Evaluation of Residents Accessibility to Activity Centers in Richmond

Yue Shan Dec 13, 2013

Abstract
Activity center has been the key component of the planning of many cities, such as Cincinnati, Melbourne and so on. Activity center could provide a stable investment environment and improved synergies between private and public investment, reduce car dependency, make neighborhoods more livable, but more importantly activity center could offer access for all to jobs, goods and services which can affect poverty and unemployment. This study uses GIS as tool to understand the condition of Richmond and get the evaluation of accessibility of people who living in poverty or without vehicles to activity centers in Richmond. And find out if they can get access to center of activity on foot, by bike, or on public transportation. If not, do spatial analysis to make some strategies in order to improve the accessibility.

Background
Nowadays, much of urban poverty is not because of distance from infrastructure and services but from exclusion (Garau P, Sclar ED,2004). They are excluded from the attributes of urban life good education, health services, decent transport, adequate incomes, access to goods and services. The key to achieving poverty reduction is to address the important problem of unemployment. Increasing employment among residents will reduce the poverty rate of both adults and children in the city. Activity centers make it easier for people to gain access to a wider range of goods and services, employment opportunities. Therefore, the accessibility to activity center is critical for poor people and the evaluation of accessibility became more important. With its median household one of the highest, Commonwealth of Virginia is one of the richest states in America. However, in Richmond, as capital of Virginia, more than 26% of all people are living in poverty as 1 in 4 families. Childhood poverty is the highest in the state out of another other metropolitan city exceeding over 35%. In addition, more than 40% of children under the age of 5 live in poverty in Richmond.

In fact, many low-income residents (including 18.1% of all households in the city) do not have a car. These residents rely on mass transit options to reach jobs which are not within walking distance. In addition, 42.1% of households in the city have only one car (including 27.1% of households with two or more adults), making it unlikely that a second adult or young person living in the house will have access to jobs not served by public transportation. However, Richmond is in the bottom of large metro areas in transit accessibility. It was studied In 2010 that just 30.8% of working-age Richmond metropolitan residents lived in a neighborhood within three-quarters of a mile of mass transit stop; by this measure of transit coverage, the Richmond region ranks 95th out of the nations top 100 metropolitan areas. Just 26.5% of jobs metropolitan-wide are accessible to residents living in transit-served neighborhoods, giving Richmond a ranking of 67th out of the top 100 metropolitan areas. (Alan Berube.etc, 2011) Therefore, it is meaningful to study to residents accessibility to activity center in Richmond.

Data Source
GIS Data 1. Shapefile of Census Tract 2013 from U.S Census Bureau
http://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-line.html

2. Shapefile of Neighborhoods from UVA Library Geoportal http://gis.lib.virginia.edu/ 3. Shapefile of James River from UVA Library Geoportal http://gis.lib.virginia.edu/ 4. Shapefile of Bus Stops and Bus Routes in Richmond from GRTC(Greater Richmond Transit Company) Other Data 1. Demographic Data of Percentage of Poverty from file 2012 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates http://factfinder2.census.gov/ 2. Demographic Data of Percentage of Households without vehicle from file 2012 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates http://factfinder2.census.gov/ 3. Address of Activities form websites

Analysis
1. Organize and Process Data (1) Map of Richmond Get a new layer of Richmond by census tract through selecting by attribute where countyfp = 760 from the map Virginia by census tract. (2) Join Data and Geocoding Join data Percentage of poverty and Percentage of household without vehicle by census tract into the map Richmond by census tract. Geocoding the address of activities and get the point shapefile Activities. (3) Projection Use the tool Project ( Data Management Tools> Projection and Transformation> Feature) to convert all feature class datas projection coordinate system into NAD_1983_StatePlane_Virginia_South_FIPS_4502_Feet 2. Raster Analysis In order to find out if people living in poverty or without vehicle can access centers of activity on foot or on public transportation, we should take following criteria into consideration: where there is high percentage of population living in poverty, appropriate walking distance to bus stop and where there is high concentration of activities. I created 3 raster surfaces, each representing a suitability criterion for an analysis study. They are Percentage of Poverty, Distance to nearest stop and Density of Activities. The corresponding tools used are Polygon to Raster, Euclidean Distance and Point Density. Then reclassify cell values into scores. The Table 1 shows the range of cell values and its corresponding score. There is problem that I cannot reclassify density of activities from 9 classes in 7 classes. Finally, combine the raster surface to create a final surface and get the Map Evaluation of Accessibility to Activity Center. And the figure 1 shows the procession of raster analysis. The area having lower score means the people living the area have more difficulties to access to center of activity.

Table 1
Percentage of Poverty Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Scale (%) 53.1 - 70.7 37.8 - 53.1 26.6 - 37.8 22.1 - 26.6 16.0 - 22.1 6.6 -16.0 2.6 - 6.6

Distance to Bus Stop Score 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Scale (feet) No Data 2125.1 - 2630 1660.9 - 2125.1 1227.6 1660.9 815.0 - 1227.6 443.6 - 815.0 134.1 443.6 0 134.1

Density of Activity Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Scale 0 - 4.26 4.26 - 10.96 10.96 - 19.79 19.79 - 28.62 28.62 - 39.89 29.89 - 50.85 50.85 - 59.68 59.68 - 66.38 66.38 - 77.65

Figure 1

Map1 3. Raster to Vector In order to get clear view of activity center and area need to be improved. I reclassify the raster surface again into 3 parts. The range of each part is from 3 to 6, from 7 to 16 and from 17 to 20. And in order to do further spatial analysis, I transform the raster surface into polygon. Then use select by attribute to get polygon of area Activity Centers and Area to be improved Moreover, use select by attribute to get polygon of area which need to be focused in Richmond where have high percentage of poverty or high percentage of households without vehicle. Then use clip to reduce the range of Area to be improved under the range of area which need to be focused. The following figure 2 shows the procession. In order to do spatial analysis and erase the area overlaid by river, use the tool erase, interest, clip, merge and use editor to edit polygon to get 9 parcel in the Area to be improved and name each parcel from 1 to 9. You can get them clearly in the Map Area need to be improved.

Figure 2

Map 2

4. Spatial Analysis After knowing the area which needs to be improved, it is time to think about strategy: 1) Making some existing centers more walkable 2) Link centers of activity with effective transportation 3) Create new centers of activity where appropriate. 4) I use the calculator geometry to get the area of each parcel and use tool near to get the distance between each parcel and each kind of activity in the table 2. Table 2
ID Area Activity (1000 Center Square) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 981 4483 2415 479 3187 7678 7031 36826 25917 1213 1493 1973 1213 2938 1123 1783 1111 6961 2633 2101 1255 1983 4804 1486 1453 2783 4271 1556 848 7737 3587 4393 17479 10781 2996 12926 1915 762 304 2460 686 4337 883 0 1060 3188 3550 2623 3062 1852 2655 2182 2310 2855 4338 3629 304 2460 3508 6092 2842 981 2011 1978 1296 374 1831 2728 1073 1872 952 944 1328 1362 963 846 1691 1330 1344 1265 1483 Service Center Food and Recreation Sports Schools Center Community Church Stop Bus

Unit: Feet

According to the table 2, we can improve parcel 1, 2, 4 and 6s access to activity center by transforming some existing centers more walkable. In addition, we also must invest in our existing infrastructure and locate new commercial and civic activities which the 4 parcels need into our existing centers. Meanwhile, change the setting public transportation by building more bus stops or changing bus routes across the unserved area. Currently, there are large under-served areas on the south-east of the City (Parcel 9 and Parcel 10). In those areas, new centers of activity should be created. And creating new actvity only in locations where there is a residential population with needs that are not met. New centers should be located by identifying areas where some services are already clustered. In such way, we can ensure that people who live in poverty and without vehicle can access our centers of activity on foot, by bike, or on public transportation.

Strategy for Richmond

The following is Map Strategy for Richmond about strategies to help residential populations living in unserved area: 1) Invest in 4 existing activity centers in orange, which are near parcel 1, 2, 4 and 6. Not only extend their range of influence, but also make streets around or in them more walkable in range of 2000 feet. 2) Build new activity centers even activity corridor in blue with compact walkable community character along the bus route in the parcel 8 and parcel 9 where some activity are presently in the work. Moreover, the new center will not harm or weaken an existing center. Build any kind activity except sports. 3) Change the setting public transportation around the 4 area in purple. Change the bus routes around parcel 7 and parcel 2 and make them across or along the parcels. Extend bus routes and build more bus stops around parcel 5 and 3.

Reference:
1. Alan Berube, Elizabeth Kneebone, Robert Puentes and Adie Tomer, Missed Opportunity: Transit and Jobs in Metropolitan America. 2011 2. Garau P, Sclar ED. Interim Report of the Millennium Development Goal Task Force 8 on Improving the Lives of Slum Dwellers . 2004 3. Melbourne 2030 http://www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/planning/plansandpolicies/planningformelbourne/planninghistory/melb ourne2030 4. Plan Cincinnati http://www.plancincinnati.org/ 5. Region Forward http://www.regionforward.org