West, East Or South, Which Railwaystation in Hudiksvall Is
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
West, East or South, which Railway Station in Hudiksvall is Preferable? A Predictive Study of Future Climate Scenarios from an Accessibility Perspective Sofia Moberg Master Thesis Spatial planning and development, Umeå university Spring 2021 Author: Sofia Moberg Contact: [email protected] Master thesis (30 ects) Program: Master in Spatial Planning and Development Department of Geography Umeå University Supervisor: Magnus Strömgren Abstract in English An expansion of the railway, East Coast Line is essential in order to ensure transportation of passenger and goods back and forth to Northern Sweden. The preliminary studies of the planned expansion to a double track have identified vulnerabilities linked to how our climate changes. Because of these risks and vulnerabilities, the railway station in Hudiksvall needs to be relocated or the Current station needs to be adapted to potential future climate scenarios. Furthermore, social sustainability and the aspect of accessibility is also a vital perspective to consider during the development of railway infrastructure. This study compares the three different station locations from an accessibility perspective and from different climate scenarios through Network Analyst in ArcGIS Pro. To visualize future climate scenarios, two RCP-scenarios (Representative Concentration Pathways) are considered, which is RCP 4.5 and RCP8.5. Additionally, the GTFS specification in ArcGIS Pro is used to model public transit to these railway stations in an accessibility perspective. Because one strategy when developing the East Coast Line is to increase the active transportation in comparison to car transportation. Results from this study indicates that the Current station, which is located in a coastal area will be worst affected of potential future climate scenarios from an accessibility perspective. Other findings are that vulnerable groups in the society, such as low-income earners and elderly will be most affected, if the railway station remains in the current location. The results from the performed Service area analysis and Location-allocation analysis advocates the Eastern station as a location for the new railway station. Keywords: accessibility, active transportation, RCP-scenarios, public transit, GTFS. Abstract in Swedish – Abstrakt på svenska En expansion av Ostkustbanan är viktigt för att kunna säkerställa transport av passagerare och gods till och från norra Sverige. Förstudierna av den planerade expansionen till ett dubbelspår har identifierat sårbarheter kopplat till hur vårt klimat förändras. Som en följd av dessa risker och sårbarheter behöver järnvägsstationen i Hudiksvall flyttas. Alternativt behöver den nuvarande klimatanpassas. Detta ställer krav på att ta hänsyn till den sociala hållbarheten och tillgängligheten för befolkningen i Hudiksvall. Denna studie ämnar att jämför de tre olika stationslägena ur ett tillgänglighetsperspektiv samt utifrån olika klimatscenarier i ArcGIS Pro. För att visualisera framtida klimatscenarier beaktas två RCP-scenarier, det vill säga representativa koncentrationsvägar, vilket är RCP4.5 och RCP8.5. Dessutom används GTFS- specifikationen i ArcGIS Pro för att modellera kollektivtrafik till dessa järnvägsstationer ur ett tillgänglighetsperspektiv, då ett mål med utvecklingen av Ostkustbanan är att utöka andelen av personer som väljer aktiv transport i jämförelse med biltransporter. Resultatet av denna studie visar att den nuvarande stationen, som är placerad i närheten av Hudiksvalls kust, kommer att vara hårdast drabbad av potentiella framtida klimatscenarier ur ett tillgänglighetsperspektiv. Vidare visar studien på att låginkomsttagare och äldre kommer att drabbas hårdast om järnvägsstationen ligger kvar på den nuvarande platsen. Resultatet från de utförda Service area analyserna och Location-allocation analyserna, visar att det östra alternativet är det alternativ som kommer att vara minst påverkad av ett framtida klimat från ett tillgänglighetsperspektiv. Nyckelord: tillgänglighet, aktiv transport, RCP-scenarier, kollektivtrafik, GTFS. Acknowledgements First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor at Umeå University, Magnus Strömgren, for helping me to develop my research and introducing me to the GTFS-specification in ArcGIS. Most of all, thanks for your patience when mine was non-existing. I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor at the Swedish Transport Administration, (STA), Katarina Lind, for enabling me to do this thesis in collaboration with the STA. Thank you for emphasizing the importance of my work and your faith in me when I need it the most. Also, to Isabelle Jonsson, thank you for the time you have spent introducing me to SCALGO Live and helping me to understand the different conditions of the RCP- scenarios. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank everyone in the Planning- department at STA for your warm welcome of me during these special times. A very big thank you to Hans Gyllow at Hudiksvall’s municipality and to Agneta Davidsson, project leader at STA, for your time going through the different conditions of the East Coast Line project. To my father-in-law, Roger Söderberg, M.A. in English linguistic, thank you for your time and effort you have spent on this thesis with your carefully reading of my texts. Additionally, I would like to thank my family and friends who have supported me through this journey. A personal thanks to my father, Hans Moberg, who has stopped asking finally what I am going to be when I grow up. At last, I would like to express my gratitude to my fiancé Pontus Söderberg, who always supports and pushes me to challenge myself. Without you I would probably not even have started my master studies. You are my greatest source of inspiration. Tabel of Content 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 10 1.1. Problem Formulation .................................................................................................................. 11 1.1.2. Aim ...................................................................................................................................... 13 2. Theoretical framework & Literature review ...................................................................................... 15 2.1. Theoretical Framework .............................................................................................................. 15 2.1.1. How can Accessibility & Active transportation be Achieved? ........................................... 15 2.1.2. Concepts of Planning for Climate Changes ......................................................................... 16 2.1.3. Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) .................................................................. 16 2.2. Literature review ........................................................................................................................ 18 2.2.1. Accessibility of Public Transit Systems .............................................................................. 18 2.2.2. Active Transportation & Accessibility ............................................................................... 20 2.2.3. Challenges with Implementation of Climate Adaptation .................................................... 21 2.2.4. Expected Events in a Future Climate .................................................................................. 23 3. Method .............................................................................................................................................. 25 3.1. GIS as a Quantitative Method .................................................................................................... 25 3.1.3. Why Network Analyst? ....................................................................................................... 27 3.2. Data sample & Methodological settings ..................................................................................... 28 3.2.1. Methodological Choices for the Network Analysis ............................................................ 28 3.2.2. Methodological Choices for the Climate Layers ................................................................. 30 3.2.3. Restrictions & Barriers in the Network ............................................................................... 30 3.2.4. Methodological Choices for the Service Area Analysis ...................................................... 31 3.2.5. Methodological Choices for Location-allocation Analysis ................................................. 32 3.3. Limitations.................................................................................................................................. 33 4. East Coast Line & Travel Patterns .................................................................................................... 34 4.1. Travel Patterns of Today ............................................................................................................ 34 4.2. Routes of the East Coast Line .................................................................................................... 37 5. Result ................................................................................................................................................. 38 5.1. How will the Accessibility be Affected Regarding Different Locations? .................................. 38 5.1.1. Catchment Area of Various Groups ...................................................................................