Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 32
BREAKOUT SESSION Data and Synthetic Populations Erik Sabina, Denver Regional Council of Governments Gregory Erhardt, PB Consult, Inc. Thomas Rossi, Cambridge Systematics, Inc. John Coil, Denver Regional Council of Governments John Bowman, John Bowman Research and Consulting Guy Rousseau, Atlanta Regional Commission Bin Zhou, University of Texas at Austin Kara Kockelman, University of Texas at Austin PROCESSING THE DENVER TRAVEL SURVEY TO and disaggregate land use model components. This phase SUPPORT TOUR-BASED MODELING: METHODS, is currently under way. The tour-based model builds on DATA, AND LESSONS LEARNED the previous work in San Francisco; Portland, Oregon; New York; Columbus, Ohio; and Atlanta. Erik Sabina, Gregory Erhardt, Thomas Rossi, · The Travel Behavior Inventory (TBI) was con- and John Coil ducted before the start of the refresh phase. The TBI involved a suite of regional surveys, including a house- hold travel survey. Data collection in 1997 included a Greg Erhardt described the travel surveys conducted by home interview survey, an onboard transit survey, a com- the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) mercial vehicle survey, and an external station survey. as part of the development of a new activity-based travel · The initial home interview survey design used an model. He discussed the background to the surveys, the activity-based format with one record of data collected survey methods, and the results. Volume 2 includes a for each activity engaged in by household members. The paper on the topic.1 The following points were high- results from the pilot survey indicated that individuals lighted in his presentation. found this format confusing. As a result, a place format survey was used, following the approach used in New · The development of the DRCOG integrated York. Respondents were asked to describe the sequences regional model includes three phases. The refresh phase of places they visited throughout the day and what they included a partial reestimation and a full recalibration of did there. Respondents were asked to select primary and the existing trip-based model. This phase has been com- secondary activities from a list of 12 possibilities. A sam- pleted. The vision phase, which included the evaluation ple of 4,196 households completed the survey. An addi- of advanced modeling techniques and projects through- tional 677 households, recruited through an onboard out the United States and Europe, is also complete. The transit survey, also completed the place format survey. update phase entails the development of an integrated The onboard transit survey collected basic information modeling system, including a tour-based travel model on trip purpose and demographic characteristics of the rider. Passengers on 51 routes were included in the sur- 1 See Sabina, E. E., G. D. Erhardt, T. F. Rossi, and J. Coil. Processing vey, which was also used to recruit the transit riders for the Denver Travel Survey to Support Tour-Based Modeling: Methods, the place format survey. Data, and Lessons Learned. In Conference Proceedings 42: Innovations in Travel Demand Modeling, Volume 2: Papers, · Three traditional trip purposes were included in Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the survey. These trip purposes were home-based work Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 4953. (HBW), home-based nonwork (HBNW), and non-home- 20