Strategic Location & Accessibility Assessment
2026-06-29
Hub & Flow Mobility Consultants (HF)
private PersonenUnternehmen1.1. Indentification Of Relevant Points
1.2. Multimodal Routing Simulation
1.3. Mathematical Weighting
1.4. Attribute Filtering
Potential Apartments (\(A_i\)): O
Ponits Of Interest (\(P_j\)): D
mapmap
To simulate realistic commuter behavior, strict algorithmic boundaries were deployed:
r5r (Rapid Realistic Routing) package, fusing OpenStreetMap (OSM) topographies with public transit schedules (GTFS).Since different destinations demand different weekly frequencies, travel times (\(T_{ij}\)) were normalized using prioritized utility weights (\(W_j\)) tailored to a standard schedule:
| Destination Node | Category | Priority Weight (\(W_j\)) | Strategic Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| University Campus | Education | 5.0 | Primary daily anchor; non-discretionary |
| Workplace / Job | Finance | 2.5 | High-frequency income synchronization |
| Closest Supermarket | Supply | 2.0 | Essential bi-weekly supply resilience |
| ZOB / Main Station | Transit | 1.5 | Weekend regional travel connectivity |
| Football / Leisure | Social | 1.0 | Discretionary weekly activity |
| Klinikum Passau | Health | 0.5 | Low-frequency baseline medical node |
The total spatial friction for each apartment was determined by calculating the Total Weighted Travel Time (\(C_i\)):
\[C_i = \sum_{j} (T_{ij} \times W_j)\]
Under this objective function, the apartment minimizing \(C_i\) represents the mathematical optimum. Following time optimization, multi-attribute filters were applied:
gewichtete reisezeit für aktuelle wohnung hinzufügen vielleicht noch isochromen map zu einer wohnung
After applying filters and the cost objective function, three final choices were isolated:
Apartment A (Innstadt - Focus: Proximity) * Pros: Minimal transit times to University; high pedestrian density. * Cons: Significant rental cost premium; smaller square footage per room.
Apartment B (Haidenhof-Nord - Focus: Balance) * Pros: Exceptional transit gateway access (ZOB/HBF); optimal rent-to-space ratio. * Cons: Moderate bus reliance during peak university lecture hours.
Apartment C (Heining/Grubweg - Focus: Budget) * Pros: Lowest rent per square meter; maximizes available room sizes. * Cons: Severe “Periphery Penalty” (>25 min commute); highly vulnerable to bridge traffic bottlenecks.
Based on quantitative trade-offs, the analysis yields a definitive selection:
Selection: Apartment B (Haidenhof-Nord)
To provide a high-performance web experience, an optimized GIS processing pipeline was deployed:
anzahl_busse >= 16). grafik, welche haltestellen wie viele abfahrten haben?r5r with a strict 10-minute cutoff (mode = "WALK").sf), dropping unpopulated null cells. This saved 80% of server RAM, enabling seamless deployment.The spatial layer utilizes high-resolution data from the deu_ppp_2020_UNadj_constrained.tif WorldPop matrix:
Combining both mandates allows HF to extract macro-level urban planning insights for our clients:
r5r) with high-resolution demographic models removes subjective bias, providing an unassailable mathematical foundation for spatial investments.GTFS Data:
OpenStretMap Data
Population Data
Hub & Flow Mobility Consultants