High-Speed Rail Route and Regional Mobility with a Ras-ter-Based Decision Support System: The Texas Urban Triangle Case
- 1 Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA
- 2 Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA
- 3 Built Environment, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
Abstract
This study addresses sustainable transportation in the Texas Urban Triangle at the regional scale. Its aim is to determine the most suitable corridor for new transport infrastructure by employing a spatial decision support system proposed in this project. The system is being tested through its application to a prototype corridor parallel to Interstate 35 between San Antonio and Austin. The basic research questions asked are spatial in nature, so accordingly the geographic information system is the primary method of data analysis. The overall modeling approach is devote d to answer ing the following questions: What are the considerations to support sustainable growth? What scale or type of infrastructure is necessary? An d how to adequately model the transportation corridors to meet the demands and to sustain the living environment at the same time?
- M. Neuman and E. Bright, “Texas Urban Triangle: Framework for Future Growth,” Southwest Region University Transportation Center, College Station, 2008.
- Governor’s Business Council Transportation Task Force, “Shaping the Competitive Advantage of Texas Metropolitan Regions,” Governor’s Business Council, Austin, 2006.
- S. Roop, “TransDec 2.0: Project Planning Decisions Made Easy. Texas Transportation Researcher,” Texas Transportation Institute, College Station, 2003.
- C. A. Morgan, B. R. Sperry, J. E. Warner, A. A. Protopapas, J. D. Borowiec, L. L. Higgins and T. B. Carlson, “Potential Development of an Intercity Passenger Transit System in Texas,” Texas Transportation Institute, College Station, 2010.
- British Columbia Ministry of Transportation, “MicroBENCOST Guidebook: Guidelines for the Benefit Cost Analysis of Highway Improvement Projects in British Columbia,” British Columbia Ministry of Transportation, British Columbia, 2005.
- R. A. Johnston, D. R. Shabazian and S. Gao, “UPlan: A Versatile Urban Growth Model for Transportation Planning,” Transportation Research Record 1831 (2003), 2007, pp. 202-209.
- E. M. Bright, “The ‘Allot’ Model: A PC-Based Approach to Siting and Planning,” Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 16, No. 5, 1992, pp. 435-451. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0198-9715(92)90004-B
- I. L. McHarg, “Design with Nature,” J. Wiley, New York, 1994.
- C. P. Lo and A. K. W. Yeung, “Concepts and Techniques of Geographic Information Systems,” Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2006.
- Parsons Brinckerhoff, “Technical Memorandum: Alignment Design Standards for High-Speed Train Operation TM 2.1.2. California High-Speed Train Project,” California High-Speed Rail Authority, Sacramento, 2009.
- T. L. Saaty, “The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation,” RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, 1990.
- R. Ramanathan, “A Note on the Use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process for Environmental Impact Assessment,” Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 63, No. 1, 2001, pp. 27-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jema.2001.0455
- E. H. Forman, “Random Indices for Incomplete Pairwise Comparison Matrices,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 48, No. 1, 1990, pp. 153-155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90072-J
- The European Parliament and of the Council, “Directive on the Interoperability of the Rail System within the Community,” Official Journal of the European Union, Brussels, 2008, pp. 1-191.