Comparing land use forecasting methods

Journal of the American Planning Association

Volumn 75, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 343-357

  Ewing, Reid ^a   Bartholomew, Keith ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

Author keywords

Delphi method; Expert panel; Highway induced development; Land use forecasting; Land use model

Indexed keywords

FORECASTING METHOD; LAND USE PLANNING; NUMERICAL MODEL; PLANNING PRACTICE; SPATIAL PLANNING; SUBURBAN AREA; TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT; TRANSPORTATION PLANNING; URBAN PLANNING; ZONING SYSTEM;

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES; WASHINGTON [DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA];

EID: 70549085989     PISSN: 01944363     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01944360902956296     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Avin, U., Cervero, R., Moore, T., & Dorney, C. (2007). Forecasting indirect land use effects of transportation projects. Washington, DC: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Retrieved August 1, 2008, from http://www.trb.org/NotesDocs/ 25-25(22)_FR.pdf
2. Badger, C. M. Higgins, W. J., & Ketron, B. D. (1976). Population forecasting in small urban areas by a Delphi process. Transportation Research Record, 617, 45-49.
3. Bajpai, J. N. (1990). Forecasting the basic inputs to transportation planning at the zonal level (National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report No. 328). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
4. Bartholomew, K. (2007). The machine, the garden, and the city: Toward an access-efficient transportation planning system. Environmental Law Reporter, 37(8), 10593-10614.
5. Bhatta, S. D. & Drennan, M. P. (2003). The economic benefits of public investment in transportation: A review of recent literature. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 22(3), 288-296.
6. Boarnet, M. G. & Haughwout, A. (2000). Do highways matter? Evidence and policy implications of highways' influence on metropolitan development. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
7. Cavalli-Sforza, V. & Ortolano, L. (1984). Delphi forecasts of land use: Transportation interactions. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 110(3), 324-339.
8. Cervero R. (2002). Induced travel demand: Research design, empirical evidence, and normative policies. Journal of Planning Literature, 17(1), 3-20.
9. Citizens for a Better Environment v. Deukmejian, 731 F. Supp. 1448 (N.D. C.A. 1990).
10. Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §1344 (2000).
11. Coalition for Canyon Preservation v. Bowers, 632 F. 2d 774 (9th Cir. 1980).
12. Conder, S. & Lawton, K. (2002). Alternative futures for integrated transportation and land use models contrasted with trend-Delphi models. Transportation Research Record, 1805, 99-107.
13. Conservation Law Foundation v. Federal Highway Administration, No. 06-cv-45-PB, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64465 (D. N.H. 2007).
14. Davis v. Coleman, 521 F. 2d 661 (9th Cir. 1975).
15. Davis v. Mineta, 302 F. 3d 1104 (10th Cir. 2002).
16. Dalkey, N. C. (1969). An experimental study of group opinion: The Delphi method (RM-5888-PR). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
17. Delbecq, A. L. Van de Ven, A. H., & Gustafson, D. H. (1975). Group techniques for program planning: A guide to nominal group and Delphi processes. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
18. Department of Transportation Act of 1966, 49 U.S.C. §303 (2000).
19. Downs, A. (2004). Still stuck in traffic: Coping with peak-hour traffic congestion. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
20. Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. §1536 (2000).
21. Ervin, O. L. (1974). Delphi method: Some applications to local planning. Tennessee Planner, 32, 1-22.
22. Ewing, R. (2008). Highway induced development: Results for metropolitan areas. Transportation Research Record, 2067, 101-109
23. Executive Order No. 12,898, 59 Fed. Reg. 7,629 (Feb. 16, 1994).
24. Faris, J. Beever, L., & Brown, M. (2000). Geography information system (GIS) and urban land use allocation model (ULAM) techniques for existing and projected land use data. In Seventh National Conference on Transportation Planning for Small and Medium-Sized Communities. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board. Retrieved from http://ntlsearch.bts.gov/tris/record/tris/ 01042407.html
25. Florida Wildlife Federation v. Goldschmidt, 506 F. Supp. 350 (S.D. F.L. 1981).
26. Gamble, T. & Pearson, D. (1993). Growth allocation using the Delphi process. In J. M. Faris (Ed.), 4th National Conference on Transportation Planning Methods Applications: Vol. 2 (pp. 683-709). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
27. Gloucester County Concerned Citizens v. Goldschmidt, 533 F. Supp. 1222 (D. N.J. 1982).
28. Gregor, B. (2007). Land Use Scenario DevelopeR: Practical land use model using a stochastic microsimulation framework. Transportation Research Record, 2003, 93-102.
29. Hansen, W. G. (1959). How accessibility shapes land use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 25(2), 73-76.
30. Herzog, E. Hall, J. M., & Carlson, T. (2002). Estimating air quality and congestion relief benefits of commuter choice programs with the COMMUTER model. Transportation Research Record, 1815, 78-85.
31. Horowitz, A. J. (2004). Lowry-type land use models. In D. A. Hensher, K. J. Button, K. E. Haynes, & P. R. Stopher (Eds.), Handbook of transport geography and spatial systems (pp. 167-183). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
32. Horowitz, A.J. & Farmer, D. D. (1999). Statewide travel forecasting practice: A critical review. Transportation Research Record, 1685, 13-20.
33. Hunt, J. D. Johnston, R., Abraham, J. E., Rodier, C. J., Garry, G. R., Putman, S. H., et al. (2001). Comparisons from Sacramento model test bed. Transportation Research Record, 1780, 53-63.
34. Hunt, J. D. Kriger, D. S., & Miller, E. J. (2005). Current operational urban land-use-transport modelling frameworks: A review. Transport Reviews, 25(3), 329-376.
35. Iacono, M. Levinson, D., & El-Geneidy, A. (2008). Models of transportation and land use change: A guide to the territory. Journal of Planning Literature, 22(4), 323-340.
36. ICF Consulting. (2005a). Executive Order 13274 Indirect and Cumulative Impacts Work Group: Draft baseline report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation. Retrieved August 1, 2008, from http://www.dot.gov/execorder/13274/workgroups/icireporticf031405.pdf
37. ICF Consulting. (2005b). Handbook on integrating land use considerations into transportation projects to address induced growth Washington, DC: American Association of State Highway and
38. Transportation Officials. Retrieved August 1, 2008, from http://nepa.fhwa.dot.gov/ReNEPA/ReNepa.nsf/All+Documents/ E096B40B01B9D4B185256FC0004BBDF5/$FILE/Final%20Report %2025-25%20Task%203.pdf
39. Kanaroglou, P. & Scott, D. (2002). Integrated urban transportation and land-use models for policy analysis. In M. Dijst, W. Schenkel, & I. Thomas (Eds.), Governing cities on the move: Functional and management perspectives on transportation of European urban infrastructures (pp. 42-72). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
40. Linstone, H. A. & Turoff, M. (1975). Introduction. In H. A. Linstone & M. Turoff (Eds.), The Delphi method: Techniques and applications (pp. 1-12). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
41. Louis Berger Group. (2002). Desk reference for estimating the indirect effects of proposed transportation projects (National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report No. 466). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board. Retrieved August 1, 2008, from http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_466.pdf
42. Lowry, I. S. (1964). A model of metropolis. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
43. Marshall, N. & Grady, B. (2006). Sketch transit modeling based on 2000 census data. Transportation Research Record, 1986, 182-189.
44. Maryland State Highway Administration. (2000). Secondary and cumulative effects analysis guidelines for environmental impact statements and environmental assessments. Baltimore, MD: Author. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.sha.state.md.us/ ImprovingOurCommunity/oppe/scea/other/6-28-00Guidelines.pdf
45. Maryland State Highway Administration. (2006). Intercounty Connector final environmental impact statement. Baltimore, MD: Author. Retrieved November 1, 2008, from http://www.iccproject.com/ feis-download.php
46. Moeckel, R. Costinett, P. J., & Weidner, T. J. (2008). Interaction of transportation and land use: A simple model for land use allocation and transportation demand. In Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 2008 Annual Meeting, Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://ntlsearch.bts.gov/tris/record/tris/01099469.html
47. Mosk, M. (2006, September 26). Highway backer a steady Ehrlich donor; proposed route crucial to success of developer's "mini-city" project. The Washington Post, p. A01.
48. Mulligan, P. M. & Horowitz, A. J. (1986). Expert panel method of forecasting land use impacts of highway projects. Transportation Research Record, 1079, 9-15.
49. Mullin v. Skinner, 756 F. Supp. 904 (E.D. N.C. 1990).
50. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq. (2000).
51. National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. §470f (2000).
52. New Hampshire Department of Transportation. (2008). Moving ahead: SEIS public information meetings presentation. Concord, NH: Author. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://www.rebuildingi93.com/ content/environmental/seis/
53. Noland, R. B. & Lem, L. (2002). A review of the evidence for induced travel and changes in transportation and environmental policy in the U.S. and the U.K. Transportation Research Part D, 7, 1-26.
54. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas. (1998). Land use impacts of transportation: A guidebook (National Cooperative Highway Research Program Project 8-32(3)). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
55. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas. (2002). I-93 Manchester to Salem expert panel analysis: Final report. Concord: New Hampshire Department of Transportation.
56. Porter, C. Melendy, L., & Deakin, E. (1995). Land use and travel survey data: A survey of the metropolitan planning organizations of the 35 largest U.S. metropolitan areas. Philadelphia: Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission.
57. Powell, C. (2003). The Delphi technique: Myths and realities. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41(4), 376-382.
58. Rankin v. Coleman, 394 F. Supp. 647, modified 401 F. Supp. 664 (E.D. NC 1975).
59. Sackman, H. (1975). Delphi critique: Expert opinion, forecasting, and group process. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
60. Senville v. Peters, 327 F. Supp. 2d 335 (D. Vt. 2004), motion den'd, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50789 (July 30, 2006).
61. Seskin S. N. Still, K. G., & Boroski, J. (2002) The use of expert panels in analyzing transportation and land use alternatives (National Cooperative Highway Research Program Project 8-36(4)). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
62. Sierra Club v. U.S. Department of Transportation, 962 F.Supp. 1037 (N.D. IL. 1997).
63. Stanley, M. (2006). Indirect and cumulative impact analysis: A review and synthesis of the requirements for indirect and cumulative impact analysis and mitigation under major environmental laws and regulations. Washington, DC: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Retrieved August 2, 2008, from http://www.trb.org/NotesDocs/25-25%2811%29_FR.pdf
64. Trejos, N. (2005, August 5). Montgomery rural areas fear growth will follow Connector; county says it will retain open space. The Washington Post, p. B5.
65. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2000). Projecting land-use change: A summary of models for assessing the effects of community growth and change on land-use patterns. Washington, DC: Author.
66. Waddell, P. A. Wang, L., & Charlton, B. (2008). Integration of a parcel-level land use model and an activity-based travel model. In Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 2008 Annual Meeting, Washington, DC. Retrieved from: http://ntlsearch.bts.gov/tris/record/tris/01099462.html
67. Wegener, M. (2004). Overview of land use transport models. In D. A. Hensher, K. J. Button, K. E. Haynes, & P. R. Stopher (Eds.), Handbook of transport geography and spatial systems (pp. 127-146). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
68. Ziglio, E. (1996). The Delphi method and its contribution to decisionmaking. In M. Adler & E. Ziglio (Eds.), Gazing into the oracle: The Delphi method and its application to social policy and public health (pp. 1-21). London: Jessica Kingsley.