Abstract

The primary intent of this paper is to explore the claim that transportation benefits can be derived from neotraditional neighborhood design. Conventional transportation planning models are used as tools to evaluate the performance differences of two hypothetical street networks designed to replicate a neotraditional and a conventional suburban community. Relative transportation benefits are measured in terms of vehicle-miles traveled, average trip lengths, and congestion on links and at intersections. This comparison provides an assessment of how well the two networks in question deal with trips generated by the activities which they serve. All aspects of the modeled communities are held constant except for the actual configuration of the networks. The results of this evaluation indicate that equivalent levels of activity (defined by the land uses within the community) can produce greater congestion with conventional network structures and that corresponding average trip lengths are generally longer. The ultimate goal is to determine if one network type, because of the nature of its design, can result in a more efficient transportation system. The results indicate that neotraditional designs can improve system performance.