IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v25y2013icp41-51.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A GIS-based appraisal framework for new local railway stations and services

Author

Listed:
  • Blainey, Simon P.
  • Preston, John M.

Abstract

This paper describes the development of an integrated appraisal procedure for new local railway stations. The procedure is not intended to act as a ‘solid state’ set of guidelines, but instead to provide a framework containing current best practice, within which individual elements can be updated and enhanced as new evidence becomes available without affecting the rest of the methodology. The framework includes a number of different elements, which are brought together in an appraisal spreadsheet but which can be altered without affecting other sections of the procedure. First, the best locations for new stations within the study area are chosen, with potential sites selected, catchments defined, infrastructure capacity assessed and potential service patterns planned. Usage at the potential stations is predicted using trip end and flow level demand models, and the extent of abstraction from neighbouring stations is considered. The benefits and costs of constructing the stations are then estimated, including direct financial gains and losses as well as wider economic impacts and social costs and benefits. Finally, these are brought together to calculate financial and social net present values and benefit–cost ratios, with break-even demand levels for new stations also provided. The framework provides a consistent means of estimating the costs and benefits of the large number of schemes for new local railway stations in the UK, and use of a standardised methodology allows those schemes with the best case for construction to be prioritised. Since rail privatisation in the mid-1990s the costs of new stations have escalated dramatically, meaning that stations have to demonstrate much greater revenue-earning potential than was previously the case to justify construction. By providing more accurate forecasts and thus reducing uncertainty over scheme costs and benefits, this appraisal procedure can help to ensure that the best return is obtained on the limited investment funds which are available.

Suggested Citation

  • Blainey, Simon P. & Preston, John M., 2013. "A GIS-based appraisal framework for new local railway stations and services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 41-51.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:25:y:2013:i:c:p:41-51
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.11.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X12001722
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.11.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wardman, Mark & Lythgoe, William & Whelan, Gerard, 2007. "Rail Passenger Demand Forecasting: Cross-Sectional Models Revisited," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 119-152, January.
    2. Debrezion, Ghebreegziabiher & Pels, Eric & Rietveld, Piet, 2009. "Modelling the joint access mode and railway station choice," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 270-283, January.
    3. Brons, Martijn & Givoni, Moshe & Rietveld, Piet, 2009. "Access to railway stations and its potential in increasing rail use," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 136-149, February.
    4. Blainey, Simon, 2010. "Trip end models of local rail demand in England and Wales," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 153-165.
    5. Mark Horner & Tony Grubesic, 2001. "A GIS-based planning approach to locating urban rail terminals," Transportation, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 55-77, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Givoni, Moshe & Rietveld, Piet, 2014. "Do cities deserve more railway stations? The choice of a departure railway station in a multiple-station region," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 89-97.
    2. Simon P. Blainey & John Armstrong & Andrew S. J. Smith & John M. Preston, 2016. "New routes on old railways: increasing rail’s mode share within the constraints of the existing railway network," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 425-442, May.
    3. Yadi Zhu & Feng Chen & Zijia Wang & Jin Deng, 2019. "Spatio-temporal analysis of rail station ridership determinants in the built environment," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2269-2289, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Givoni, Moshe & Rietveld, Piet, 2014. "Do cities deserve more railway stations? The choice of a departure railway station in a multiple-station region," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 89-97.
    2. Weliwitiya, Hesara & Rose, Geoffrey & Johnson, Marilyn, 2019. "Bicycle train intermodality: Effects of demography, station characteristics and the built environment," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 395-404.
    3. Yu Shen & Jinhua Zhao, 2017. "Capacity constrained accessibility of high-speed rail," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 395-422, March.
    4. Saiyad, Gulnazbanu & Srivastava, Minal & Rathwa, Dipak, 2022. "Exploring determinants of feeder mode choice behavior using Artificial Neural Network: Evidences from Delhi metro," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 598(C).
    5. Simon P. Blainey & John Armstrong & Andrew S. J. Smith & John M. Preston, 2016. "New routes on old railways: increasing rail’s mode share within the constraints of the existing railway network," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 425-442, May.
    6. Kager, R. & Bertolini, L. & Te Brömmelstroet, M., 2016. "Characterisation of and reflections on the synergy of bicycles and public transport," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 208-219.
    7. Joeri F. P. Mil & Tessa S. Leferink & Jan Anne Annema & Niels Oort, 2021. "Insights into factors affecting the combined bicycle-transit mode," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 649-673, October.
    8. Pucher, John & Buehler, Ralph & Seinen, Mark, 2011. "Bicycling renaissance in North America? An update and re-appraisal of cycling trends and policies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 451-475, July.
    9. Lahoorpoor, Bahman & Levinson, David M., 2020. "Catchment if you can: The effect of station entrance and exit locations on accessibility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    10. Lindsey, Marshall & Schofer, Joseph L. & Durango-Cohen, Pablo & Gray, Kimberly A., 2010. "Relationship between proximity to transit and ridership for journey-to-work trips in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 697-709, November.
    11. Roberto Sañudo & Eneko Echaniz & Borja Alonso & Rubén Cordera, 2019. "Addressing the Importance of Service Attributes in Railways," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, June.
    12. Ying Ni & Jiaqi Chen, 2020. "Exploring the Effects of the Built Environment on Two Transfer Modes for Metros: Dockless Bike Sharing and Taxis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, March.
    13. Ingvardson, Jesper Bláfoss & Nielsen, Otto Anker, 2018. "How urban density, network topology and socio-economy influence public transport ridership: Empirical evidence from 48 European metropolitan areas," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 50-63.
    14. Hasnine, Md Sami & Graovac, Ana & Camargo, Felipe & Habib, Khandker Nurul, 2019. "A random utility maximization (RUM) based measure of accessibility to transit: Accurate capturing of the first-mile issue in urban transit," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 313-320.
    15. Vale, David S. & Viana, Cláudia M. & Pereira, Mauro, 2018. "The extended node-place model at the local scale: Evaluating the integration of land use and transport for Lisbon's subway network," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 282-293.
    16. Samanta, Sutapa & Jha, Manoj K., 2011. "Modeling a rail transit alignment considering different objectives," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 31-45, January.
    17. Nocera, Silvio & Pungillo, Giuseppe & Bruzzone, Francesco, 2021. "How to evaluate and plan the freight-passengers first-last mile," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 56-66.
    18. Cheng, Long & Shi, Kunbo & De Vos, Jonas & Cao, Mengqiu & Witlox, Frank, 2021. "Examining the spatially heterogeneous effects of the built environment on walking among older adults," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 21-30.
    19. Duncan, Michael & Christensen, Robert K., 2013. "An analysis of park-and-ride provision at light rail stations across the US," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 148-157.
    20. Mulley, Corinne & Tsai, Chi-Hong (Patrick) & Ma, Liang, 2018. "Does residential property price benefit from light rail in Sydney?," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 3-10.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:25:y:2013:i:c:p:41-51. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.