Influence of land use on tour complexity: A Dutch case

Transportation Research Record

Volumn , Issue 1977, 2006, Pages 234-241

  Maat, Kees ^a   Timmermans, Harry ^b  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^b EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; DISTANCE MEASUREMENT; NETHERLANDS; URBAN PLANNING;

TOUR COMPLEXITY; URBAN DESIGNS;

LAND USE;

EID: 33947594805     PISSN: 03611981     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3141/1977-29     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Badoe, D. A., and E. J. Miller. Transportation-Land-Use Interaction: Empirical Findings in North America, and Their Implications for Modeling. Transportation Research D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2000, pp. 235-263.
2. Ewing, R., and R. Cervero. Travel and the Built Environment: A Synthesis. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1780, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 87-114.
3. Crane, R. On Form Versus Function: Will the New Urbanism Reduce Traffic, or Increase It? Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1996, pp. 117-126.
4. van Wee, B., and K. Maat. Land Use and Transport: A Review and Discussion of Dutch Research. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2003, pp. 199-218.
5. Bhat, C., and H. Zhao. The Spatial Analysis of Activity Stop Generation. Transportation Research B: Methodological, Vol. 36, 2002, pp. 557-575.
6. Banister, D. Reducing the Need to Travel. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 24, 1997, pp. 437-449.
7. Arentze, T. A., and H. J. P. Timmermans. Albatross, A. Learning-Based Transportation Oriented Simulation System. EIRASS, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2000.
8. Clarke, M. I., M. C. Dix, P. M. Jones, and I. G. Heggie. Some Recent Developments in Activity-Travel Analysis and Modeling. In Transportation Research Record 794, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1981, pp. 1-8.
9. Harms, L. Mobiliteit. In De Sociale Staat van Nederland 2005. Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau, Hague, Netherlands, 2005.
10. Ma, J., and K. G. Goulias. Application of Poisson Regression Models to Activity Frequency Analysis and Prediction. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1676, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1999, pp. 86-94.
11. Golob, T. F. A Simultaneous Model of Household Activity Participation and Trip Chain Generation. Transportation Research B: Methodological, Vol. 34, 2000, pp. 355-376.
12. Nishii, K., and K. Kondo. Trip Linkages of Urban Railway Commuters Under Time-Space Constraints: Some Empirical Observations. Transportation Research B: Methodological, Vol. 26, 1992, pp. 33-44.
13. Strathman, J. G., K. J. Dueker, and J. S. Davis. Effects of Household Structure and Selected Travel Characteristics on Trip Chaining. Transportation, Vol. 21, 1994, pp. 23-45.
14. Ewing, R. Beyond Density, Mode Choice, and Single-Purpose Trips. Transportation Quarterly, Vol. 49, 1995, pp. 15-24.
15. Kitamura, R., T. Akiyama, T. Yamamoto, and T. F. Golob. Accessibility in a Metropolis: Toward a Better Understanding of Land Use and Travel. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1780, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 64-75.
16. Krizek, K. J. Neighborhood Services, Trip Purpose, and Tour-Based Travel. Transportation, Vol. 30, 2003, pp. 387-410.
17. Maat, K., B. van Wee, and D. Stead. Land Use and Travel Behavior: Expected Effects from the Perspective of Utility Theory and Activity-Based Theories. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 32, No. 1, 2005, pp. 33-46.
18. Hanson, S. The Importance of the Multi Purpose Journey to Work in Urban Travel. Transportation, Vol. 9, 1980, pp. 229-248.
19. Nishii, K., K. Kondo, and R. Kitamura. Empirical Analysis of Trip Chaining Behavior. In Transportation Research Record 1203, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1988, pp. 48-59.
20. Arentze, T., M. Dijst, E. Dugundji, C.-H. Joh, L. Kapoen, S. Krygsman, K. Maat, and H. Timmermans. New Activity Diary Format: Design and Limited Empirical Evidence. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1768, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 79-88.
21. Reichman, S. Travel Adjustments and Life Styles: A Behavioral Approach. In Behavioral Travel-Demand Models (P. R. Stopher and A. H. Meyburg, eds.), Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass., 1976.
22. Maat, K., and J. J. Harts. Implications of Urban Development for Travel Demand in the Netherlands. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1780, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 9-16.
23. Geurs, K. T., and J. R. Ritsema van Eck. Evaluation of Accessibility Impacts of Land-Use Scenarios: The Implications of Job Competition, Land-Use, and Infrastructure Developments for the Netherlands. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 30, 2003, pp. 69-87.
24. Rodríguez, G. Lecture notes. 2004. data.princeton.edu/wws509/ notes/c4.pdf. Accessed May 15, 2006.
25. Greene, W. H. Accounting for Excess Zeros and Sample Selection in Poisson and Negative Binomial Regression Models. Stern School of Business, New York, 1994.
26. Vuong, Q. H. Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-Nested Hypotheses. Econometrica, Vol. 57, 1989, pp. 307-333.
27. Handy, S. Regional Versus Local Accessibility: Implications for Nonwork Travel. In Transportation Research Record 1400, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993, pp. 58-66.