Intrazonal or interzonal? Improving intrazonal travel forecast in a four-step travel demand model
- PDF / 971,459 Bytes
- 22 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 16 Downloads / 200 Views
Intrazonal or interzonal? Improving intrazonal travel forecast in a four‑step travel demand model Keunhyun Park1 · Sadegh Sabouri2 · Torrey Lyons2 · Guang Tian3 · Reid Ewing2
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019
Abstract Conventional four-step travel demand models, used by most metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), state departments of transportation, and local planning agencies, are the basis for long-range transportation planning in the United States. Trip distribution— whether the trip is intrazonal (internal) or interzonal (external)—is one of the essential steps in travel demand forecasting. However, the current intrazonal forecasts based on a gravity model involve flawed assumptions, primarily due to a lack of considerations on differences in zone size, land use, and street network patterns. In this study, we first survey 25 MPOs about how they model intrazonal travel and find the state of the practice to be dominated by the gravity model. Using travel data from 31 diverse regions in the U.S., we develop an approach to enhance the conventional model by including more built environment D variables and by using multilevel logistic regression. The models’ predictive capability is confirmed using k-fold cross-validation. The study results provide practical implications for state and local planning and transportation agencies with better accuracy and generalizability. Keywords Trip distribution · Gravity model · Intrazonal trips · Built environment · Multilevel modeling
Introduction Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) coordinate transportation investments from federal, state, and local sources to ensure that regional transportation plans meet performance criteria such as air quality and congestion management. One of the essential ways
* Keunhyun Park [email protected] 1
Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning, Utah State University, 4005 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322, USA
2
Department of City and Metropolitan Planning, College of Architecture + Planning, University of Utah, 375 S 1530 E, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
3
Department of Planning and Urban Studies, University of New Orleans, 2000 Lakeshore Drive, New Orleans, LA 70148, USA
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
Transportation
MPOs determine how to allocate funds is the forecasting of future travel demands. Forecasts are ordinarily made using what is known as the four-step travel demand model. Some MPOs are beginning to abandon the traditional four-step travel model in favor of activity/tour-based travel modeling (ABT). As of 2015, in the US, ABT modeling was still in its formative stages and not standard practice (Travel Forecasting Resource 2015). Atlanta Regional Commission, San Diego Association of Government, and New York Metropolitan Transportation Council are some of the pioneering MPOs using this approach. Notwithstanding nearly 30 years of promotion of activity-based modeling (ABM) in the travel modeling literature, we believe that enhancements of the conventional four
Data Loading...
