University of Twente Student Theses


Applying the concept of mobility hubs in he context of the Achtersluispolder

Mouw, A.V. (2020) Applying the concept of mobility hubs in he context of the Achtersluispolder.

[img] PDF
Abstract:To reduce the negative environmental, spatial and societal impacts of private car ownership, a shift from private ownership towards shared mobility is needed. One of the means to accomplish this is the concept of mobility hubs. A mobility hub offers various shared modes of transport at the same location, such that users can easily use and switch between modes that best suits their mobility needs. This study focuses on offering recommendations on how to apply mobility hubs in the context of the Achtersluispolder. This neighbourhood is an area within the municipality of Zaanstad and will transform in the coming decades from an industrial district into a mixed residential and working area. In order to offer recommendations, first the characteristics of hubs and its users were examined. When considering the location and number of hubs, it appeared from literature review and interviews that there is not a single manifestation of hubs, as a result hubs can be large and small, there can be a large or small number of hubs and they can be located above-ground or underground. Looking at the user characteristics, it became clear that the most influential aspects are being younger, living in a high density area, having a higher education level and a lower car dependence. Lastly, the criteria that are most decisively for a successful hub usage are: ease of use, distance to the hub and vehicle costs. To develop scenarios for hubs in the Achtersluispolder, three frameworks based on the Technology Acceptance Model in combination with the key design element distance to the hub were developed. First, when users experience more effort to reach a hub compared to reaching their private car, shared mobility is an additional service. Since the goal of the municipality is to decrease the use of private cars in the Achtersluispolder, this option was not used in one of the three scenarios. Second, if the same amount of effort is experienced in order to reach a hub compared to a privately owned car, shared mobility becomes an interesting option. Last, when users experience more effort to reach their private car compared to reaching a hub, mobility hubs have the greatest chance to replace the private car. These concepts were used to develop three scenarios for mobility hubs in the Achtersluispolder. The first scenario focuses on offering all modes of transport, both private and shared, within a distance of 150 meters. This results in 35 small hubs, spread across the area. The second scenario focuses on offering shared mobility closer to the users than privately owned cars, such that shared mobility is actively stimulated. This results in 5 big parking garages and 13 smaller mobility hubs. The last scenario highly focuses on sustainable transport and car-free streets, which means there is an emphasis on walking, cycling and public transport. This results in 9 bigger hubs with both private and shared cars and 20 smaller hubs that offer shared light electric vehicles. To encourage the use of mobility hubs and to discourage private cars, several boundary conditions – which are again linked to the Technology Acceptance Model – have to be met. One of the most important boundary conditions is a low parking standard: when lowering the parking standard, the effort of owning a private car increases, while the effort of using shared mobility remains the same. Another important boundary condition is paid parking, to increase the attractiveness of shared mobility. Lastly, residents should be able to use the mobility hubs from the moment they settle in the area, because otherwise habitual travel behaviour without mobility hubs will be formed. It is essential that these boundary conditions are fulfilled, such that the greatest chance of success is ensured. To assess the three scenarios, a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) with weighting has been performed. To determine the importance of the different criteria, the interviewed experts and experts of Arcadis divided 100 points among criteria they see as important. This resulted in the following ranking from high to low: ease of use, distance to the hub, vehicle costs, availability of the vehicles, state & (social) safety of the hub, visibility of the hub and diversity of the vehicles.
Item Type:Essay (Bachelor)
Faculty:ET: Engineering Technology
Programme:Civil Engineering BSc (56952)
Link to this item:
Export this item as:BibTeX
HTML Citation
Reference Manager


Repository Staff Only: item control page