Urban models useful in transportation planning are reviewed, focusing especially on ones that are based on geographic information system (GIS) software. Then UPlan, a simple model written by the authors in the ArcView GIS, is described. Several different applications of UPlan are outlined, involving transportation planning and analysis of the growthinducing effects of new facilities, to demonstrate its use. Such models are coming into use for National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 assessments and for joint land use and transportation planning.
NCHRP Report 423A: Land Use Impacts of Transportation: A Guidebook. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1999.
3.
WegenerM.Operational Urban Models: State of the Art. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 60, No. 1, 1994, pp. 17–29.
4.
MillerE. J., KrigerD. S., and HuntJ. D.. TCRP Web Document 9: Integrated Urban Models for Simulation of Transit and Land-Use Policies. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., Sept.1998.
5.
Special Report 245: Expanding Metropolitan Highways: Implications for Air Quality and Energy Use. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995.
6.
RodierC. J., AbrahamJ. E., JohnstonR. A., and HuntJ. D.. Comparison of Highway and Travel Demand Management Measures Using Integrated Land Use and Transportation Model in the Sacramento Region. Presented at 81st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2002.
7.
Projecting Land-Use Change: A Summary of Models for Assessing the Effects of Community Growth and Change on Land-Use Patterns. USEPA Report EPA/600/R-00/098. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., Sept.2000.
8.
HeikkilaE. J.GIS Is Dead; Long Live GIS!Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 64, No. 3, 1998, pp. 350–360.
9.
LandisJ. D.The California Urban Futures Model: A New Generation of Metropolitan Simulation Models. Environment and Behavior B, Vol. 21, 1994, pp. 399–420.
10.
LandisJ. D.Imagining Land Use Futures: Applying the California Urban Futures Model. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 61, No. 4, 1995, pp. 438–457.
11.
ClarkeK., HoppenS., and GaydosL. J.. Methods and Techniques for Rigorous Calibration of a Cellular Automaton Model of Urban Growth, 1996. geo/arc/nasa.gov/usgs/clarke/calib.paper.html.
12.
ClarkeK., et al. An Analysis of Human-Induced Land Transformations in the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento Area, 1996. geo/arc/nasa.gov/usgs/WRR_paper.html.
13.
ClarkeK. C., and HoppenS.. A Self-Modifying Cellular Automaton Model of Historical Urbanization in the San Francisco Bay Area. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 24, 1997, pp. 247–261.
14.
LandisJ., and ZhangM.. The Second Generation of the California Urban Futures Model. Part 1: Model Logic and Theory. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 25, No. 5, 1998, pp. 657–666.
15.
LandisJ., and ZhangM.. The Second Generation of the California Urban Futures Model. Part 2: Specification and Calibration Results of the Land-Use Change Submodel. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 25, No. 6, 1998, pp. 795–824.
16.
LowryI. S.A Model of Metropolis. RM-4035-RC. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif., 1964.
17.
MarshallN. L., and LaweS. J. C.. Land Use Allocation Modeling in Uni-Centric and Multi-Centric Regions. Presented at 75th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1996.
18.
KlostermanR. E.The What If? Collaborative Planning Support System. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 26, 1999, pp. 393–408.
19.
FultonW., PendallR., NguyenM., and HarrisonA.. Who Sprawls Most? How Growth Patterns Differ Across the U.S. Center on Urban and Metropolitan Growth, Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C., July2001.
20.
JohnstonR. A., and de la BarraT.. Comprehensive Regional Modeling for Long-Range Planning: Integrated Urban Models and Geographic Information Systems. Transportation Research A, Vol. 34, 2000, pp. 125–136.
21.
FrankJ. E.The Costs of Alternative Development Patterns. Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C., 1989.
22.
NearingM. A.A Single, Continuous Function for Slope Steepness Influence on Soil Loss. Soil Science Society American Journal, Vol. 61, 1997, pp. 917–919.
23.
DalyC., TaylorG., and GibsonW.. The PRISM Approach to Mapping Precipitation and Temperature. Proc., 10th Conference on Applied Climatology, Reno, Nev., American Meteorological Society, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 10–12.
24.
ReynoldsK.Netweaver for EMDS User Guide (Version 1.1): A Knowledge Base Development System. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-471. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oreg., 1999.
25.
SaundersM. C., RajotteE. G., and TravisJ. W.. The Use and Significance of Expert Systems in Small Fruit IPM. In Monitoring and Integrated Management of Arthropod Pests of Small Fruit Crops (BostanianN. J., WilsonD. T., and DennehyT. J., eds.), Intercept, London, 1989.
26.
SaundersM. C., CoulsonR. N., and FolseJ.. Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Agriculture and Natural Resource Management. In Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technology (KentA. and WilliamsJ., eds.), Vol. 25, Suppl. 10, Dekker, New York, 1990, pp. 1–14.
27.
ReynoldsK., CunninghamP., BednarL., et al. A Design Framework for a Knowledge-Based Information Management System for Watershed Analysis in the Pacific Northwest U.S. AI Applications, Vol. 10, 1996, pp. 9–22.
