Integrated Transportation and Land Use Models (2018)

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.

Integrated Transportation and Land Use Models A Synthesis of Highway Practice Rolf Moeckel Technical UniversiTy of MUnich Munich, Germany 2018 Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration Subscriber Categories Planning and Forecasting N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP SYNTHESIS 520

Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America NCHRP SYNTHESIS 520 Project 20-05, Topic 48-06 ISSN 0547-5570 ISBN 978-0-309-39027-9 Library of Congress Control Number 2018941375 © 2018 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation results in increasingly complex problems of wide inter- est to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 ini- tiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniques—the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was requested by AASHTO to administer the research program because of TRB’s recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. TRB is uniquely suited for this purpose for many reasons: TRB maintains an extensive com- mittee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; TRB possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state, and local governmental agencies, univer- sities, and industry; TRB’s relationship to the National Academies is an insurance of objectivity; and TRB maintains a full-time staff of special- ists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators and other staff of the highway and transportation departments, by committees of AASHTO, and by the Federal Highway Administration. Topics of the highest merit are selected by the AASHTO Special Committee on Research and Innovation (R&I), and each year R&I’s recommendations are proposed to the AASHTO Board of Direc- tors and the National Academies. Research projects to address these topics are defined by NCHRP, and qualified research agencies are selected from submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Academies and TRB. The needs for highway research are many, and NCHRP can make significant contributions to solving highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement, rather than to substitute for or duplicate, other highway research programs.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP SYNTHESIS 520 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Staff Officer Cheryl Keith, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Associate Director of Publications Hilary Freer, Senior Editor NCHRP PROJECT 20-05 PANEL Brian A. Blanchard, Florida DOT, Tallahassee, FL (Chair) Stuart D. Anderson, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX Socorro Briseno, California DOT, Sacramento, CA David M. Jared, Georgia DOT, Forest Park, GA Cynthia L. Jones, Ohio DOT, Columbus, OH Malcolm T. Kerley, NXL, Richmond, VA John M. Mason, Jr., Auburn University, Auburn, AL Roger C. Olson, Minnesota DOT, Bloomington, MN (retired) Benjamin T. Orsbon, South Dakota DOT, Pierre, SD Randall R. Park, Utah DOT, Salt Lake City, UT Robert L. Sack, New York State DOT, Albany, NY Francine Shaw Whitson, FHWA, Washington, DC Joyce N. Taylor, Maine DOT, Augusta, ME Jack Jernigan, FHWA Liaison Stephen F. Maher, TRB Liaison TOPIC 48-06 PANEL Frederick W. Ducca, University of Maryland, College Park, MD Ahsan Habib, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS Tae-Gyu Kim, North Carolina DOT, Raleigh, NC Andy Li, Wasatch Front Regional Council, Salt Lake City, UT Michael Reilly, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, San Francisco, CA Guy Rousseau, Atlanta Regional Commission, Atlanta, GA Tara J. Weidner, Oregon DOT, Salem, OR Eric Pihl, FHWA Liaison Stephen Sissel, FHWA Liaison Jennifer L. Weeks, TRB Liaison AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author would like to thank the practitioners who volunteered their time for in-depth interviews: Rebekah Anderson, Dennis Farmer, Greg Giaimo, John Hodges-Copple, Jon Larsen, Dr. Andy Li, Kacey Lizon, Dr. Michael Reilly, and Guy Rousseau. Their input constitutes the main content of this report. Without their time and openness to sharing their experiences, this report would not have been possible.

FOREWORD Highway administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which information already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and practice. This infor- mation may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviating the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to highway administrators and engineers. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day- to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evalu ating such useful information and to make it available to the entire highway community, the American Association of State High- way and Transportation Officials—through the mechanism of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program—authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing study. This study, NCHRP Project 20-05, “Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Problems,” searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute an NCHRP report series, Synthesis of Highway Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems. PREFACE By Crawford F. Jencks Staff Officer Transportation Research Board As an aid to decision making, the important interaction between land use and transportation is receiving increased attention. Although the relationship between land use and transportation is obvious, modeling the interaction has not been as easily accomplished. However, various integrated transportation and land use models exist that seek to analyze this interaction, and this synthesis identifies methods and levels of integration now being used by select agencies to support decision making with the use of such models. These models differ considerably in their complexity and requirements for data, expertise, and resources. They range from relatively simple sketch-based approaches to complex behavioral urban and areawide models. Models have different appropriate uses, and each differs in the extent to which transportation–land use interactions are captured. The practice affected by these issues was reviewed, and gaps in knowledge and needed research were identified. Information was gathered by reviewing international literature, conducting an initial screening survey to determine which agencies use integrated transportation and land use models, and then selecting seven agencies for in-depth interviews. The seven agencies included one state DOT, five MPOs, and one regional agency in support of MPOs. The agencies selected represented varying levels of integration of their transportation and land use models. Dr. Rolf Moeckel, Technical University of Munich, the study’s principal investigator, col- lected and synthesized the information and wrote the report. The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on the preceding page. This synthesis is an immediately useful document that records the practices that were acceptable with the limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand.

1 Summary 6 Chapter 1 Introduction 7 1.1 Short History of Integrated Land Use/Transport Modeling 10 1.2 Model Types 11 1.3 Report Method 13 Chapter 2 Principles for Integration of Land Use and Transport Models 13 2.1 Accessibilities 17 2.2 Frequency of Interaction 18 2.3 Levels of Integration 21 Chapter 3 Screening Survey 26 Chapter 4 Sketch Planning Land Use Models 26 4.1 Model Concept 27 4.2 Interviews 27 4.3 Model History 29 4.4 Model Implementation and Application Effort 30 4.5 Land Use/Transport Model Integration 31 4.6 Model Application 33 4.7 Lessons Learned 35 Chapter 5 Microsimulation Discrete Choice Land Use Models 35 5.1 Model Concept 37 5.2 Interviews 37 5.3 Model History 38 5.4 Model Implementation and Application Effort 39 5.5 Land Use/Transport Model Integration 40 5.6 Model Application 43 5.7 Lessons Learned 45 Chapter 6 Spatial Input-Output Land Use Models 45 6.1 Model Concept 46 6.2 Interviews 46 6.3 Model History 48 6.4 Model Implementation and Application Effort 50 6.5 Land Use/Transport Model Integration 51 6.6 Model Application 54 6.7 Lessons Learned C O N T E N T S

56 Chapter 7 Choosing a Model 56 7.1 Model Implementation Criteria 56 7.2 Model Type Evaluation Matrix 63 Chapter 8 Conclusions 63 8.1 Research Needs 65 8.2 Benefits and Limitations of Microsimulation 66 8.3 Concluding Remarks 71 Appendix A 75 Abbreviations 76 References Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.