Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
20 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 SUPPORT TOUR- BASED MODELING: METHODS, DATA, AND LESSONS LEARNED Erik Sabina, Gregory Erhardt, Thomas Rossi, and John Coil Greg Erhardt described the travel surveys conducted by the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) as part of the development of a new activity- based travel model. He discussed the background to the surveys, the survey methods, and the results. Volume 2 includes a paper on the topic.1 The following points were high- lighted in his presentation. ⢠The development of the DRCOG integrated regional model includes three phases. The refresh phase included a partial reestimation and a full recalibration of the existing trip- based model. This phase has been com- pleted. The vision phase, which included the evaluation of advanced modeling techniques and projects through- out the United States and Europe, is also complete. The update phase entails the development of an integrated modeling system, including a tour- based travel model and disaggregate land use model components. This phase is currently under way. The tour- based model builds on the previous work in San Francisco; Portland, Oregon; New York; Columbus, Ohio; and Atlanta. ⢠The Travel Behavior Inventory (TBI) was con- 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 home interview survey, an onboard transit survey, a com- mercial vehicle survey, and an external station survey. ⢠The initial home interview survey design used an activity- based format with one record of data collected for each activity engaged in by household members. The results from the pilot survey indicated that individuals found this format confusing. As a result, a place format survey was used, following the approach used in New York. Respondents were asked to describe the sequences of places they visited throughout the day and what they did there. Respondents were asked to select primary and secondary activities from a list of 12 possibilities. A sam- ple of 4,196 households completed the survey. An addi- tional 677 households, recruited through an onboard transit survey, also completed the place format survey. The onboard transit survey collected basic information on trip purpose and demographic characteristics of the rider. Passengers on 51 routes were included in the sur- vey, which was also used to recruit the transit riders for the place format survey. ⢠Three traditional trip purposes were included in the survey. These trip purposes were home- based work (HBW), home- based nonwork (HBNW), and non- home- 1 See Sabina, E. E., G. D. Erhardt, T. F. Rossi, and J. Coil. Processing the Denver Travel Survey to Support Tour- Based Modeling: Methods, Data, and Lessons Learned. In Conference Proceedings 42: Innovations in Travel Demand Modeling, Volume 2: Papers, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 49â53.
