2012. Finding multi-criteria optimal paths in multi-modal public transportation networks using the transit algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 19th ITS World Congress, Vienna. Available from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8158/276fdc49b27293187e54fc7a835e7e62abee.pdf [Accessed 21 Sept 2018].
   Google Scholar
• Benenson, I., et al., 2016. The benefits of a high-resolution analysis of transit accessibility. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 31 (2), 213–236. doi:10.1080/13658816.2016.1191637.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertaud, A., 2018. Order without design: how markets shape cities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boarnet, M.G., et al. 2017. First/last mile transit access as an equity planning issue. Transportation Research Part A, 103, 296–310.
   Google Scholar
• Börjesson, M., and Eliasson, J., 2019. Should values of time be differentiated? Transport Reviews, 39(3), 357–375.
   Google Scholar
• Carvalho, E.C., 2017. H.2623: an act establishing a rapid transportation pilot for the Fairmount corridor. Available from: https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H2723 [Accessed 12 March 2019].
   Google Scholar
• Conway, M.W., Byrd, A., and van der Linden, M., 2017. Evidence-based transit and land use sketch planning using interactive accessibility methods on combined schedule and headway-based networks. Transportation Research Record, 2653, 45–53. doi:10.3141/2653-06
   Google Scholar
• Conway, M.W., Byrd, A., and van Eggermond, M., 2018. Accounting for uncertainty and variation in accessibility metrics for public transport sketch planning. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 11 (1), 541–558. doi:10.5198/jtlu.2018.1074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cui, M. and Levinson, D., 2018. Full cost accessibility. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 11 (1), 661–679. Available from: https://www.jtlu.org/index.php/jtlu/article/view/1042.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delling, D., Pajor, T., and Werneck, R.F., 2015. Round-based public transit routing. Transportation Science, 49 (3), 591–604. doi:10.1287/trsc.2014.0534
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dreier, P. and Vrabel, J., 2010. Did he ever return?: the forgotten story of Charlie and the M.T.A. American Music, 28 (1), 3–42. doi:10.5406/americanmusic.28.1.0003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El-Geneidy, A., et al. 2016. The cost of equity: assessing transit accessibility and social disparity using total travel cost. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 91, 302–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enchautegui, M.E., 2013. Nonstandard work schedules and the well-being of low-income families. Washington, DC. Available from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.375.8404 [Accessed 31 July 2018].
   Google Scholar
• Federal Transit Administration. 2012. FTA circular 4702.1B: title 6 requirements and guidelines for Federal Transit Administration recipients [online]. Available from: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/FTA_Title_VI_FINAL.pdf [Accessed 25 July 2018].
   Google Scholar
• Foth, N., Manaugh, K., and El-Geneidy, A.M., 2013. Towards equitable transit: examining transit accessibility and social need in Toronto, Canada, 1996-2006. Journal of Transport Geography, 29 (C), 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.12.008
   Google Scholar
• Geurs, K.T. and van Wee, B., 2004. Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. Journal of Transport Geography, 12 (2), 127–140. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2003.10.005
   Google Scholar
• Goodman, J.D., 2018. Leaders poised to provide discounted MetroCards to low-income New Yorkers. The New York Times. Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/07/nyregion/nyc-subway-metrocard-fair-fares-subsidize.html.
   Google Scholar
• Grengs, J., 2012. Equity and the social distribution of job accessibility in Detroit. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 39 (5), 785–800. Available from: http://epb.sagepub.com/lookup/doi/10.1068/b36097.
   Google Scholar
• Guo, Z. and Wilson, N.H.M., 2011. Assessing the cost of transfer inconvenience in public transport systems: A case study of the. London Underground. Transportation Research Part A, 45 (2), 91–104. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2010.11.002.
   Google Scholar
• Hess, S., et al., 2017. A framework for capturing heterogeneity, heteroskedasticity, non-linearity, reference dependence and design artefacts in value of time research. Transportation Research Part B, 96, 126–149. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2016.11.002
   Google Scholar
• Karner, A., 2018. Assessing public transit service equity using route-level accessibility measures and public data. Journal of Transport Geography, 67, 24–32. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kujala, R., et al., 2018. Travel times and transfers in public transport: comprehensive accessibility analysis based on Pareto-optimal journeys. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 67 (C), 41–54. doi:10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2017.08.012.
   Google Scholar
• Lo, H.K., Yip, C.W., and Wan, K.H., 2003. Modeling transfer and non-linear fare structure in multi-modal network. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 37 (2), 149–170. doi:10.1016/S0191-2615(02)00005-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahmoudi, M., et al., 2019. Accessibility with time and resource constraints: computing hyper-prisms for sustainable transportation planning. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 73, 171–183. Available from: doi:10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2018.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manaugh, K. and El-Geneidy, A.M., 2012. Who benefits from new transportation infrastructure? Using accessibility measures to evaluate social equity in public transport provision. In: K. Geurs, K. Krizek, and A. Reggiani, eds. Accessibility and transport planning challenges for Europe and North America. London:Edward Elgar Publishing, 211–227. Available from: http://tram.mcgill.ca/Research/Publications/Transit_plan_equity.pdf [Accessed 31 July 2018].
   Google Scholar
• Martens, K., 2017. Transport justice. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Martens, K. and Golub, A., 2018. A fair distribution of accessibility: interpreting civil rights regulations for regional transportation plans. Journal of Planning Education and Research. doi:10.1177/0739456X18791014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, n.d. a. Automated fare collection 2.0. Available from: http://web.archive.org/web/20180801213143/https://www.mbta.com/projects/automated-fare-collection-20-afc-20 [Accessed 1 Aug 2018].
   Google Scholar
• Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, n.d. b. Fares. Available from: http://web.archive.org/web/20180802013933/https://mbta.com/fares [Accessed1 Aug 2018].
   Google Scholar
• Miller, E.J., 2018. Accessibility: measurement and application in transportation planning. Transport Reviews, 38 (5), 551–555. doi:10.1080/01441647.2018.1492778
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, H.J., 1991. Modelling accessibility using space-time prism concepts within geographical information systems. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 5 (3), 287–301. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02693799108927856
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller-Hannemann, M., et al. 2007. Timetable information: models and algorithms. In: Algorithmic methods for railway optimization, Geraets, F., Kroon, L., Schoebel, A., Wagner, D., Zaroliagiis, C., eds., Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 67–90.
   Google Scholar
• O’Sullivan, D., Morrison, A., and Shearer, J., 2000. Using desktop GIS for the investigation of accessibility by public transport: an isochrone approach. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 14 (1), 85–104. doi:10.1080/136588100240976
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen, A. and Jiang, H., 2015. Temporal sampling intervals and service frequency harmonics in transit accessibility evaluation. Unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Pereira, R.H.M., Schwanen, T., and Banister, D., 2017. Distributive justice and equity in transportation. Transport Reviews, 37 (2), 170–191. doi:10.1080/01441647.2016.1257660
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pucher, J. and Renne, J.L., 2003. Socioeconomics of urban travel: evidence from the 2001 NHTS. Transportation Quarterly, 57 (3), 49–77.
   Google Scholar
• Rodriguez, C., et al., 2017. Accessibility, affordability, and addressing informal services in bus reform. Transportation Research Record, 2634, 35–42. doi:10.3141/2634-06
   Google Scholar
• San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, n.d. Fare calculator. Available from: http://www.bart.gov/tickets/calculator.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, A.F., 2017. Mapping transit accessibility: possibilities for public participation. Transportation Research Part A, 104, 150–166.
   Google Scholar
• Stuntz, A., Atanucci, J., and Salvucci, F.P., 2017. Process for transit fare structure and fare level analysis: case study at Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. In: Transportation research board annual meeting. Washington, DC, 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Vaccaro, A., 2018. City councilor wants lower prices on commuter rail in Boston neighborhoods. The Boston Globe. Available from: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/02/09/city-councilor-wants-lower-prices-commuter-rail-boston-neighborhoods/Z5LUfD7vHbqzgtXFuu6CcL/story.html.
   Google Scholar
• Verbich, D. and El-Geneidy, A.M., 2017. Public transit fare structure and social vulnerability in Montreal, Canada. Transportation Research Part A, 96, 43–53.
   Google Scholar
• Xie, C. and Waller, S.T., 2012. Parametric search and problem decomposition for approximating Pareto-optimal paths. Transportation Research Part B, 46 (8), 1043–1067. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2012.03.005
   Google Scholar