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 137
126 I N N O VAT I O N S I N T R AV E L D E M A N D M O D E L I N G , V O L U M E 2 In contrast, SACOG's operators only dealt with a sin- Both workshops attracted a lot of participants includ- gle software package. The PLACE3S land use program ing many elected officials who got a new perspective on was modified to display and manipulate the what the electorate wants. Cube/Voyager networks and to prepare the files for Cube/Voyager runs. Cube/Voyager was then run within the PLACE3S shell and the run's outputs were displayed LESSONS LEARNED using PLACE3S' GIS functionality. This was a smoother arrangement than SLOCOG's and, by reducing the time The most obvious lesson is that it is possible to forecast needed for shuffling data, it enabled SACOG to devote traffic in a visioning workshop and that doing so will nearly all of its 15 min to model run time. influence the results in important ways. Performing complex technical tasks in a hurry in front of an audience is inherently risky. It is inadvisable unless WORKSHOP RESULTS there is time for testing and practice beforehand and backups for all hardware components. Participants who were not familiar with regional plan- Modelers must accept that a workshop model has a ning were surprised by traffic forecasts in the SLOCOG different purpose than a conventional model and that workshops, with most not realizing the importance of some functionality will have to be sacrificed for speed. location. Prior to the workshop most of the dialogue on When deciding on how to modify a model it is best to development in San Luis Obispo County centered on start with the few key indicators that you plan to show the number of units being proposed and their compati- participants, then work backwards to determine the nec- bility to the immediately adjacent land uses. People were essary model components. surprised to find that the same number of jobs and In the SLOCOG workshops much of the time was dwelling units produced different levels of traffic con- spent inputting similar data at different tables. This can gestion depending on where they were located in the be avoided by allowing participants to select from a county. Specifically, there was a tendency to concentrate menu of "starter sets" that allocate about half of the new residential developments in certain towns while turning development. Each starter set should represent a theme other towns into employment centers. The traffic fore- such as (for networks) "facilitate long-distance auto casts for groups that followed this pattern had much travel" or (for land uses) "infill within existing urban higher levels of congestion on the connecting highways boundaries" and contain the most prominent proposals than the groups that had a diversity of land uses within consistent with that theme. Participants are expected to each town. This led to a consensus on the need for bet- delete unwanted projects and add new ones, but giving ter land use. In addition, participants wanted compact them something to work from helps groups to reach con- mixed-use development of a kind that is not even an sensus faster. allowable land use category under most general plans in The final lesson is that visioning workshops are mean- the county. ingless unless the agencies approach them with an open The SACOG workshops revealed a disconnect mind and a willingness to act. Both sets of workshops between agency and public opinion. Specifically, public revealed public preferences that were in conflict with proj- works agencies were pursuing projects that did not inter- ects that agencies considered "done deals." The work- est the public, while participants wanted certain projects shops were a success in that they brought such conflicts to (toll roads, major urban bridges) that the agencies light; it remains to be seen how much influence they will thought were politically impossible. have on the projects that are actually implemented.