YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Urban Planning and Development
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Urban Planning and Development
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Visioning versus Modeling: Analyzing the Land-Use-Transportation Futures of Urban Regions

    Source: Journal of Urban Planning and Development:;2008:;Volume ( 134 ):;issue: 003
    Author:
    Jason D. Lemp
    ,
    Bin (Brenda) Zhou
    ,
    Kara M. Kockelman
    ,
    Barbara M. Parmenter
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2008)134:3(97)
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: In recent years, the use of visioning processes and scenario-planning tools for developing regional land-use scenarios has become rather common. Typically, visioning is performed as a cooperative, inclusive process among business owners, community residents, interest groups, and local officials, and results in broad goals and principles which can guide future policies and plans. This is a very different approach than a land-use modeling process, which is typically generated by technical experts and results in a set of probable future trends and indicators which can guide the implementation of growth management strategies. The scenario-planning tools typically used for visioning processes are designed to generate and compare potential and preferred future development scenarios based on stakeholder values and preferences, whereas land-use models are used to predict likely future development patterns based on mathematical equations, reflecting historical trends, and market forces. Consequently, direct comparisons of results for the two methods are not really relevant. However, it is important to understand how the two approaches differ and that both offer their own relative advantages from a planning perspective. In an effort to better appreciate what each approach offers, this paper compares and contrasts these two methods, featuring the Austin metropolitan statistical area as a case study. The preferred vision, produced by the Envision Central Texas organization, offers the greatest potential for public involvement in identifying regional development goals for the future. The land-use models have a strong theoretical foundation and allow for interactions with a transportation model. Moreover, the land-use models have the potential to identify key strategies that can be used in achieving the region’s goals. Thus, the combination of these two approaches seems to offer the greatest opportunities for planners to achieve a future that accommodates all stakeholders.
    • Download: (861.1Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Visioning versus Modeling: Analyzing the Land-Use-Transportation Futures of Urban Regions

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/38579
    Collections
    • Journal of Urban Planning and Development

    Show full item record

    contributor authorJason D. Lemp
    contributor authorBin (Brenda) Zhou
    contributor authorKara M. Kockelman
    contributor authorBarbara M. Parmenter
    date accessioned2017-05-08T21:05:53Z
    date available2017-05-08T21:05:53Z
    date copyrightSeptember 2008
    date issued2008
    identifier other%28asce%290733-9488%282008%29134%3A3%2897%29.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/38579
    description abstractIn recent years, the use of visioning processes and scenario-planning tools for developing regional land-use scenarios has become rather common. Typically, visioning is performed as a cooperative, inclusive process among business owners, community residents, interest groups, and local officials, and results in broad goals and principles which can guide future policies and plans. This is a very different approach than a land-use modeling process, which is typically generated by technical experts and results in a set of probable future trends and indicators which can guide the implementation of growth management strategies. The scenario-planning tools typically used for visioning processes are designed to generate and compare potential and preferred future development scenarios based on stakeholder values and preferences, whereas land-use models are used to predict likely future development patterns based on mathematical equations, reflecting historical trends, and market forces. Consequently, direct comparisons of results for the two methods are not really relevant. However, it is important to understand how the two approaches differ and that both offer their own relative advantages from a planning perspective. In an effort to better appreciate what each approach offers, this paper compares and contrasts these two methods, featuring the Austin metropolitan statistical area as a case study. The preferred vision, produced by the Envision Central Texas organization, offers the greatest potential for public involvement in identifying regional development goals for the future. The land-use models have a strong theoretical foundation and allow for interactions with a transportation model. Moreover, the land-use models have the potential to identify key strategies that can be used in achieving the region’s goals. Thus, the combination of these two approaches seems to offer the greatest opportunities for planners to achieve a future that accommodates all stakeholders.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleVisioning versus Modeling: Analyzing the Land-Use-Transportation Futures of Urban Regions
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume134
    journal issue3
    journal titleJournal of Urban Planning and Development
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2008)134:3(97)
    treeJournal of Urban Planning and Development:;2008:;Volume ( 134 ):;issue: 003
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian