HOME MyTRB CONTACT US DIRECTORY E-NEWSLETTER FOLLOW US RSS


The National Academies

NCHRP Synthesis 20-05/Topic 48-06 [Active (Synthesis)]

Integrated Transportation and Land Use Models
[ NCHRP 20-05 (Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Practices) ]

  Project Data
Funds: $45,000
Authorization to Begin Work: 5/9/2016 -- estimated
Staff Responsibility: Crawford Jencks
Research Agency: Technical University of Munich
Principal Investigator: Rolf Moeckel
Effective Date: 9/14/2016
Fiscal Year: 2016

Final Scope

In recent years, the fundamental and critical connection between land use and transportation has received increased attention. In some cases, legislation has been adopted (e.g. California SB 375 (2008), Oregon SB 1059 (2010)), that provides further impetus to consider land-use and transportation together. There is an increasing number of integrated transportation and land use models that seek to analyze the interaction between transportation and land-use. However, there is not a single source providing critically needed information for DOTs and MPOs about these models. This study will frame analytic needs to support planning, policy, and investment decisions at varying levels of spatial and temporal representation. The study will identify appropriate methods and levels of integration for decision making.

A growing number of different techniques, methods and models have been developed over the past fifty years with the aim of integrating transportation and land-use modeling. These tools differ considerably in their complexity, and requirements for data, expertise, and resources. They range from relatively simple sketch-based approaches to complex behavioral urban models. Each of these tools has different appropriate uses, and each differs in the extent to which transportation-land-use interactions are captured. At the same time, transportation models range from activity based, dynamic assignment to trip based, static assignment models, and combinations thereof. This is a study of the interaction between land use and transportation models, ranging from sequential, loosely-coupled to tightly integrated models with feed-backs. The work will summarize and complement existing theoretical discussions of integrated models. The emphasis of this study is documentation of how practitioners have employed integrated models to analyze planning, policy and investment decisions. As well, the study will identify gaps in knowledge and needed research.

The objective of this project is to develop a synthesis of integrated transportation and land-use models for use by planning agencies with varying resource levels (DOTs, MPOs, etc.). The project will result in a document that allows planning agencies to identify the type of integrated model that fits their needs.

Information will be gathered by review of international literature, a brief screening survey to determine which U.S. and Canadian agencies are using integrated transportation and land use modes. This survey will be sent to state DOTs (AASHTO SCOP), Canadian MOTs, and AMPO / NARC members. Interviews will then be conducted with agencies known to have varying levels of integration with their transportation and land use models that are in use. The report will include 5 - 10 case examples that illustrate differing approaches to use of integrated models. The consultant will identify agencies to be interviewed; this list will be reviewed by the topic panel.

Information to be gathered and summarized includes, but is not limited to -

1. Definition of integrated models and levels of model integration
2. Types of policy, planning, and investment decisions that might be informed by the use of integrated models, appropriate model types, and level of integration
3. Different approaches that are available and that have been applied to integrate the planning of transportation and land-use.
4. Classification of the approaches in terms of capabilities, theoretical approaches and requirements (data, computational and human resource, expertise).
a. Feedback mechanisms, including accessibility and impedance (e.g. times and costs)
b. Summarizing the key benefits of the various approaches
5. For each class, there will be examples of the use of these approaches. These will include:
a. the institutional context (planning agency);
b. to what purpose the approach was adopted;
c. what the model results were –
i. types of policies evaluated,
ii. comparisons that were possible,
iii. forecasts that were generated;
iv. how the model results were used in planning and decision making- including value added to the process;
v. the value of enhance integration
vi. what resources and data were needed and the costs
vii. the degree to which the example was considered successful by the stakeholders, and lessons learned; and
viii. validation of model outputs for current and future years;
6. Gaps in knowledge and practice, and future research directions

FHWA and AMPO will be approached for sponsorship of the project survey. (Eric Pihl will assist).

This is a critical, new planning area, where a single source of information of available methods is urgently needed by planning professionals.

Information Sources:

• Miller, Kriger and Hunt, Transit Cooperative Research Report 48: Integrated Urban Models for Simulation of Transit and Land Use Policies: Guidelines for Implementation and Use (1998)
• NCHRP 08-94, Guidelines for Selecting Travel Forecasting Methods and Techniques
• AMPO survey on land use models
• TMIP land use forecasting course
• AMPO modeling subcommittee
• Delania Hardy and Brian Gardner
• IATBR resource papers by E. Miller and Timmerman


TRB Staff
Crawford Jencks
Phone: 202-334-3245
Email: cjencks@nas.edu


Meeting Dates
First Panel:  September 14, 2016, Washington, DC
Teleconference with Consultant: October 4, 2016, 12 p.m. EDT
Second Panel: May 22, 2017, Irvine, CA

Topic Panel
Frederick W. Ducca, University of Maryland
Ahsan Habib, School of Planning and Dept of Civil and Resources Engineering
Tae-Gyu Kim, North Carolina DOT
Andy Li, Wasatch Front Regional Council
Michael Reilly, Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Guy Rousseau, Atlanta Regional Commission
Tara J. Weidner, Oregon DOT
Eric Pihl, Federal Highway Administration
Steve Sissel, Federal Highway Administration
Jennifer L. Weeks, Transportation Research Board

To create a link to this page, use this URL: http://144.171.11.40/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=4168