Transport

for NSW Transport Modelling

Guidelines
Volume 0:
Introduction

October 2024

T
AF
R
D

transport.nsw.gov.au

OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Document Control

Document Owner Navreet Virdi (Senior Manager Model Planning)

Approved By Director Transport Modelling
Document Number TS 05461.0
Branch | Division Planning, Integration and Passenger | Transport Planning
Review Date 15/10/2024
Superseded Documents TS05461 - Traffic Modelling Guidelines (2013)
TS 05445 - Traffic Signals in Microsimulation Modelling (2018)
TS05442 - Operational Modelling Reporting Structure (2017)

Version

Version Notes
0.1 Public Exhibition (20/10/2024)

Overview

The Transport Modelling Guidelines are a suite of volumes designed to guide the development and
application of transport models in New South Wales. These Guidelines are produced in 7 volumes:
(0) Introduction, (1) Place Forecasting Guidelines, (2) Strategic Modelling Guidelines, (3) Operational
Modelling Guidelines, (4) Active Transport Modelling Guidelines, (5) Emerging Modelling
Techniques and Trends, and (6) Guide to Practitioners. Practitioners are encouraged to read and
familiarise themselves with all volumes of these Transport Modelling Guidelines.

Disclaimer

TfNSW ensures the Guidelines are accurate at publication but makes no guarantees they are error-
free, up-to-date, or compliant with all laws. TfNSW is not liable for any loss, damage, or
consequences from using the Guidelines. Seek professional advice before applying this guidance.

Acknowledgements

These Guidelines were developed by Transport for New South Wales’ Transport Modelling Function
in conjunction with industry specialists and internal subject matter experts. The project was led by:

• Frank Milthorpe, Modelling Technical Advisor (Project Director)

• Dr Navreet Virdi, Senior Manager Modelling Planning (Project Manager and Lead Editor)

Transport for New South Wales also acknowledges the significant input from subject matter
experts across NSW Government in particular members of the Transport Modelling Tools and
Methodology Working Group, including Transport Planning, Regional and Outer Metropolitan,
Sydney Metro, Cities and Active Transport and Infrastructure and Place; and the collective skills and
diversity of ideas contributed by a consortium of industry experts during the development and
review of these guidelines including representatives from consulting organisations (various),
Regional Organisation of Councils, University of NSW | Research Centre for Integrated Transport
Innovation, and Industry stakeholders (various).

The Transport Modelling team also credits the informative approaches to Transport Modelling from
a range of organisations including Main Roads Western Australia, Australian Transport Assessment
and Planning, New Zealand Transport Agency, Transport for London, and US Federal Highway
Administration.

Page | 2

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Table of Contents

List of Figures.............................................................................................................................. 5

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... 5

List of Glossary and Abbreviations ........................................................................................... 6

1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 11

1.1 About Transport for NSW ................................................................................................................................... 11

1.2 About Transport Modelling ................................................................................................................................12

1.3 Purpose of these Guidelines ..............................................................................................................................12

1.4 Guideline Structure ...............................................................................................................................................12

1.5 Future Trends and Potential Future Volumes ............................................................................................ 15

1.6 Exclusions ................................................................................................................................................................ 15

1.7 Feedback .................................................................................................................................................................. 15

2 Overview of Transport Modelling ................................................................................. 16

2.1 Purpose of Modelling ........................................................................................................................................... 16

2.2 Role of Modelling in a Vision and Validate Approach .............................................................................. 16

2.3 Roles and Responsibilities .................................................................................................................................20

2.4 Types of Transport Modelling............................................................................................................................21

2.5 Planning Framework and Transport Modelling Hierarchy .................................................................... 22

2.6 Model Process Overview ....................................................................................................................................24

2.6.1 Model Selection and Scoping .................................................................................................................24

2.6.2 Model Scenario Naming Convention ....................................................................................................25

2.6.3 Model Development Process Overview...............................................................................................25

2.6.4 Model Application .......................................................................................................................................26

2.6.5 Model Review ................................................................................................................................................26

3 Literature Review ........................................................................................................... 27

3.1 Volume 1 – Place Forecasting Guidelines .................................................................................................... 28

3.2 Volume 2 – Strategic Modelling Guidelines ................................................................................................ 33

Page | 3

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

3.3 Volume 3 – Operational Modelling Guidelines............................................................................................37

3.4 Volume 4 – Active Transport Modelling Guidelines ................................................................................. 44

3.5 Volume 5 – Emerging Modelling Techniques and Trends Guidelines ................................................ 51

References................................................................................................................................ 56

Page | 4

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

List of Figures
Figure 1: ‘Predict and Provide’ vs ‘Vision and Validate’ approach to planning. Source: Practitioners
Guide to Movement and Place (NSW Government Architect 2021) ..................................................................17
Figure 2: ‘Predict and Provide’ vs ‘Vision and Validate’ assessment process ............................................... 18
Figure 3: ‘Vision and Validate’ approach to planning ............................................................................................. 19
Figure 4: Types of transport modelling ........................................................................................................................21
Figure 5: ATAP planning framework ............................................................................................................................. 22
Figure 6: TfNSW modelling hierarchy..........................................................................................................................24
Figure 7: The multi-resolution modelling (MRM) process developed by (Shelton, et al. 2019) ............ 54

List of Tables
Table 1: Transport Modelling Guidelines – quick reference guide ..................................................................... 13
Table 2: Contrasting features of Predict and Provide with Vision and Validate ...........................................17
Table 3: ATAP hierarchy of transport modelling applications ............................................................................23
Table 4: Standard naming of model scenarios .........................................................................................................25

Page | 5

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

List of Glossary and Abbreviations

Term Definition
AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic
ABM Agent Based Modelling
ABM Activity Based Models
ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics
AI Artificial Intelligence
Aimsun Simulation software for transportation planning and traffic management.
AITPM Australian Institute of Traffic Planning and Management
Represents the typical weekday (Tuesday to Thursday) morning peak period in
AM which most pedestrians travel from their homes to their places of employment
or education. This period is generally between (or a subset) 6am and 10am.
API Application Programming Interface
ASC Alternative Specific Constant
ATAP Australian Transport Assessment and Planning
ATC Automatic Traffic Count
ATC Adaptive Traffic Control
Association of the Australian and New Zealand transport agencies,
Austroads
representing all levels of government
AV Autonomous Vehicles
BITRE Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics
BLoS Bicycle Level of Service
BOAM Bus Opal Assignment Model
Calibration Process of comparing model forecasts to a real set of travel behaviour
CAV Connected Autonomous Vehicles
CBA Cost Benefit Analysis
CBD Central Business District
CCTV Closed Circuit Television
CGE Computable General Equilibrium
The end-user of the assessment. This may be TfNSW or another entity
Client
(including private organisations).
COP Common Operational Practice
Cordon Boundary within a larger (model) area
Core area Primary area of focus of a model
CR Coincidence Ratios
CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
CT Cycle time in traffic signal phasing plan
CUBE Predictive transportation modelling and simulation software
CV Connected Vehicles
D Average density
DP Differential privacy – part of Deep Learning
DPHI Department of Planning, Housing, and Infrastructure
DTA Dynamic traffic assignment
DVC Data version control
Vehicle-based traffic simulation and DTA that combines mesoscopic and
Dynameq
microscopic properties
EJD Effective Job Index

Page | 6

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

EMME Strategic multi-modal transport modelling software

ETCM Enhanced Train Crowding Model
EV Electric Vehicles
EV Evening Peak Period
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FLS Fire Life Safety
FMM Freight Movement Model
FOAM Ferry Opal Assignment Model
Mathematical approximation to create a matrix of origins and destinations
Furness
matching a given set of trip totals
GC Generalised Cost
Geoffrey E. Havers (GEH) statistic is a form of Chi-squared statistic commonly
GEH
used to compare modelled and observed hourly counts.
GIS Geographical Information System
GIS SEN GIS Spatially Enabled Networks
GMA Greater Metropolitan Area
GPS Global Positioning System
General transit feed specification - open standard used to distribute travel
GTFS
information about transit systems to passengers.
HCL Highest cycle time in traffic signal phasing plan
Highway Capacity Manual produced by the United States of America
HCM
Transport Research Board
Heavy Commercial Vehicle. Austroads vehicle classification system Class 3
HCV higher (e.g., rigid truck or bus, semi-trailer, road train, etc.) used for
business/commercial purposes
Walking or cycling for pleasure or experience (i.e., recreation or exercise) and
Hedonic trips may or may not have a specific destination. These trips cannot be replaced (or
undertaken) by another mode since the intent is to walk or cycle.
Travel time data from multiple sources, including connected car probes,
HERE
roadway sensors, and live operations centres
HOV High occupancy vehicle
HTS Household Travel Survey
Model consisting of multiple levels of detail, e.g., mesoscopic model with a
Hybrid
microsimulation area contained within it
IA Infrastructure Australia
IDM Intersection Diagnostic Monitor
INSW Infrastructure NSW
IP Inter-Peak period
IVT In-Vehicle Time
JTW Census Journey to Work
kp Link occupancy in a simulation model
Light Commercial Vehicle. Austroads vehicle classification system Class 1 or 2
LCV vehicles (e.g., van, utility, SUV, etc.), but excluding bicycles and motorcycles,
used for business/commercial purposes
LCVM Light Commercial Vehicle Model
Pedestrian modelling and simulation software that models a space where
Legion
people converge.
LGA Local Government Area
Light vehicle Car, motorcycle, SUV, with or without trailer

Page | 7

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Software that models traffic signals and their effect on traffic capacities and
LinSig
queuing.
LoS Level of Service
LP Link plan – in traffic signal co-ordination
MaaS Mobility as a Service
Macroscopic Large-scale model with more simplified (aggregated) elements and variables
MassMotion Pedestrian and crowd simulation software.
Mesoscopic Intermediate scale and level of detail between microscopic and macroscopic
mf Maximum flow
Microsimulation Smaller scale model with more detailed elements
ML Machine Learning
MSA Method of Successive Averages
MTW Method of Travel to Work
Multi-modal Model representing several modes of transport (e.g., car, truck, train, bus,
modal pedestrian, cyclist, etc.)
MWCOG Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments
ND Normalised Deviations
Net Ops Network operations
NSW New South Wales
O-D Origin Destination
OP Offset plan – in traffic signal co-ordination
Opal is the smartcard ticketing system used to pay for travel on public
Opal transport in Sydney, the Blue Mountains, Central Coast, the Hunter and the
Illawarra.
P Flow volume
Paramics 3D traffic simulation software.
PB Place Based Projects
PB-SA-FMM Port Botany – Sydney Airport Freight Movement Model
PCT Propensity to Cycle Tool
PCU Passenger Car Unit
PHT Passenger-Hours Travelled
PKT Passenger-Kilometres Travelled
Represents the typical weekday (Tuesday to Thursday) afternoon or evening
peak period in which most pedestrians travel from their places of employment
PM
or education back to their homes. This period is generally between (or a
subset of) 3pm and 7pm.
PNSW Property NSW
PoC Proof of Concept
PT Public Transport
PTIPS Public Transport Information and Priority System
PTPM Public Transport Project Model
Software company producing transport modelling software including Vissim
PTV
and Visum
Python High-level general purpose computer programming language
R2 Correlation between count data and predicted model volume
RAND The 8-case pivoting method developed by RAND Europe and TfNSW
Set of five categories describing the level of responsibility of a person for the
RASCI transport modelling process (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted,
Informed)

Page | 8

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

rCITI Research Centre for Integrated Transport Innovation

RFM Regional Freight Model
RLF Rail, Light Rail and Ferry
RMS Roads and Maritime Services NSW, now known as Transport for NSW
RMSE Root Mean Square Error
ROAM Rail Opal Assignment Model
RTA Roads and Traffic Authority, now known as Transport for NSW
RTM Regional Travel Model
S Average Speed
SA2 Statistical Area 2 (ABS Census)
SA3 Statistical Area 3 (ABS Census)
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
SALTM Sydney Airport Landside Transport Model
Saturation Flow Maximum rate at which vehicles can pass through a lane or transport link
SCATS Sydney Coordinated and Adaptive Traffic System
Sydney Coordinated Adaptive Traffic System Simulation. Software that allows
SCATSIM a SCATS system to be linked to Traffic Micro Simulation software packages
for modelling purposes
Screenline Notional line/boundary on a map that crosses one or more transport links
SFM Strategic Freight Model
SHRP Strategic Highway Research Program
SIDRA Intersection traffic modelling software for single intersections or a network
SME Subject Matter Expert
SMPM Strategic Motorway Planning Model
SPE SCATS Priority Engine
SPSG Station Planning Standards and Guidelines
SRMS SCATS Ramp Metering System
SS Sub-system
Microsimulation modelling tool for the prediction of pedestrian movement
STEPS
under normal and emergency conditions.
STFM Strategic Traffic Forecasting Model
STM Strategic Travel Model
T2 or T3 Transit Lane requiring a minimum number of people per vehicle
TAG Transport Analysis Guidance
TASM Transport Appraisal & Strategic Modelling
TCS Traffic Control Signal
TDD Test-driven development
TELCO data Data generated by telecommunications companies
TfL Transport for London
Transport for New South Wales is the government transport and road agency
responsible for transport infrastructure and operations in NSW, including
TfNSW
customer experience, planning, policy and procurement. Referred to as
Transport or more commonly TfNSW in short form.
TI Transport Infrastructure Projects
TIA Traffic Impact Assessment
TLP Train Load Predictor
TMC Transport Management Centre
TransCAD GIS and strategic transportation and land use modelling software

Page | 9

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Software suite containing a macroscopic traffic model, a signal optimiser, and

TRANSYT a simulation model for situations from single isolated road junctions to large
mixed signal-controlled and priority control traffic networks.
Rural traffic simulation model to investigate the effects of changes in either
TRARR
the road (e.g., overtaking lanes) or traffic characteristics on traffic operations.
Travel zone Representation of an area within a model from which trips start/finish
TRB Transportation Research Board
TTS Travel Time Savings
TZP Travel Zone Projection
Walking or cycling to a specific destination, such as walking between their
Utilitarian trips home, place of work, place of education or other destinations including
recreational destinations. These trips could be undertaken by other modes
Volume to capacity ratio, v/c = 1.0 indicates the anticipated volume is equal to
V/C
the theoretical capacity
Vehicle actuated – traffic signal triggered by the presence of a vehicle as
VA
opposed to a fixed signal timing
Confirmation of model using a secondary data source not used in the model
Validation
calibration
VHT Vehicle Hours Travelled
Vissim Microscopic multi-modal traffic flow simulation software
Multi-modal software for macroscopic simulation and modelling of transport
Visum
networks and demand,
VISWALK Pedestrian simulation software.
VKT Vehicle-Kilometres Travelled
VOC Vehicle Operating Costs
VOT Value of Time
WSG Walking Space Guide
XCL Stretch cycle time in traffic signal phasing plan

Page | 10

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

1 Introduction
Transport modelling provides a valuable tool for planning and managing the transport network.
Great care is placed in the development of transport models to realise their usefulness as trusted
sources of reliable forecasts. Transport for NSW (TfNSW), other government agencies, industry
practitioners, research institutions and transport professionals utilise transport models to evaluate
the impacts of infrastructure projects, policy, and emerging trends on the transport network.

The intention of these guidelines is to:

• Outline current best modelling practices.

• Provide model development technical requirements to ensure model fitness for purpose.

• Provide guidance to technical and non-technical practitioners on developing new models.

• Inform model reviewers and data recipients on the characteristics of a reliable model.

• Promote uniformity in the development, application, and documentation of models.

• Ensure appropriate, ethical, and transparent assessment of infrastructure developments.

These guidelines constitute a major revision to previous Transport Modelling Guidelines and
develop an industry-standard document to serve as the foundation of transport modelling in NSW.
These guidelines supersede the:

• 2013 TfNSW Operational Modelling Guidelines

• 2017 TfNSW Technical Direction on Operational Modelling Reporting Structure

• 2018 TfNSW Traffic Signals in Microsimulation Modelling

• 2018 TfNSW Requirements for Traffic Data Collection.

These guidelines provide advice on a broad range of transport modelling topics and incorporate
recommendations that have benefited from recent industry feedback and academic research. They
adopt a Vision and Validate approach instead of the traditional Predict and Provide (discussed in
Section 2.2). The update to the guidelines commenced with a review of existing literature, including
other guidelines published domestically and internationally that represent best practice. The
literature review can be found in Appendix A as a resource for modelling practitioners.

1.1 About Transport for NSW

The transport network in New South Wales (NSW) comprises over 180,000 kilometres of roads ,
more than 10,000 kilometres of rail , waterway routes for passenger and freight transport, intrastate
air routes, and active transport facilities. TfNSW is the lead agency responsible for the development
of a safe, efficient, and integrated transport system that facilitates the movement of people and
goods, connects communities, and shapes the future of our cities, centres, and regions in NSW.
TfNSW also oversees the procurement, contracts, accreditation, and regulation while ensuring
customer-focused service and considering the needs of travellers, the commuter, and the broader
focus on mobility and movement across the transport network.

Page | 11

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

1.2 About Transport Modelling

Comprehensive planning is undertaken to ensure the transport network can accommodate the
needs of growing cities and regions in a way that creates thriving and liveable places. This planning
must be grounded in accurate data-driven analytics and evidence-based assumptions. Transport
modelling serves as a validation tool to simulate the effect of various changes in assumptions,
enabling evidence-based decision-making about the future state of the transport network.
Transport modelling encompasses all network users, including light and heavy vehicles, public
transport, and active modes such as pedestrians and cyclists. In the context of transport modelling
and forecasting, TfNSW functions as master planners rather than regulators.

A transport model is a simplified representation of the real world, utilised to forecast hypothetical
development and policy scenarios and their multi-modal network impacts. These models are
produced for diverse purposes using various software packages, and must therefore be robust,
consistent, verifiable, and fit for purpose. Reliable modelling underpins the economic viability,
societal necessity, and network efficacy of transport infrastructure development options,
supporting planners in maximising the likelihood of positive community outcomes.

Different modelling approaches are suited to distinct stages of the project lifecycle, including
planning, concept design, detailed design, construction staging, and operational improvements. It is
important that experienced modelling practitioners adequately size and match their modelling tools
to support the project’s desired outcomes, following the principles of fitness for purpose. Further
information on model suitability and application is detailed in Volume 6 – Guide to Practitioners.

1.3 Purpose of these Guidelines

The purpose of these guidelines is to provide guidance to all users of transport models, including
for infrastructure planning, business case development, and infrastructure delivery.

The guidelines do not over prescribe processes, limit innovation, or create barriers to project
completion. Rather, they provide guidance and a baseline level of questioning and scrutiny to ensure
the development of robust transport models. On occasion, it may be appropriate to depart from
these guidelines. Where the development or application of a model departs from the requirements
of these guidelines, the model practitioner should document and provide adequate technical
justification for the departures. Volume 6 - Guide to Practitioners contains further information on
the reporting requirements pertaining to modelling.

These guidelines are not designed to serve as an instructional guide for modelling. Instead, they
outline best practice, standard parameters, and typical processes in the development and
application of models. Section 1.4 of this volume provides an overview of the modelling process to
act as a quick reference and index to Volumes 1 to 6 for readers new to transport modelling.

1.4 Guideline Structure

These guidelines are organised by volume based on the objectives and requirements of models and
their application. The structure of the guidelines is as follows:

• Volume 0: Introduction (This Volume): An introductory volume outlining the purpose of the
guidelines while also providing an introduction to the different types of transport modelling,
identifying modelling appropriateness, and best practice use of modelling.

Page | 12

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Volume 1: Place Forecasting Guidelines: A volume detailing land use forecasting and its
role in the modelling process. This volume provides a guiding framework for the
consideration, development, and alteration of land use scenarios.

• Volume 2: Strategic Modelling Guidelines: A volume outlining best practice when

developing and applying strategic models. This volume provides guidance on assessing
fitness for purpose of a strategic model, discussing both quantitative criteria and qualitative
aspects of the model.

• Volume 3: Operational Modelling Guidelines: A volume outlining the development and use
of operational traffic models including intersection, corridor, microscopic, and mesoscopic
models. This volume provides a framework for modern operational modelling use cases
including noise and emissions modelling, connected and autonomous and electric vehicle
fleet penetration, treatment of over-capacity models and submission requirements.

• Volume 4: Active Transport Modelling Guidelines: A volume outlining the development and
use of active transport models, including pedestrian modelling. This volume provides a
framework for the calibration and validation of active transport models.

• Volume 5: Emerging Modelling Techniques and Trends: A volume providing a guiding

framework for emerging and niche modelling techniques. This volume provides an overview
of new data sources (big data) and their role in transport modelling, guidance for the
treatment of demand for multi-resolution modelling, and a brief discussion on modelling
potential future trends.

• Volume 6: Guide to Practitioners: A volume providing an overview of best practices

surrounding the administration and management of models and modelling projects. This
volume provides guidance engaging with the TfNSW Transport Modelling Function, a
checklist for reviewing models, instructions for maintaining modelling runbooks and
manuals, data storage and disposal instructions, and an ethics statement committing to
open and ethical modelling practices.

A short guide to the content of each volume is provided in Table 1.

Table 1: Transport Modelling Guidelines – quick reference guide

Volume Summary of Contents Quick Reference

1 Introduction 4.1 Modelling framework for
2 Overview Place Based Land Market
1 Place 3 Land Use Context Supply Side Initiatives
Forecasting 4 Place Based Modelling Methodology 4.2 Transport Infrastructure
5 Application of Supply and Demand Induced Land Market
Side Modelling in Economic Analysis Demand Side Initiatives
1 Introduction
2 Model interdependencies
3 Foundation Model Review
Project-Specific Model Application 2.4 Model development and
Activities project application
2 Strategic 5 Model Calibration and Validation process
Modelling 6 Model Responsiveness and 4.4 Demand adjustment
Sensitivity Tests 5 Model Calibration and
7 Limitations and Recommendations Validation
8 Types of Model Outputs
9 Reporting
10 Checklists
Page | 13

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Volume Summary of Contents Quick Reference

1 Introduction
2 Model Scoping and Setting a Brief
3.2 Existing data review and
3 Model Development Process
data requests
4 Model Calibration and Validation
4 Model calibration and
5 Reporting
validation criteria
6 Mesoscopic Model Development
4.3.3 Model stability
3 Operational 7 Hybrid Simulation Modelling
8 SIDRA Modelling
Modelling 8 Micro-Analytical Intersection
9.1 Surrogate Safety
Modelling
Assessment Model
9 Broader applications of Operational
9.2 Emissions modelling
Modelling
9.3 Noise modelling
10 Traffic Signals in Microsimulation
10.10 SCATSIM modelling
Modelling
11 Site Visit Pro Forma
3.2 Estimating pedestrian
demand
3.4 Calibration and Validation
1 Introduction Criteria
2 Overview 3.5 Analysis Types for
4 Active
3 Walking Pedestrian Operational
Transport
4 Cycling (and Other Micro Mobility Models
Modelling
Modes) 4.2 Estimating cyclist demand
5 Future of Active Transport Modelling 4.3 Development of Cycle
Estimation Models
44 Analysis Types for Cycle
Operational Models
4.1 Pivoting methods
1 Introduction
4.2 RAND method
2 An Overview of ABM
5.1 Decarbonisation and
5 Emerging 3 Big Data
electric vehicles
Techniques 4 Integration Between Models of
5.2 Connected and automated
and Trends Different Resolutions
vehicles
5 Future Trends and Capturing
5.3 Micromobility and mobility
Uncertainty
as a service
1 Introduction
2 Typical Modelling Process
3 Model Selection and Generic Limitations
4 Model Selection Process
5 Model Selection Templates
6 Writing a Transport Modelling Service Brief
6 – Guide to 7 Model Types, Typical Software, and Project Application
Practitioners 8 Model Handover
9 Data Collection
10 Project Management Roles and Responsibilities
11 Ethical Conduct
12 TfNSW Contacts for Assistance
13 Model Selection Process Blank Templates
14 Models and Software used in NSW

Page | 14

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

1.5 Future Trends and Potential Future Volumes

These guidelines will be updated to support advancements in modelling practices, in line with the
expansion of software capabilities and addition of novel features to modelling tools.

Revised versions of volumes in this guideline will be issued as best practices in new and emerging
areas of modelling evolve to become industry standard. This may include areas such as Mobility as a
Service (MaaS) and Micromobility.

These guidelines notes emerging trends and likely future development for information and
consideration. No specific or prescriptive guidance is provided on these areas, as TfNSW has not yet
established an official view or position on their application.

1.6 Exclusions
These guidelines do not replace or supersede specific technical guidelines on related areas, such as
economic appraisal or rail operational modelling. Reference is made to other technical domains in
general terms only and practitioners should seek specific guidance separately.

In the event of any inconsistency, please provide feedback and seek clarification and guidance from
the modelling subject matter experts in the TfNSW Transport Modelling Function via
[email protected].

1.7 Feedback
The Transport Modelling Guidelines have been prepared and reviewed by industry-leading
modelling practitioners. The guidelines are intended to undergo continuous revision and
improvement. Readers are encouraged to submit feedback to the Transport Modelling Function via
[email protected]. All comments will be considered for periodic revisions of the
guidelines.

Page | 15

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

2 Overview of Transport Modelling

2.1 Purpose of Modelling

Transport models are developed for many purposes, including:

• Investigating policy changes

• Land-use planning for new communities

• Understanding impacts on transport corridors

• Assessing new infrastructure

• Development of public transport projects

• Determining the impact of new developments

• Design of intersections.

Future network changes are often costly, impractical, and unethical to test in real-world settings.
Transport models enable these modifications to be simulated and analysed prior to implementation,
facilitating an understanding of potential impacts. As a result, models commonly inform the design
and evaluation of public transport facilities, road projects, corridor plans, and precinct and transport
strategies.

Models are tools that inform the decision-making process, their results should not be viewed in
isolation. The outputs must be understood within the broader context of the project and the
limitations of these tools. Models reflect the data, assumptions, and methodology used to develop
them. Their results and predictive accuracy is a reflection of the quality of their inputs.

2.2 Role of Modelling in a Vision and Validate Approach

Vision and Validate planning approach (TfNSW 2023), adopted through the NSW Government’s
Future Transport Strategy, that defines a desired future state (vision) and then validates it through
the iterative testing of land use, policy, technology and infrastructure provision. This differs from
the Predict and Provide planning approach, which relies on historic trends and patterns to predict a
probable future, from which solutions are identified to meet the predicted travel demand of that
future.

• Predict and Provide poses the question “If things continue as they are now, where will we end
up and how would we respond?” This prompts a reactive approach where actions are taken
incrementally to maintain the status quo, and the forecasting of travel based on existing
behaviours, tending to reinforce them into the future. In the context of matching transport
demand with supply of capacity, this is a self-reinforcing cycle where infrastructure is built
to meet demand and demand continually rises to consume it.

• Vision and Validate poses the question “If we know where we want to be in the future, what
steps would we need to take along the way to ensure that we get there?” This prompts a
proactive approach that explores many avenues to reach the desired vision. In the context of
matching transport demand with supply of capacity, this approach allows for interventions
that contemplate influencing trends and behaviours to manage demand and balance the
need for more capacity with other values such as capital or operating costs, user costs,
amenity, sustainability and place-making. These interventions are often iteratively tested in
multiple modelling scenarios to validate the established vision.
Page | 16

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Figure 1 and Figure 2 illustrate the differences between the two processes. Contrast between these
two planning approaches is described in Table 2.

Table 2: Contrasting features of Predict and Provide with Vision and Validate

Predict and Provide Vision and Validate

Established focused method New blended method
Transport modelling is used to validate planning
Underpinned by transport modelling techniques including targets, data on existing
conditions, and benchmarking
Not necessarily motivated by or aligned to Starts with a vision against which the project
an overarching vision objectives are defined and assessed
May need to consider a broader set of qualitative
metrics as governed by the overarching vision and
Tends to be a narrow set of quantitative
project objectives (e.g., accessibility)
metrics (e.g., travel time savings)
Outcomes provide validation of whether the vision
has been achieved
May need to adapt established transport modelling
Relies on established transport modelling
tools and techniques to address limitations, the
tools, techniques, and outputs that rely on
increasing pace of change in travel behaviour, and
extrapolating existing trends and
incorporate additional metrics to broaden the
behaviours.
scope of analysis

Figure 1: ‘Predict and Provide’ vs ‘Vision and Validate’ approach to planning. Source: Practitioners Guide to
Movement and Place (NSW Government Architect 2021)

Page | 17

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Figure 2: ‘Predict and Provide’ vs ‘Vision and Validate’ assessment process

Page | 18

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Transport modelling following a Vision and Validate approach should demonstrate the application of
a movement & place-based holistic approach. Transport modelling is one component of a process
that considers various analytical, qualitative and quantitative inputs, as shown in Figure 3. In all
cases, it relies upon the review and interpretation of the results in the context of the wider transport
system it is trying to assess.

Figure 3: ‘Vision and Validate’ approach to planning

Care should be given to the selection and application of modelling tools, as some are unable to
assess the benefits and implications for all transport users to the same degree. For example, the
outputs of strategic and operational modelling may place disproportionate weight to road based
modes as compared with walking, cycling, and public transport. Additional guidance on model
selection for Vision and Validate is provided in Volume 6 – Guide to Practitioners Section.

Models can support a Vision and Validate approach through iterative testing of various scenarios.
Results need to be presented in a manner that enables understanding of by a wide range of
stakeholders, including those without technical knowledge of the modelling software.

Transport modelling as part of a Vision and Validate approach in rural environments should be used
where feasible alternative travel options exist. In most rural areas and sometimes for smaller
projects in urban areas, these options may not exist or be justified, in which case a Predict and
Provide approach informed by a traditional modelling approach will continue to be appropriate.

Page | 19

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

2.3 Roles and Responsibilities

Several roles contribute to the successful application and delivery of transport modelling. These
roles are required to consult and collaborate at specific points along the process. Some of the key
roles and responsibilities involved in a typical transport modelling exercise are outlined below:

• Project Sponsor: The project sponsor is responsible for delivering and overseeing the
project. This person is most likely to reside within TfNSW, Department of Planning, Housing,
and Infrastructure (DPHI) or a Local Council, unless the project is being managed by a
private entity such as a property developer. The project sponsor is typically responsible for
preparing the project brief and managing the overall project. They will want to see how a
Vision and Validate approach is being applied and may refer to these guidelines to assess
model fitness for purpose.

• Project Manager: Manages the transport modelling project in close coordination with the
Project Sponsor and the Lead Transport Modeller. In some cases, the Project Manager and
Lead Transport Modeller may be the same person. They will work together to propose a
model process, which is then agreed with the Project Sponsor.

• Lead Transport Modeller: Manages and oversees the transport modelling task. This person
must be suitably qualified, has the technical skills and experience, and be involved from
start to finish of the project. They are responsible for applying the direction provided in the
guideline.

• Model Reviewer: This person undertakes necessary model reviews to ensure compliance
and that the model is fit for purpose. This person should be independent of the transport
modelling core team and must be suitably qualified and experienced.

• TfNSW Transport Modelling SMEs and Operations Staff: Consultation and data requests
from TfNSW SMEs and Operations staff are strongly recommended during the project. Early
consultation and agreement on methodology, data, and other specifics is key to providing
successful outcomes as the modelling progresses. The Project Manager and Lead Transport
Modeller should complete the necessary consultations.

Further guidance on the selection and application of models for the roles listed above is provided in
Volume 6 – Guide to Practitioners. The roles above are consolidated into the following three roles:

• End-User: The person seeking transport modelling outcomes to inform their project, such as
the Project Sponsor or Project Manager.

• Practitioner: The person from the TfNSW Transport Modelling Function consulting with the
project team and contributing subject matter expertise in transport modelling to identify the
approach that will meet the needs of the End-User.

• TfNSW Approver: The person within the TfNSW who will review the transport modelling
approach and selected model, and confirm it meets the needs of the project.

Page | 20

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

2.4 Types of Transport Modelling

The four broad categories of transport modelling, and further sub-categories are summarised in
Figure 4 below. It should be noted that the operational, mesoscopic, and microsimulation models
are traffic models and not rail related models.

Figure 4: Types of transport modelling

Page | 21

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

2.5 Planning Framework and Transport Modelling

Hierarchy
The Australian Transport Assessment and Planning (ATAP) Guidelines provide a comprehensive
framework for planning, assessing, and developing transport systems. The ATAP Framework is
summarised in the following Figure 5.

Figure 5: ATAP planning framework

The transport models employed can vary in terms of geographical scope and complexity, depending
on the goals (step 1A) and objectives (step 1B) of the planned transport system. Transport modelling
techniques and applications assist with steps 2 to 5 and are occasionally used in step 7, post
completion review (e.g., ‘before & after’ studies).

ATAP describes five broad categories and shows how these relate to increasing geographical detail
(refer to Table 1 in Section 2.1.3 of ATAP Guidelines).

Table 3 replicates these broad categories.

Page | 22

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Table 3: ATAP hierarchy of transport modelling applications

Topic Reason
Land use and
transport Examines and evaluates the impacts of transport policy and land use changes
interaction on urban form and transport
modelling
Examines ‘what if?’ questions in policy development and the definition of
strategies
Identifies and assess broad metropolitan-wide impacts of land use, socio-
economic, demographic and transport infrastructure changes
Strategic Assists in transport infrastructure project generation
modelling Provides metropolitan-wide forecasts of trip generation, trip distribution,
mode choice and assignment of trips to the transport network
Considers travel needs, and multi-modal consideration of whether and how
these are satisfied
Models and assesses pricing issues
Scenario
Assesses the implications of particular strategies at the metropolitan scale
modelling
Assesses strategy components, individual projects, specific land use
Project strategies and transport corridor issues
modelling Assesses the performance of the transport network along specific corridors
and for nominated projects
Assesses the detailed operational performance of specific transport
infrastructure projects and initiatives, land use developments and local area
traffic management
Operational Prioritise allocation of road capacity between different users (e.g., bus
design priority or pedestrian signal phasing)
May assist in identifying the effects on delays and queues resulting from
changes in transport system variables (i.e., signal phasings, lane
configurations, ramp metering)

The TfNSW hierarchy of transport modelling applications is illustrated in Figure 6, which depicts the
models based on their geographic scope and a list of typical transport modelling software
applications used by TfNSW. The diagram showcases the relationship, interaction, and data flow
between the different resolution of models. There can be overlapping applications, for example:

• Hybrid mesoscopic/microscopic models are used as an analysis layer between cordon and
pure microsimulation models.

• SIDRA Network models are used as an alternative to microsimulation models in select

applicable cases.

• Microsimulation models are used for local area assessments.

Page | 23

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Figure 6: TfNSW modelling hierarchy

2.6 Model Process Overview

This section provides concise overview of the modelling process and associated terminology to
assist readers without an extensive background in modelling when referencing the technical
volumes (Volumes 1 to 6) in these guidelines.

2.6.1 Model Selection and Scoping

Volume 6 – Guide to Practitioners provides further detailed information about the process of
scoping a transport modelling project and determining the most appropriate model type to be used.

The model selection process can be broadly summarised as follows and includes:

• Meeting with the TfNSW Transport Modelling Function to discuss the project and identify
relevant stakeholders to approve the model selection checklists.

• Completing the End-user Checklist to confirm the scope and requirements of the project,
taking into consideration the impact of the project on any customer groups and
geographical impact.

• Completing the Modeller Checklist to understand the current project life-cycle stage,
existing models, project objectives, and any time or budget constraints.

• Reviewing completed checklists with the project team to identify a preferred approach.

Page | 24

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

2.6.2 Model Scenario Naming Convention

Modelling typically involves the creation and analysis of the scenarios outlined in Table 4.

Table 4: Standard naming of model scenarios

Topic Reason
Calibrated and validated to current or recent year data. Usually within 3 years
Base Year of present year. Traffic and transport model calibrated and validated to traffic
surveys undertaken at the start of the model.
Future Base Year Model with added forecast of future trip and network changes
Reference without the project. Used for multiple future years, e.g., 2026, 2031, 2036,
Case 2041. Network and land use assumptions in line with DPHI and TfNSW.
Future Project Future Reference Case Model with added forecast of project-related trips and
Case(s) network changes. Matches the years modelled for the Future Reference Case.
Copy of one of the above with a modification of one variable (either trip
Sensitivity
demand OR transport network) to compare the impact of the change. Can
Test(s)
apply to multiple years and evaluate several inputs and assumptions.

The list outlined in Table 4 represents a basic set of common scenarios applicable across all
modelling exercises. Some specialised modelling types have additional standard scenario types.
For example, Volume 1 – Place Forecasting has standard naming for different land use scenarios
and Volume 2 – Strategic Modelling has synthetic scenarios used for comparison between model
years and versions. Readers are advised to refer to these respective technical volumes for further
details on any specialised scenario types beyond the basic set presented in Table 4.

2.6.3 Model Development Process Overview

Detailed guidance on model development is provided in Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4. The model
development process typically consists of observed base year network development, future
reference case model development, and option testing with comparison to the reference case.

Observed Base Year Network Development

This base model represents the existing transport conditions and is based on site observations and
data. It represents a known set of network conditions and forms the foundation for all other models
developed to assess the impact of network changes, including in future years with forecast travel
demands. Model year base network development involves preparing and building the transport
network to be represented in the model. This network geometry forms the basis for the subsequent
processes to calibrate the model parameters and validate the model outcomes.

Base Year Calibration: Model base year calibration involves the adjustment (calibration) of model
parameters to represent the existing conditions on site. Parameters are adjusted and justified based
on a combination of data collected and professional technical judgement. Parameters that are often
adjusted may include link capacity, saturation flow, vehicle dimensions and performance, traffic
light phase timings, driver behaviour (e.g., lane changing aggressiveness and gap acceptance) and
origin-destination demand (trip) matrices.

Base Year Validation: Model base year validation involves the comparison of the model outcomes to
known data not used during calibration, such as network flows, corridor travel times and levels of
queuing. Model validation metrics are calculated to confirm whether the base model suitably
represents the existing network conditions and therefore can be carried forward to Model
Application. Where the metrics indicate that the model is not suitably validated, the model
calibration process is revisited, resulting in an iterative process between calibration and validation.
Page | 25

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Future Reference Case Model Development

The developed of future reference case models involves taking the calibrated and validated base
year model and extending it to represent a future year. This future reference case model provides a
baseline for comparing the performance of each scenario against.

The development of this model requires an understanding of the anticipated changes in land use
within the study area (e.g., forecast changes in population and employment), and network changes
that are expected to be implemented by that future year (e.g., new roads, changes to intersection
layouts). This forms the basis for the baseline network in that future year, and forecasts for travel
demand. Additional options during the Model Application process are developed on top of this
future reference case model.

2.6.4 Model Application

Model application involves the use of a calibrated and validated model for network change scenario
testing. Scenarios may include:

• Future years incorporating population or employment growth.

• Land use changes from population and employment developments.

• Infrastructure changes including new road, public, or active transport connections.

• Driver behaviour and technology changes, including autonomous and electric vehicles.

• Policy changes including road user charges such as congestion charging or tolls.

Strategic models are typically designed to understand trip generation. trip distribution and mode
choice, whereas an operational model may be designed for route choice and road network impacts
assessment. Certain modelling scenarios may require operation of several models via a multi-
resolution modelling approach and a feedback loop. Consider a light rail project case where the
strategic model is used to assess the demand response to the alignment and the operational model
is used to assess the road network performance of the resulting demand.

The purpose of scenario testing is to understand the potential impact of possible changes on the
community, such as where people travel to, choose to live, the delay they experience, or the mode of
travel they choose. Prior to commencing modelling, the model selection process should adequately
recommend a modelling approach that is suitable to deliver study-appropriate metrics and results.

2.6.5 Model Review

The model review process confirms the suitability of the model as assessed by an independent
party. The different types of model review include:

• Peer review: This involves an independent party carrying out a technical review of the
model. This peer review is used to understand the quality and robustness of the model in
the context of the project requirements. The process identifies where the model may not
meet modelling guidelines and the associated risks.

• Model audit: This is a detailed technical review of the model’s codebase by an independent
external entity. Model audits are typically more detailed and forensic compared to external
peer reviews, often involving formal checklists and detailed comments.

Page | 26

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

3 Literature Review
Introduction

Given the scale of the guideline and the need to account for state of the art in terms of mobility
technologies and modelling practices, it is necessary to conduct a broad range literature review
concerning transport modelling. This appendix summaries a comprehensive review of
documentations covering the modelling sub-disciplines of place forecasting (and land use),
strategic modelling, operational modelling, active transport modelling, and finally emerging
modelling trends used for complex or novel problems. This appendix does not provide detailed
technical discussion, but rather offers a background to each sub-discipline, a summary of existing
guidelines and key documents relevant to each sub-discipline and finally a discussion of the future
of modelling.

Modelling Guideline Context in Australia

Models serve as tools to support planning and engineering decision making and assessment
process for the development, management, and operations of infrastructure. Accordingly, guidance
for modelling practice aligns with the assessment and planning frameworks, standards, and
guidelines.

The foundational guidance supporting transport infrastructure planning and delivery in Australia
are The Australian Transport Assessment and Planning (ATAP) Guidelines. The ATAP guidelines are
prepared collaboratively by multiple state and national jurisdictions including; the Department of
Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development (Federal Government), Infrastructure
Australia, Transport for New South Wales, Department of Transport Victoria, Department of
Transport and Main Roads Queensland, Department of Transport Western Australia & Main Roads
Western Australia, Department of State Growth Tasmania, Department of Infrastructure, Planning
and Logistics Northern Territory Government, Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development
Directorate Australian Capital Territory Government, Ministry of Transport in New Zealand & New
Zealand Transport Agency, and Austroads Ltd. The first edition of the ATAP guidelines was
published in 2004 with the current (4th) edition released in 2016.

Other relevant state and national guidelines have been identified and summarised in this chapter.
International modelling standards and guideline documents have been collated to supplement and
advance current state-of-practice in New South Wales.

The remainder of the chapter is structured based on the overall structure of the review of modelling
guidelines as follows:

• Volume 1: Place forecasting

• Volume 2: Strategic modelling

• Volume 3: Operational traffic modelling

• Volume 4: Active transport modelling

• Volume 5: Emerging modelling techniques and trends.

A list of full references is provided at the end of this volume.

Page | 27

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

3.1 Volume 1 – Place Forecasting Guidelines

A place is an identifiable geographic area consisting of a physical form, with attributed meaning,
and opportunities for community participation (TfNSW 2023) (Wijayaratna, et al. 2022). Accordingly,
forecasting place requires the consideration of mobility and transport within the wider context of
land use, economics, and socio-demographic characteristics of a study area. Specifically, place
forecasting can be supported through the implementation of land use modelling and land use and
transport interaction (LUTI) modelling techniques (Alipour and Dia 2023) (ATAP 2016).

Land use modelling predicts changes in land use patterns over space and time by leveraging
mathematical relationships derived from empirical studies of human behaviour and development
(Garbolino and Baudry 2021). The modelling involves analysing and representing the interactions
between factors influencing land use decisions, such as population growth, economic trends,
transport infrastructure, environmental considerations, policy interventions, and market forces. It is
a tool used across urban planning, transport planning, and environmental analysis to determine the
appropriate structure of land use (zoning of agricultural, commercial, residential, industrial, and
open spaces) now and into the future and underpins strategic place planning.

Land use models have continually improved since their introduction in the 1940s, driven by
advancements in computer hardware and software, increased data availability, and improved
understanding of natural and social system function (Voigt and Troy 2008). Notable contributions to
land use modelling directly related to evaluating transport scenarios include:

• UrbanSim: Open-source land simulation model developed at the University of California,

Berkley (Waddell 2002). It integrates demographic, economic, transport and environmental
data to simulate temporal and spatial land use changes.

• CLUE and CLUE-S model: The Conversion of Land Use and its Effects (CLUE) model
simulates future land-use and land-cover changes. The smaller-scale counterpart to this
large-scale model has had greater applications in transport and place forecasting (Verburg,
et al. 2014).

• SLEUTH: Cellular automata (CA) land use change model initially used to forecast the spread
of bushfires and the subsequent behaviour of agents (Clarke, Brass and Riggan 1994). It has
since been modified to depict scenarios of urban growth, having been applied in 66
different cities (Chaudhuri and Clarke 2013).

Though land use modelling provides predictions for future land use and can support place
forecasting, it has limitations in capturing the interdependencies between the transport and land
use system. For example, the introduction of an education zone will increase travel demand, likely
serviced by additional transport infrastructure supply. However, the supply-side change could in-
turn change land use and promote development of commercial, residential, and industrial land uses.

To appropriately capture the feedback relationship between the two systems, LUTI models allow for
a more comprehensive analysis of the interaction between changes in transport infrastructure,
policies, or travel behaviour, and changes in land use decisions and place forecasting. LUTI
modelling is used to analyse the relationship between land use patterns, demographic and
economic characteristics, and transportation systems (Acheampong and Silva 2015) (Thomas, et al.
2018).

Page | 28

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Background of Place Forecasting in the context of LUTI model development

LUTI models as early as the 1960s (Lowry 1964), devised the gravity/spatial interaction (SI)
approach as an initial attempt to interrelate land use and transport systems. Lowry used the
Pittsburgh metropolis as a case study and assumed the interaction between two zones was related
to the number of activities in each zone and the level of impedance to travel between them. The
Lowry model was simple and lacked a strong theoretical foundation until Wilson in 1970 leveraged
the concept of entropy maximisation to provide a theory for the Lowry approach, allowing for
applications in several constrained and unconstrained matrix settings (Wilson 1970).

During the 1970s, Random Utility Theory (RUT) created a framework where choices between
alternatives are predicted as a function of attributes (McFadden 1972) (Manski 1977), accounting for
the probabilistic heterogeneity of a population’s preferences (Acheampong and Silva 2015). Utility-
based LUTI models developed using RUT were more disaggregate in nature and improved the
modelling paradigm by relaxing assumptions (preference constraints and population homogeneity)
and removing errors present in earlier LUTI gravity-based models. RUT LUTI models have limitations
as they are unable to accurately capture decision making underlying travel behaviour and
effectively capturing feedback mechanisms (Kockelman, et al. 2005).

Since the 1970s, most LUTI models have evolved to better account for uncertainties in behaviour
and system performance through the application of more complex utility-based theories such as
Expected Utility Theory (Schoemaker 1982), Prospect Theory (Kahneman and Tversky 2013) and
Regret Theory (Loomes and Sugden 1982). The latest, and most complex models also consider time-
geography paradigms, heuristic bounded rationality, and systems and complexity theory to better
account for temporal and spatial interactions of agents and infrastructure (Acheampong and Silva
2015).

The shift in underlying LUTI model theories coincided with the advent of Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) and increased computational power, especially since the 1980s. Technological
enhancements have allowed for more complex disaggregate and aggregate models with user
interfaces that allow for greater spatial and geographic awareness of inputs and outputs. In an
Australian context, LUTI models tend to “interact” with travel demand models and require an
iterative approach to optimise the land use and transport models.

Existing Place Forecasting Guidance

The primary document in Australia providing overarching guidance for place forecasting and
coordinated regional planning of land use and transport systems is the “Australian Transport
Assessment and Planning Guidelines – F0.2 Integrated Transport and Land Use Planning (ITLUP)”.
The guide discusses key concepts of the “cluster and connect” approach to modelling and
distinguishing between strategic, regional, and local transport infrastructure (ATAP 2016). ITLUP
stresses the need for a collaborative approach between transport and land-use practitioners,
stakeholders, and the wider community. It describes a framework for developing integrated
transport and land use plans, including the identification of transport corridors, provision of a
variety of transport modes, and promotion of active and public transport. ITLUP highlights the
importance of ongoing monitoring and evaluation to ensure that integrated transport and land-use
planning continues to meet the needs of the community.

Page | 29

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

In addition to the ITLUP, other documents support a greater understanding of place forecasting:

• Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guideline, O8 – Land-use benefits of

transport initiatives (2021)

o Outline a framework for assessing land-use costs and benefits of transport

initiatives, including reduced travel time, improved safety, improved accessibility,
agglomeration of economies, and reduce externalities (ATAP 2021).

o Section 3 provides extensive guidance on land-use forecasting and Section 4 covers

the estimation of land-use benefits, both sections highlighting key quantification
approaches and challenges of forecasting.

o Helps decision-makers identify and prioritise transport initiatives that have the
potential to generate significant land-use benefits and support more sustainable
and liveable communities.

• Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guideline, T1 – Travel Demand Modelling

(2016)

o This guideline provides broad modelling guidance allowing practitioners to

formulate travel demand models which predict travel behaviour in response to
changes in transport infrastructure, land use, and other factors (ATAP 2016).

o Section 3.5 provides a brief history of LUTI modelling, and the document
contextualises the importance of place forecasting in relation to strategic and
operational modelling practices.

• Infrastructure Australia, Guide to economic appraisal – Technical guide of the

Assessment Framework (2021)

o Emphasises the importance of using a consistent and transparent approach to

economic appraisal across infrastructure projects, and provides detailed guidance
on the assessment of economic, social, and environmental impacts of infrastructure
investments (Infrastructure Australia 2021)

o The guide considers project scoping, identifying, and valuing project impacts,
selecting appropriate appraisal techniques and accounting for uncertainty and risk.

o The guide primarily details cost benefit analysis applications in the Australian
context, but also discusses modern approaches for economic appraisal such as the
role of input-output analysis and computable general equilibrium (CGE) modelling.

• Department for Transport UK, TAG UNIT M1 – Principles of Modelling and Forecasting
(2014)

o Presents the fundamental principles of transport modelling and forecasting by

outlining key stages of the modelling process, such as problem identification, model
development, data collection, model validation, and sensitivity testing.

o Section 4.6.3 summarises the application of LUTI models as an “alternative model

structure” to the framework described in TAG UNIT M1 (Department for Transport,
UK 2014).

Page | 30

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Department for Transport UK, Transport Analysis Guidance: Supplementary Guidance –

Land Use/Transport Interaction Models (2014)

o Introduces the core principles of LUTI models but does not provide practical
guidance for the implementation of models (Department for Transport, UK 2014).

o Explains to practitioners the value of LUTI models, detail types of LUTI models, and
the simulation/analysis process to determine both transport and land-use outcomes.
Also provides advice on effective communication of LUTI modelling results to key
stakeholders.

• Department for Transport UK, TAG UNIT A4.3 – Place-Based Analysis (2022)

o Presents step-by-step guidance to conducting place-based analysis of townships,

villages, cities and regions (transport appraisal accounting for spatial economic and
social impacts) (Department for Transport, UK 2022).

o The guidance covers mapping techniques to establish transport and land-use

relationships, describes spatial analysis and accessibility analysis methodologies.

• United States Department of Transportation, A guidebook for best practices on

integrated land use and travel demand modelling (2014)

o Research report that summarises and evaluates available LUTI models and
consolidates best modelling practices to derive robust decision-making accounting
for all users and the overall environment (Golias, Mishra and Psarros 2014).

• United States NCHRP Synthesis 520: Integrated Transportation and Land Use Models
(2018)

o Describes the basic principles of land use and transport integration.

o Discusses different types of land use models including the sketch planning models
and advanced behavioural models (specifically, microsimulation discrete choice
models and spatial input-output models).

Accessibility Measures

Accessibility measures quantify the ease of reaching destinations or obtaining services from a
particular location within the transport and land use system. Simple measures of accessibility
consider travel time, distance, catchment areas, and leverage gravity models and other composite
measurement techniques (expected maximum random utility-based measures) (Ben-Akiva and
Lerman 2021).

Engelberg, et al. provide the most recent summary of accessibility measures extracted from land
use and LUTI modelling (Engelberg, et al. 2021). Miller discusses the challenges of defining,
measuring and applying accessibility metrics in the modelling space and in practice, noting that the
main constraint in developing robust accessibility measures relates to the heterogeneity of agents
within the system (Miller 2018). Subjective aspects make it difficult to compare across different
locations and demographics, making it difficult to account for heterogeneity. Miller details that
many metrics are static in nature and require multiple readings over time to assess whether
accessibility outcomes have been achieved.

Engelberg et al. contend that future frameworks should adopt disaggregate, activity-based
accessibility measures to better capture accessibility as a core variable within LUTI models and
reflect heterogeneities in choice (Engelberg, et al. 2021). This is particularly relevant given the rapid
evolution of technology affecting how people live and their mobility patterns.

Page | 31

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

The future of Land-use Modelling and Place Forecasting

Moeckel, et al summarises the state of the art of integrated land use and transport modelling and
reports (Moeckel, et al. 2018). The paper identifies major challenges in integrated land use and
transport modelling and proposes paths that support successful implementations. Particular
attention is given to the coordination of short- and long-term decisions, the technical integration of
models, microscopic versus macroscopic frameworks and appropriate levels of model complexity.
The paper concludes with five themes that require further research to ensure that integrated land
use and transport models will keep up with modelling needs in the future:

• Data storage and exchange formats

• Open-source modelling frameworks

• Model documentation and tutorials

• Education

• Extensibility

Alipour and Dia present the systematic review of 195 publications on land use, transport, and
energy environment integration (Alipour and Dia 2023). Their key findings were that current LUTI
modelling and place forecasting techniques have focused on accessibility planning, transit-oriented
development, and policy integration to achieve sustainable cities and urban environments. Further
research and model development is necessary to capture the impacts of climate change by
incorporating environmental variables (and sub-models) and integration of energy systems
(Keirstead, Jennings and Sivakumar 2012). In addition, smart city innovations and disruptive
technologies such as connected and automated vehicles will significantly impact the way
communities travel. LUTI models must effectively account for shifts in behaviour (Kii, et al. 2016).

Hawkins and Nurul Habib provide a summary of the LUTI model used to forecast the impacts of
autonomous vehicles, specifically discussing urban sprawl and economic agglomeration (Hawkins
and Nurul Habib 2019). The study highlights that future work requires enhance modelling of future
scenarios that consider gradual introduction of autonomous vehicles and other new disruptive
technologies.

Page | 32

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

3.2 Volume 2 – Strategic Modelling Guidelines

Transport models are mathematical representations of the movement of goods and people through
a study area. They belong to a hierarchy defined by scale and purpose, generally classified as either
macroscopic and long-term strategic models or operational and short-term detailed models.

Strategic models involve travel demand models and transport supply models that interact to
produce aggregate metrics that describe transport network performance (de Dios Ortúzar and
Willumsen 2011). Demand models predict travel patterns and infrastructure/service usage, while
supply models simulate the performance of the travel demanded to describe infrastructure level of
service (Cascetta 2001). These models contain high-level network topology and support a breadth
of output requirements. Strategic models in Australia are used to (Infrastructure Australia 2019)
(ATAP 2019):

• Conduct scenario analysis to gauge the impact of changes to infrastructure, policy

development and define future transport strategies.

• Identify and assess metropolitan-wide/regional impacts of land use, socio-economic,

demographic, and transport infrastructure changes.

• Provide metropolitan-wide/regional forecasts of trip generation, trip distribution, mode

choice, and assignment of trips to the transport networks.

• Account for public and active transport utilisation, travel demand management, and shifts in
traveller behaviour over time.

• Provide user benefits for project business case assessments.

Background to Strategic Modelling within the transport landscape

The 4-step transport modelling methodology introduced in the 1960’s, is the most common
approach to developing a strategic model in practice (Anda, Erath and Fourie 2017) (de Dios Ortúzar
and Willumsen 2011). The systemic process involves the following steps (Anda, Erath and Fourie
2017):

• Trip Generation: estimates the number of trips generation from each zone in the model.

• Trip Distribution: distributes the trips between each OD pair in the model.

• Mode Choice: separates the trips between each OD pair by model of travel.

• Trip Assignment: assigns trips to the network and evaluates network performance.

A feedback loop influences travel behaviour and iterates all steps of the modelling process to reach
network equilibrium (de Dios Ortúzar and Willumsen 2011). Each step contains sub-models that
could serve as standalone strategic models, for example the Public Transport Project Model (PTPM)
in Sydney which focuses on mode choice.

Strategic modelling has evolved since the 1990s due to increased availability of fine grained travel
data and improvements in computational processes. Activity Based Models (ABM) have been
formulated and applied in some international jurisdictions (Anda, Erath and Fourie 2017). Scientific
literature has reviewed the development, implementation, advantages, and disadvantages of ABMs
(Bhat and Koppelman 2003) (Rasouli and Timmermans 2014). Unlike the aggregate nature of the 4-
step modelling process, ABMs model individual activity patterns (work, school, shopping, leisure
trips etc.) and simulate each decision of an individual journey. This requires more detailed travel
behaviour data and considerably more resources to develop and maintain, however it overcomes
some of the shortcomings of the 4-step approach. ABMs allow for more detailed metric extraction
Page | 33

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

including agent-level data, overcome the independence between steps the 4-step modelling
process exhibits, allow for greater exploration of policy-based assumptions on travel behaviour, and
track entire trips and hence trip dependencies.

ABMs have been applied in academia (Axhausen and Gärling 1992) (Rasouli and Timmermans 2014)
(Travel Forecasting Resource 2023) but examples of application in Australia are limited. Strategic
models used in NSW include:

• Strategic Travel Model (STM): four-step tour-based model used for testing travel response
to land use and infrastructure changes.

• Public Transport Project Model (PTPM): incremental mode choice model used for business
case evaluation of public transport schemes.

• Strategic Motorway Planning Model (SMPM): used for toll road forecasting and motorway
planning.

• Strategic Traffic Forecasting Model (STFM): used for traffic impact assessments in relation
to precincts.

• Regional Travel Model (RTM): data-driven model used for assessing regional travel.

• Strategic Freight Model (SFM): freight demand and movement model that takes into
consideration both domestic and international drivers and commodities within the system.

• Regional Freight Model (RFM): freight demand and movement model of regional freight.

Existing Strategic Modelling Guidance

Strategic models have been used for transport planning purposes since the 1960s and accordingly
there is a plethora of literature and guidance surrounding the topic. Summarised below are key
guidelines relevant to the current context.

• Roads and Maritime Services (now Transport for New South Wales), Traffic Modelling
Guidelines (2013)

o Presents a framework for the development and maintenance of traffic models in

NSW (TfNSW 2013).

o Aim to ensure that traffic models (all forms of strategic and operational models) are
developed and applied in a transparent, rigorous, and consistent manner to support
transport planning and decision-making in NSW.

o Strategic modelling is covered in Section 8 and Section 9 documenting processes to

define and develop a 4-step model. Calibration and validation processes are
stipulated and benchmarks provided for practitioners to target. Though guidance is
software agnostic, different types of software available to practitioners is detailed.

• RAND Europe Research Reports regarding “Modelling Transport Demand in Sydney,

Australia (2012 - 2015)

o Comprehensive documentation (ten reports from 2012 to 2015) of the re-estimation

of the STM to account for changes in travel behaviour and include new components
such as better accountability of toll roads, park and ride schemes, and enhanced
accountability of public and active transport modes (RAND Europe 2013).

o Provides detailed background information of the STM.

Page | 34

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines, T1 – Travel Demand Modelling

(2016)

o Similar to the now superseded 2013 Traffic Modelling Guidelines (TfNSW 2013), the
ATAP guidance provides information for practitioners about the steps involved in
developing a 4-step model.

o Unlike the 2013 Traffic Modelling Guidelines, only high-level guidance is provided
and specific details regarding data preparation, calibration, validation are not
presented (ATAP 2016).

• Transport for New South Wales, Technical note on assessing the impacts of COVID-19 for
Business cases (2021)

o Guidance to undertake sensitivity analysis of Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) results to

estimate the impacts of COVID-19 (long term trends) (TfNSW 2021).

o Provides practitioners guidance for inputs to operational and strategic modelling to

appropriately account for changes in travel behaviour and the necessary sensitivity
analysis to cater for pandemic like conditions.

• Federal Highway Administration, Travel Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking

Manual (2nd Edition) (2010)

o Guidance developed as a document arising from the “Travel Model Improvement

Program” (TMIP) which focuses on implementing best state of practice and state of
the art modelling methods. The manual offers guidance on the development of
model validation plans including validation of data collection, specifications
regarding sensitivity testing, and documentation for future users (Cambridge
Systematics 2010).

• Transport for London, Traffic Modelling Guidelines (2021)

o Practitioner oriented guidance document that is similar in detail and coverage to

that of the 2013 Traffic Modelling Guidelines.

o Discusses strategic modelling in the context of “tactical modelling” (focused on

scenario analysis applying highway traffic assignment models) but does not provide
extensive detail on 4-step modelling at a strategic level or activity-based modelling
(Beeston, Blewitt and Bulmer, et al. 2021).

• Virginia Department of Transport, Travel Demand Modelling Policies and Procedures

(2020)

o State-based guidance for the purpose and application of travel demand modelling.

o Details case specific utilisation of demand modelling, data inputs, validation

processes and step by step execution of the 4-step process (Cambridge
Systematics 2020).

Freight Modelling

Freight modelling is a key sub-model within the overarching strategic transport modelling
framework, focusing on movement of goods across various transport networks (road, rail, air, and
sea). From the perspective of TfNSW, freight modelling relates to the regional and local distribution
of goods via road and rail. Freight modelling is key to optimising supply chains, identifying
bottlenecks, estimating travel times and resource requirements, and evaluating the environmental
and economic impacts of freight movements. TfNSW publishes two key resources in modelling
freight movements across NSW:
Page | 35

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• NSW Freight Data Hub: This central repository collects, integrates, and shares freight-
related data to support planning. It includes information on freight movements,
infrastructure, and industry characteristics. This data can be leveraged for existing and
future freight modelling efforts (TfNSW 2019).

• NSW Strategic Freight Model Flatfile: Forecasts state freight demand considering
economic trends, population growth, industry profiles, and trade patterns. Model outputs
include future freight volumes by mode, commodity, and year, and characteristics of the
freight movements (TfNSW 2018).

Generally, strategic freight modelling approaches include trip-based models (a subset of 4-step
modelling), commodity flow models (aggregate models of commodity flow), network models,
integrated models with passenger transport modes, and econometric models (statistical models
identifying system-wide volumes of freight) (Crainic and Laporte 1997) (Tavasszy 2008). Recent
research in NSW has contributed to the advancement of freight modelling. Hensher, et al.
developed an aggregate spatial freight modal demand model system for truck and commodity
movements (Hensher, Wei, et al. 2022). The model assesses distance-based road pricing schemes,
emphasising the importance of truck and freight movements in potential future applications.
Hensher and Teye developed a path analysis freight model that incorporates commodity production
and consumption and their driving factors (Hensher and Teye 2019). These models test freight
policies and forecast community accessibility to goods in future scenarios (Teye and Hensher 2021).

Value of Travel Time (VOT)

The value of travel time savings (VTTS) and value of time (VOT) are complex and important topics in
strategic transport modelling to compute generalised cost, and are used in cost–benefit analysis of
transport projects and policies. Different research methods and segmentations can lead to different
results for VTTS and VOT (Carrion and Levinson 2012) (Hensher, Li and Rose 2013) (Li, Hensher and
Rose 2010).

Within the strategic modelling context where focus is on evaluating long-term regional trends, VOT
can be incorporated via income stratification. This approach allows for a granular analysis of
traveller behaviour and mode choice decision-making. Alternatively, disaggregate modelling that
captures individual decision making can be used, where specific income-based VOT parameters are
set. In the context of economic appraisal such as a cost-benefit analysis or multi-criteria analysis,
VTTS and VOT values are used to assess the economic viability of specific projects or interventions
(TfNSW 2016). Future research and application should focus on obtaining metrics from strategic
models that considers VOT (accounting for heterogeneity of the population).

Regarding VTTS and VOT data, Shires and de Jong provide an international meta-analysis of VTTS
across 25 European countries, highlighting variations in VTTS by income, country, travel purpose,
mode, distance, and by survey method (Shires and de Jong 2009). Abrantes and Wardman provide a
comprehensive meta-review of variations in VOT estimates from 226 studies conducted between
1960 and 2008 in the U.K., yielding a total of 1,749 values as one of the largest VOT data sets.
(Abrantes and Wardman 2011).

The future of Strategic Modelling

The proliferation of “big data” sources, such as mobile phone records, smart card data, and geo-
coded social media presents an opportunity to develop more granular and accurate models (Anda,
Erath and Fourie 2017). The future of strategic modelling will likely integrate probabilistic models
with machine learning techniques with traditional transport models (Iliashenko, Iliashenko and
Lukyanchenko 2021). Other key recent developments include integration of transport and emissions
models to consider climate change and introduction of disruptive technologies such as connected
Page | 36

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

and autonomous vehicles (CAVs), electric vehicles, and drones (Brand, Anable and Morton 2019)
(Zhao, et al. 2020). Additionally, greater emphasis is being placed on incorporating equity
considerations into transport models, to ensure inclusive and equitable transport planning and
decision-making (Camporeale, Caggiani and Ottomanelli 2019) (Cui, et al. 2019) (Zhang, et al. 2023)
(Zhang and Waller 2019). Research and application direction that will shape practice and guidance
include:

• Modelling techniques that capture travel time reliability as a decision factor for mode
choice and traffic assignment, such as Strategic User Equilibrium (StrUE), which can
improve economic appraisal by providing more comprehensive and accurate insights by
considering reliability as an output of modelling and also influence on route choice (Duell, et
al. 2019).

• Investigation into demand management strategies is necessary to ease road network

congestion. Peak spreading requires further incorporation within strategic models
(Holyoak and Chang 2006) (Holyoak and Taylor 2006) (Loudon, Ruiter and Schlappi 1988)
(Van Vuren, et al. 1999). Many studies offer valuable insights, however, more up-to-date
research that leverages novel data science techniques is required to develop guidelines that
address the challenges and opportunities associated with managing peak travel demand
effectively.

• Toll road demand modelling warrants further investigation and understanding. Kriger, Shiu
and Naylor reviewed the state of practice by leveraging literature and surveying
practitioners, providing checklists and frameworks to improve the modelling practice
(Kriger, Shiu and Naylor 2006) . Davidson discusses various toll road modelling approaches,
analysing their advantages and disadvantages (Davidson 2011). Li and Hensher identify
errors in toll road estimation and modelling specifically in the Australian context (Li and
Hensher 2010) . Nicolaisen and Driscoll present a literature review that critiques the lack of
transparency in methodologies used for travel demand in forecasting in general without a
specific focus on toll roads (Nicolaisen and Driscoll 2014).

• Disruptive technologies including connected and autonomous vehicles, electric vehicle

adoption, ride-sharing, carpooling, and Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) in transport modelling
is an area of growing importance. Waller and Wijayaratna highlight the necessity for
macroscopic modelling to manage disruptive technologies (Waller and Wijayaratna 2021).
Numerous publications propose modifying modelling parameters such as link cost functions
to account for disruptive technologies (Gyergyay, et al. 2019) (Qiu, et al. 2022). Shen et al
provide a recent review of a variety of transport models that present optimal scenarios of
electric vehicle adoption (Shen, et al. 2019). Soteropoulos, Berger, and Ciari reviewed
modelling studies that consider connected and/or autonomous vehicle impact on travel
behaviour and land use and concluded that modelling results are highly sensitive to model
assumptions including future activity patterns and supply-side parameters (Soteropoulos,
Berger and Ciari 2019). Calvert et al emphasise the need for collaboration among three
stakeholder groups: industry partners developing AVs, academic traffic flow modelling
researchers, and government agencies responsible for regulation (Calvert, et al. 2018) .

These research directions and emerging trends in transport modelling indicate a growing
recognition of the need for more advanced and comprehensive modelling techniques that account
for factors like travel time reliability, peak spreading, toll road demand, and the impact of emerging
technologies. By addressing these areas, transport models can better capture the complexities of
transport systems and contribute to more effective and informed decision-making processes.

3.3 Volume 3 – Operational Modelling Guidelines

Page | 37

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Operational traffic models are designed to provide detailed near-real-time information on transport
systems. These models consider factors such as current traffic flow, travel times, and transit
schedules to provide up-to-date information used to manage transportation systems. Operational
models typically use short-term data such as data collected from sensors and real-time traffic
feeds, to estimate current mobility patterns and behaviours. These models are used to help manage
traffic congestion, optimise transit schedules, and respond to transportation incidents.

Background to Operational Traffic Modelling within the transport landscape

Operational traffic models provide practitioners a tool to assess, monitor, and evaluate traffic
management strategies across short time horizons (de Dios Ortúzar and Willumsen 2011). Two broad
categories can be used to classify operational models; analytical models like intersection models
based on queueing theory, and simulation models like agent based, mesoscopic, and microscopic
models. Consistency between the strategic models and operational traffic models ensures that
strategic planning initiatives can be operationalised. Accordingly, strategic modelling outputs are
used as inputs for operational models.

Analytical models underpinned by various delay and queuing models were developed prior to 1960
(Greenshields, et al. 1935). These models use empirical observations of traffic flow to evaluate road
transport systems by providing an overall Level of Service (LoS) based on queuing, delay, and
saturation of infrastructure. Chun summarised a variety of macroscopic, mesoscopic, and
microscopic analytical approaches to operationally analyse road traffic systems (Chun 2022).

The lack of visualisation and spatial description of analytical model outputs are a constraint in
communicating results to a wider audience. Furthermore, aggregation of traffic conditions, in both
temporal and spatial contexts limits the analysis of complex infrastructure and land use settings.
Technological advancements in computing have facilitated development of simulation models that
visualise existing and predicted scenarios while also capturing individual vehicle and user
behaviour.

Microscopic simulation models were introduced in the late 1970s and early 1980s as a response to
limitations of analytical models (Asuka and Komaya 1996) (Gartner 1973) (Seddon 1972) .
Microscopic simulation models enable a granular perspective by simulating the behaviour of
individual vehicles in traffic, offering a detailed view of traffic flow and behaviour and making them
valuable for evaluating intersections and corridors. These models facilitate analysis of changes in
traffic signals, roadway geometries, and other factors contributing to traffic flow and congestion.

Mesoscopic Traffic Modelling and Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA)

Mesoscopic models bridge the gap between macroscopic strategic models and microscopic
simulation models. They serve as regional simulation models that provide more detailed outputs
compared to macroscopic models but without the level of disaggregation and fine granularity of a
microsimulation model. Mesoscopic models capture larger-scale impacts of transport system
changes with enhanced operational assessments, striking a balance between complexity and
computational burden. Chao et al provides a review of various simulation studies, outlining
advancements and findings within the field (Chao, et al. 2019) .

The Dynamic Traffic Assignment: A Primer (Chiu, et al. 2011) provides comprehensive academic
foundational information about dynamic traffic assignment (DTA). The DTA Primer aids decision
making by practitioners in planning and managing DTA modelling activities. The DTA Primer:

• Explains the concepts of DTA and various DTA definitions and implementations.
Page | 38

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Highlights the types of transportation analysis applications for DTA models.

• Provides information about selecting a DTA model that best serves the intended application.

• Provides information regarding planning for and executing a DTA traffic analysis activity.

• Describes the general DTA modelling procedure and issues that may concern a model user.

Existing Operational Traffic Modelling Guidance

Operational models have been used for transport planning purposes since the 1960s and
accordingly there is a plethora of literature and guidance surrounding the topic. Listed and
summarised below are key guidance documents relevant to the current context.

• Roads and Maritime Services (now Transport for New South Wales), Traffic Modelling
Guidelines (2013)

o Presents a framework for the development and maintenance of traffic models in

NSW (TfNSW 2013).

o Aim to ensure that traffic models are developed and applied in a transparent,
rigorous, and consistent manner to support planning and decision-making in NSW.

o Section 11 and 12 details “Microsimulation Modelling” and the incorporation of

SCATSIM within microsimulation, covering network coding practices, calibration and
validation benchmarks, methods for sensitivity analysis, and reporting practices.

o Section 13 presents Corridor Modelling via LinSig (microanalytical modelling tool

capable of modelling isolate or coordinated networks), providing a basic
understanding of the software and guidance to develop, calibrate, and validate a
corridor model.

o Appendices include data collection protocols (used for calibration and validation
purposes) and specifics related to SCATS and gap acceptance parameters
necessary for the development of microsimulation models.

• Transport for New South Wales, Mesoscopic Network Representation – Protocols for
Model Handling (2016)

o Guidance for the consistent development, reuse, and maintenance of base

mesoscopic model network in the Aimsun platform, however, general practices can
be translated to other software platforms (TfNSW 2016).

o Details the underpinning of the Sydney Aimsun Foundation Network (SAFN) to

coordinate network geometry across different mesoscopic models.

o Details data requirements, coding, scripting and coordination between models.

• Transport for New South Wales, Technical Direction - Operational Modelling reporting
structure (TTD 2017.001) (2017)

o This technical direction the outlines reporting structure to accompany the

development and application of transport models (TfNSW 2017).

o Must be read in conjunction with the 2013 Traffic Modelling Guidelines (TfNSW
2013).

o Details the need for modelling methodology, base model development, option testing
reports.

Page | 39

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Transport for New South Wales, Technical direction traffic signals in microsimulation
modelling (TTD 2018.002) (2018)

o This Technical Direction is about traffic signals in microsimulation modelling

(TfNSW 2018).

o Provides an overview of SCATS and details signal timings that should be replicated
in microsimulation models. Identifies SCATS data and data sources that are
necessary for the development of microsimulation models.

• Transport for New South Wales, Technical note on assessing the impacts of COVID-19 for
Business cases (2021)

o Guidance to undertake sensitivity analysis of Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) to

estimate the impacts of COVID-19 (long term trends) (TfNSW 2021) .

o Provides practitioners guidance for inputs to operational and strategic modelling to

appropriately account for changes in travel behaviour and the necessary sensitivity
analysis to cater for pandemic-like conditions.

• Main Roads Western Australia, Operational Modelling Guidelines (2021)

o Guidance that explicitly defines the overarching topic of Operational Modelling

(Main Roads Western Australia 2021).

o Similar in structure to the Transport for London Traffic Modelling Guidelines which
provides general guidance for all forms of operational models (Section 2), and
provides detailed guidance for specific software platforms; LinSig (Section 3),
SIDRA (Section 4), Vissim (Section 5), and Aimsun (Section 6).

o Covers the entire modelling process and considers network coding, calibration,
validation, sensitivity analysis, and reporting.

• Main Roads Western Australia, Mesoscopic and Hybrid Modelling Guidelines (2021)

o Standardises mesoscopic and hybrid modelling practices used by Main Roads to

enable a transparent modelling process while also improving the robustness of
model outputs (Main Roads Western Australia 2021).

o Offers several Excel-based model auditing checklists for Aimsun, Vissim and
Visum .

• Austroads, Management of Traffic Modelling Processes and Application (2021)

o Research report that provides comprehensive guidance for project managers to

deliver a successful traffic model that meets the desired aims for the community
and governing transport authority (Austoads 2021).

o Provides insights for the appropriate use of simulation (mesoscopic and

microscopic) and intersection models across the spectrum of transport project
types.

o Details the structure and processes involved in both simulation and intersection
models and synthesises modelling guidance across all states and territories in
Australia.

Page | 40

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• VicRoads, Transport Modelling Guidelines Volume 4 – Simulation modelling (2019)

o Road network simulation guidance for practitioners similar in nature to the 2013
Traffic Modelling Guidelines (VicRoads 2019).

o Generic, software independent guidance that covers in detail the entire simulation
process focusing on mesoscopic and microscopic simulation (VicRoads 2019).

• VicRoads, Transport Modelling Guidelines Volume 5 – Intersection modelling (Draft)

(2020)

o Details the Victoria Department of Transport expectations for reporting and practice
related to intersection modelling (VicRoads 2020).

o Guidelines cover the topics of model scope, data collection and analysis, model
development, reporting, and modelling context.

o Provides high level appreciation of transport modelling and contextualises

intersection modelling as a specific operational assessment of a component of road
infrastructure.

o Includes details for data collection, calibration, validation, options testing,

evaluation, reporting and presentation as well as quality assurance.

• Software Vendor User Guides

Software vendors have produced guidance for the application of operational models within
a particular software platform. Guides include:

o LinSig User Guide (Moore 2011)

o SIDRA User Guide (SIDRA Solutions 2023)

o Vissim User Guide (Planung Transport Verkehr (PTV) 2018)

o Aimsun User Guide (Aimsun 2022)

• Transport for London, Traffic Modelling Guidelines (2021)

o Practitioner-oriented guidance document that is similar in detail and coverage to

that of the 2013 Traffic Modelling Guidelines.

o Published recently, the guidance provides greater instruction for the inclusion of
public and active transport modes, including a complete section regarding
emissions modelling (ability to measure climate change impacts) (Transport for
London 2021).

o Software based discussion of a variety of operational models (from analytical

models to detailed mesoscopic and microscopic models).

• Transport for London, Model Auditing Process – Traffic Schemes in London Urban
Networks (2017)

o This is a supplement to Transport for London’s Traffic Modelling Guidelines and

provides guidance for practitioners to deliver their Model Audit Process (MAP)
(Beeston and Blewitt 2023) .

o The MAP is a systematic and rigorous evaluation process used to assess the
accuracy, reliability, and appropriateness of operational transport models used by
the organisation. It considers the review and verification of model inputs, data
sources, assumptions, and methodologies to ensure robustness of models (Beeston
and Blewitt 2023).

Page | 41

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• New Zealand Transport Agency, Economic Evaluation Manual (2013)

o Provides procedures to evaluate the economic efficiency of investment proposals in

line with the New Zealand Transport Agency’s Assessment Framework (NZTA 2013).

o Details capturing both direct and wider impacts of transport projects and use of
model outputs within economic appraisal and infrastructure monitoring.

o Takes into consideration social and environmental aspects while also accounting for
uncertainty through sensitivity and risk analysis.

o Section 2.12 discusses the use of transport models and the Appendices provide
details regarding the type of traffic data and estimation techniques required when
curating inputs for economic appraisal.

The future of Operational Modelling

The future of operational modelling mirrors that of strategic modelling. Disruptive mobility
technologies (connected and autonomous vehicles, electric vehicles, ride-sharing etc) will change
driver behaviour in both analytical and simulation-based approaches. Furthermore, access to fine
grained and up-to-date data of active, public, and private modes of travel enhances the assessment
of complex infrastructure and behavioural settings, such as the modelling of shared environments in
multi-modal interchanges. The future of operational traffic modelling is expected to bring several
advancements to enhance accuracy, efficiency, and effectiveness of traffic management and
transportation planning.

Some key aspects that may shape the future of operational traffic modelling include:

• Integration of Real-Time Data: increasing availability of real-time data from various sources
such as connected vehicles, mobile devices, and smart infrastructure, will allow operational
traffic models to access new and near real-time information of existing traffic conditions.
Specifically, real-time data can support the proliferation of adaptive and stochastic traffic
assignment models (Ashfaq, et al. 2021) (Kucharski and Gentile 2019) (Waller and
Ziliaskopoulos 2006). Calibration and validation of models could occur more frequently
given access to live data, enabling dynamic modelling and prediction of traffic flow,
congestion, travel times, and adaptive traffic management strategies (Wojtowicz and
Wallace 2010) .

• Advanced Data Analytics and Machine Learning: will enable the identification of patterns,
trends, and anomalies in traffic data (Atta, et al. 2021), facilitating improved traffic
prediction, incident detection and decision-making (Robles-Serrano, Sanchez-Torres and
Branch-Bedoya 2021). Machine learning models can also assist in optimising signal timings
(Maadi, et al. 2022) , route recommendations, and other traffic management strategies
(Alomari, Katib and Mehmood 2020).

• Resilience and Emergency Management: in the context of climate change, future

operational traffic models will place greater emphasis on resilience and emergency
management (Alipour and Dia 2023). These models will simulate the impacts of various
incidents, disasters, and extreme weather events on networks, supporting development of
proactive strategies for mitigating disruptions, optimising evacuation plans, and enhancing
the resilience of transportation system.

• Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs): Soteropoulos, Berger, and Ciari summarise
the impact of CAVs considering the spectrum of modelling approaches (Soteropoulos,
Berger and Ciari 2019). Research has focused on incorporating CAVs as a new vehicle class
within simulated environments by translating physical vehicle technologies into microscopic
Page | 42

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

and mesoscopic simulation environments (Virdi, Grzybowska, et al. 2019) (Sinha, et al. 2020)
(Ahmed, Huang and Lu 2021) (Raju and Farah 2021). Research has also focused on
infrastructure requirements (dedicated lanes, road segments) for the mass scale adoption
of CAVs in mixed traffic environments evaluating both operational efficiency (Virdi 2020)
and safety (Sinha, et al. 2020).

• Enhanced Multimodal Modelling: leveraging real-time data, crowd-sourced data, and

advanced data analytics methodologies, operational models will improve the depiction of
multimodal scenarios. Ameli, Lebacque, and Leclercq provide several optimisation
techniques and traffic assignment methods for multi-modal environments, revealing that
application is only feasible with transparent and real-time data access (Ameli, Lebacque and
Leclercq 2021). This integrated multimodal modelling approach will provide a
comprehensive understanding of the entire transportation system, enabling better
coordination and optimisation of multimodal networks.

• Simulation and Visualisation Technologies: advanced simulation and visualisation

technologies will become more prevalent in operational traffic modelling. High-fidelity
simulation platforms will enable the testing and evaluation of different traffic management
strategies, infrastructure designs, and policy interventions in virtual environments.
Visualisation tools such as augmented reality (AR) (Ishii, et al. 2002) (Perez, et al. 2019) and
virtual reality (VR) (Hasan, et al. 2021) , will enhance understanding and communication of
complex traffic data and model outputs.

While these opportunities present significant enhancements, they are accompanied by challenges
such as data access, maintaining privacy and security, and developing the requisite governance and
planning frameworks (Shoman, et al. 2023). Research has modelled complex multi-modal and CAV
settings without having this modelling replicated in practice, indicating a knowledge transfer and
information accessibility gap. Finally, limitations in operational modelling persist including
capturing congestion and capacity interaction effects (Shoman, et al. 2023). Further research and
collaboration with practitioners can overcome these challenges, coupled with advancements
detailed above contributing to more efficient traffic management, improved decision-making, and
the development of smarter and more sustainable transportation systems.

Page | 43

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

3.4 Volume 4 – Active Transport Modelling Guidelines

Active transport modelling refers to the use of mathematical models to predict and analyse
behaviours of individuals who choose to walk, cycle, or use other forms micromobility. Active
transport models incorporate several factors that influence individual travel behaviour, such as the
availability and quality of infrastructure (e.g., foot paths, bike lanes), the distance and time required
to travel, the attractiveness of the environment, and individual characteristics such as age, gender,
and income.

By simulating the active transport related choices of individuals, transport planners use models to
evaluate the effectiveness of different policies, interventions, and infrastructure aimed at promoting
active transport. The models can also be used to forecast future trends in active transport
behaviour and to develop more efficient and sustainable transport plans for cities and communities.

Background to Active Transport Modelling

Active transport modelling to date is generally isolated into the two main categories of pedestrian
modelling and bicycle modelling, without the consideration of holistic active transport models
capturing multiple active modes (Zare, et al. 2022).

Pedestrian modelling is a well-established domain within literature with focus on both theoretical
and data-driven approaches to depict traveller behaviours (Kouskoulis, Spyropoulou and Antoniou
2018) (Lilasathapornkit and Saberi 2022) (Papadimitriou, Yannis and Golias 2009) (Saberi,
Mahmassani and S 2014). Theoretical models generally use cellular automata (Flötteröd and
Lämmel 2015), social force (Helbing and Molnar 1995) or lattice gas theory (Hao, et al. 2011) within
simulation environments that allow agents to move across a 360-degree plane. Advancements in
data collection technologies has led data-driven approaches to pedestrian modelling, with
clustering, classification, and regression techniques being used to draw relationships amongst
behavioural parameters. These empirical relationships are then used within simulation
environments to guide movements of pedestrians.

Cycling has generally been incorporated within traditional operational road network models as an
additional mode interacting with vehicles (Ziemke, Metzler and Nagel 2019) with few studies
investigating cycling in shared active environments (Anvari, et al. 2015) (Frosch, Martinelli and
Unnikrishnan 2019). In the context of demand modelling, Lovelace et al. present “The Propensity to
Cycle Tool”, an open-source planning tool that leverages origin-destination data to model cycling
uptake at the regional and route level given existing conditions or policy shift (Lovelace, et al.
2017) . Models of this nature do not consider the operational interactions with other modes limiting
their applicability in multi-modal contexts.

Lee and Sener review emerging data sources such as mobile and navigation data and their use in
calibrating and validating active transport models (Lee and Sener 2020). Mode-specific data tends
to focus on cycling, allowing practitioners to identify travel patterns, model route choice, estimate
pollution exposure, and assess demands for infrastructure. They also describe data sampling bias
and privacy issues, restricting correlations with demographic and traveller information data.

Existing Active Transport Modelling Guidance

Considering the relative emergence of active transport modelling, especially when compared with
strategic modelling and operational traffic modelling, there is limited formalised guidance for the
modelling of active modes. However, below is a list of existing publications that include discussion
or commentary related to active transport modelling:

Page | 44

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Transport for New South Wales, Walking Space Guide – Towards Pedestrian Comfort and
Safety (2020)

o Provides guidance, standards, and tools to support the provision of walking spaces
across the road network and public realm.

o Offers a clear set of definitions related to footpath design, implementation, and

monitoring. Discusses COVID-19 implications and level of service requirements for
footpath design and maintenance.

o Provides step-by-step guidance to conduct site investigations and assess

footpath/walking space requirements (TfNSW 2020).

o Focuses on the design/site investigation of infrastructure and provides network

configuration support for the development of models (does not cover modelling).

• Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads: Pedestrian Demand Forecasting

Guideline (2021)

o Provides guidance to practitioners to forecast demand for pedestrians for new

infrastructure such as: footpaths or shared paths, including 'missing links' in an
existing path network, unsignalised road crossings such as pedestrian refuges,
zebra or wombat crossings or grade-separated infrastructure, and/or signalised
road crossings, including mid-block pedestrian-operated signals and pedestrian
crossings at signalised intersections (Department of Transport and Main Roads
Queensland 2021).

o Does not consider pedestrian simulation modelling of crowd dynamics for purposes
such as typical and emergency egress from train stations or sports stadiums.

o Technical details of the forecasting approach are reported in a Research Report,

Technical Report on validation, and Direct Demand Models report.

• Austroads Forecasting Demand for Bicycle Facilities (2001)

o Reviews methods for estimating cycling demand under different conditions.

o Provides a framework for analysing data to develop demand forecasts for bicycle
use.

o Reviews major forecasting methods that are grouped into eight categories
including; comparison studies, aggregate behaviour studies, maximal share studies,
sketch-plan method, regional travel models, discrete choice models, advanced
behavioural modelling techniques and GIS based methods (Austroads 2001).

o Assists practitioners in selecting the most appropriate forecasting method(s) based

on the level and intensity of data requirements/collection, the size and scope of the
proposed facility, and the level of technical skill required.

• US Department of Transportation, Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of

Pedestrian Facilities (2014)

o Guide focuses on identifying effective measures for accommodating pedestrians on

roads, streets, and highways.

o Consists of five main chapters that discuss the needs and characteristic, design
elements, crossing treatments, maintenance and level of service of pedestrian
infrastructure (United States Department of Transportation 2014).

o Provides a comprehensive framework for designing and operating pedestrian

facilities.
Page | 45

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Australian Institute of Traffic Planning and Management, Pedestrian Modelling

Guidelines (2021)

o Provides microsimulation modelling guidance to enhance and standardise the

depiction of pedestrians (AITPM 2021).

o Details the need for modelling and discusses the two primary approaches to
modelling- analytical or static modelling and dynamic modelling. Also introduces
hybrid approaches (semi-dynamic spreadsheet modelling).

o Provides information regarding a variety of assessment criteria including standard

level of service approaches and modified approaches presented by global
jurisdictions.

o Presents data aspects, calibration, validation, and result interpretation guidance.

• Roads and Maritime Services (now Transport for New South Wales), How to prepare a bike
plan (2012)

o A guide primarily targeted for Local Councils to develop “bike plans” to encourage
uptake of cycling within the local government area.

o Provides key resourcing information to deliver a bike plan as well as covering

specifics in terms of infrastructure, routes, education, and costing.

o Refers to the use of modelling to identify cycling demand that leverage maximal
share studies or surveys. Briefly discusses forecasting approaches (mode choice
models based on revealed or stated preference surveys). Does not provide modelling
guidance.

• Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Centre (supported by the US Department of

Transportation), Bicycle and Pedestrian Forecasting Tools: State of Practice (2015)

o White paper that provides a comprehensive overview of methods to forecast

demands for pedestrians and cyclists (Aoun, et al. 2015).

o Divides forecasting tools into “aggregate” (mode split percentage outputs) and
“disaggregate” (individual user models to forecast demographic changes in cycling
demand) models. Additionally, covers both demand forecasting and project
prioritisation tools at a variety of geographic scales.

o Provides guidance on the categories and types of models available to a practitioner

but does not offer instructional guidance to develop pedestrian or cycling models.

• European Union, Mobile 2020 – Handbook on Cycling Inclusive Planning and Promotion
(2012)

o Guidance developed to address the project Mobile 2020 – “more biking in small and
medium sized towns of Central and Eastern Europe by 2020” (Deffner, et al. 2012)

o Covers the core areas of strategic and integrated planning to promote cycling,
providing guidance to practitioners regarding infrastructure planning and servicing
the needs of cyclists, educating the wider community of a change in traveller
profiles.

o Does not explicitly cover models or modelling practices.

Page | 46

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines – M4 – Active Travel (2016)

o Holistic guidance across all active travel modes (primary focus on walking and
cycling).

o Provides an overarching discussion of the characteristics of active travel and the

necessary infrastructure (ATAP 2023).

o Details demand modelling techniques to forecast walking and cycling demands.

Briefly presents the main approaches to estimating active travel demand:
comparison studies, aggregate behaviour studies, sketch planning, discrete choice
models, modified 4-step models (START/TRIPS), and GIS methods.

o Includes a section that estimates benefits resulting from the presence of active
travel within the transport system.

• Department for Transport UK, TAG UNIT A5.1 – Active Mode Appraisal (2022)

o Similar in nature to the ATAP guideline for Active Travel (Department for Transport
2022), there is a focus on forecasting active travel demand and quantifying the
economic implications.

o Sections include approaches to forecasting (comparative study, disaggregate mode

choice models, sketch plan methods), calculation methods of key impacts (physical
activity, absenteeism, journey quality, safety, environmental, decongestion, travel
time), and reporting approaches (Department for Transport 2022).

• Transport for London, Station Modelling with Legion Spaceworks: Best Practice Guide
(2016)

o Covers guidance for the application of Legion Spaceworks to model interactions

within stations of the London Rail and Underground infrastructure.

o Outlines basic requirements and technical suggestions for station facilities but does
not provide a guide to use the software (Clear and Wong 2016) .

o Details best practice, modelling notes and modelling parameters.

o Tailored guidance specific to railway station modelling, thus limited in application.

• Austroads, Guide to Road Design Part 6A – Paths for Walking and Cycling (2021)

o Similar in nature to the TfNSW Walking Space Guidelines, however, has greater
details of engineering design aspects and accounts for cycling.

o Provides guidance for designers and other practitioners on the design of paths for
safe and efficient walking and cycling, both within the road corridor and outside the
road corridor (Aumann and Arnold 2017).

o Focuses on the design of infrastructure and this resource will provide network
configuration support for the development of models (does not cover modelling).

Page | 47

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Transport for NSW, Cycleway Design Toolbox – Designing for cycling and micromobility
(2020)

o Practitioner guidance for the design of cycling and micromobility infrastructure in

Greater Sydney and NSW (best practice design guidance for on and off-road cycling).

o Contextualised based on the 6 design principles: (1) Safe, (2) Connected, (3) Direct, (4)
Attractive, (5) Comfortable, and (6) Adaptable (TfNSW 2020).

o Contains sections covering general cycleway design, facility design, public bicycle
parking, context-based designs based on location (parks, school zones, main streets,
transport interchanges) and temporary bicycle infrastructure.

o Focuses on the design of infrastructure and this resource will provide network
configuration support for the development of models (does not cover modelling).

Walking trips in the Strategic Transport Modelling context

Strategic transport models are primarily designed to simulate vehicle travel (driver and passenger)
and public transport. These models often have a limited representation of pedestrian behaviour, and
usually omit or combine walking with cycling as one non-motorised mode. Additionally, most
transport models use coarse zone systems that are not fine-grained enough to accurately represent
walking trips. Another limitation in existing transport models is the understanding of important
factors that influence pedestrian travel, such as activity density, existence of parks, and footpath
gradients. These factors are often omitted from traditional car-oriented transport models and
necessary to better represent walking trips.

Pedestrian traffic assignment (PTA) is a less studied topic in academia and less applied approach in
practice. Unlike car traffic, pedestrian traffic does not often follow pre-specified lanes. Links in a
pedestrian network (e.g., footpaths) often accommodate bidirectional flow and follow a unique
pedestrian fundamental diagram different to car traffic. Several studies in the academic literature
provide a deeper understanding of pedestrian fundamental diagram (Flötteröd and Lämmel 2015)
(Hoogendoorn, et al. 2018) (Nikolić, et al. 2016), mesoscopic pedestrian modelling (Tordeux, et al.
2018), and macroscopic pedestrian modelling (Hänseler, et al. 2017) (Lilasathapornkit, Rey, et al.
2022) (Lilasathapornkit and Saberi 2022) (Moustaid and Flötteröd 2021), relevant to application of
PTA in practice for strategic active transport planning purposes.

While research on pedestrian travel behaviour has grown significantly over the past decade, there is
still insufficient work on pedestrian modelling practices in the context of strategic transport
modelling, especially at a regional level. Singleton et al. (2018) found that 12 of the 48 Metropolitan
Planning Organizations (MPOs) in the US do not include non-motorised trips in their models. The
remaining models include walking and cycling separately or as a combined mode, often only in the
mode choice model. The following provides a few examples of regional strategic models that
include walking and cycling trips:

• Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) Regional Travel Demand Model:
In the DVRPC model, the non-motorised trips are directly modelled in the trip generation
stage (Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission 2011). They are stored as zonal
results and dropped in the trip distribution and traffic assignment stage. The trip generation
models for non-motorised trips include travel zone level attributes such as the number of
households, group quarters population (such as nursing homes, military barracks and
college/university student housing), basic employment, and retail employment.

Page | 48

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• San Francisco County Model (SF-CHAMP): In this model, walking and cycling trips are
modelled separately in the mode choice models (Cambridge Systematics 2002). Pedestrian
environment factors such as network continuity, ease of street crossing, perception of
safety, and topological barriers are considered in mode choice. The route choice model is
applied to cyclists but not to pedestrians. Trip purposes are categorised into work,
education, and others.

• mobiTopp: The model was developed and applied in the German context. mobiTopp
simulates activities over a week (Schnittger and Zumkeller 2004). Walking and cycling
tours/trips are modelled separately for eight trip purposes including shopping and leisure.
Mode choice is modelled after destination choice. There are no pedestrian environment
factors included in the mode choice models.

• Portland Metro Model: The model includes an enhanced non-motorised travel forecasting
methodology by incorporating walking and cycling modes in the mode choice model
(Oregon Metro 2020). Walking and cycling choices are modelled by travel zone as a function
of number of local intersections, households, and total/retail employment.

The Future of Active Transport Modelling

Recent research and practice have focused on capturing the impacts, benefits, and costs of
incorporating active transport modes on site, with limited attention in the context of traffic
modelling (Haustein, Jensen and Nielsen 2019). As detailed above, active transport guidance
documents are present, but traditionally in multi-modal road traffic models they depict time and
spatial allocation without explicit simulation. However, this aspect has changed significantly in
recent years, especially with the adoption of agent-based approaches (Legion modelling and Social
Force Modelling) to depict pedestrians and cyclists in multi-modal environments.

Jafari et al. developed an algorithm that converts existing road networks used for modelling to
better identify cycling and pedestrian infrastructure, simplifying future applications (Jafari, et al.
2022) . As discussed in the Strategic Modelling and Operational Modelling sections of the review,
integration of active modelling within both these landscapes are imperative to define multi-modal
transport management schemes and devise informed strategic plans. In addition to the core
objective of model integration, the following key areas of development may be possible in the
future.

• Emerging Data Collection Technologies: Smartphone fitness applications, GPS tracking

through smartphones, traffic signal data, and CCTV trajectory tracking are emerging data
collection technologies that can enhance the development of active transport models. Lee
and Sener review emerging data sources use in active transport modelling and highlight
that the greatest challenges are sample bias and a lack of trip/traveller information due to
privacy issues (Lee and Sener 2020). They also highlight that data fusion techniques are
required to improve the quality of data produced within these sources. Singleton and Runa
utilised traffic signal data to infer pedestrian counts producing an 84% accuracy as
compared to manual field data collection, highlighting potential for widespread application
(Singleton and Runa 2021).

• Integration of Health and Well-being: Active transport modelling will increasingly

incorporate health and well-being considerations. Macmillan et al present a case study of an
application of placemaking and promotion of active transport in Auckland, New Zealand
(Macmillan, et al. 2020). The paper describes the connections between these interventions
and specific Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets. Mueller et al conducted a Health
Impact Assessment for a district of Barcelona, Spain that experienced a “superblock
transformation” and forecasted the potential health impacts for a region-wide
Page | 49

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

transformation (Mueller, et al. 2020). These analysis techniques combined with strategic and
operational traffic models can forecast the future health and wellbeing of communities,
enabling policymakers to prioritise active transport initiatives that maximise health benefits.

• Dynamic and Real-time Considerations: Like the discussion of operational traffic models,
active transport models will incorporate real-time data to capture dynamic factors
influencing walking and cycling patterns. This includes real-time weather conditions, traffic
congestion, events, and other variables that affect mode choice and route preferences (Lee
and Sener 2021) . Real-time data will enable development of dynamic routing algorithms and
adaptive planning strategies to enhance active transport experiences and safety.

• Accessibility and Equity: Future active transport models will emphasise the analysis of
accessibility and equity considerations. The models will assess the availability and quality of
active transport infrastructure in different neighbourhoods and demographic groups,
addressing issues of social equity and accessibility barriers. This analysis will help identify
areas for improvement and guide investments in infrastructure development to ensure
equitable access to active transport options. Arellana et al discuss the inequality of
pedestrian provisions in Colombia (Arellana, et al. 2021). The study highlights the mismatch
between walking demand and walking infrastructure which needs to be captured directly in
future active transport modelling techniques.

• Behaviour Change Modelling: Future active transport models will incorporate behaviour
change modelling to understand and predict shifts in travel behaviour. These models will
consider factors influencing the adoption of active transportation, such as attitudes, social
norms, personal preferences, and incentives (Mizdrak, Blakely and Cleghorn 2019).
Behaviour change modelling will help design targeted interventions and policies that
encourage more individuals to choose walking and cycling as viable transportation options.

The future of active transport modelling will involve a holistic and data-driven approach that
integrates health considerations, utilises microsimulation modelling techniques, incorporates real-
time data, addresses accessibility and equity, integrates multi-modal transport, incorporates
behaviour change modelling, and embraces emerging technologies. These advancements will
support evidence-based decision-making, facilitate the planning and design of active transport
infrastructure, and promote sustainable and healthy communities.

Page | 50

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

3.5 Volume 5 – Emerging Modelling Techniques and Trends

Guidelines

Accounting for Latent and Induced Demand

Many travel demand models do not capture latent or induced demand which limits their ability to
accurately forecast infrastructure or travel behaviour changes (Næss, Nicolaisen and Strand 2012).

• Latent Demand: refers to the potential travel demand that exists but is not currently being
met due to various factors such as lack of infrastructure or inefficient transport options.

• Induced Demand: refers to the phenomenon where increasing road capacity or improving
transportation infrastructure leads to an increase in travel demand.

Advancements in data collection combined with the use of ABMs and dynamic trip-based models
can support the identification and accountability of both latent and induced demand events
(Ishibashi, Harada and Kawahara 2019). Being able to conduct detailed “before and after” studies of
major changes to a transport system can provide the empirical basis to develop models that correct
for the impacts of both latent and induced demand (Hymel 2019).

Activity Based Modelling

The proliferation of Activity-Based Modelling (ABM) is currently dominating the landscape of

transport modelling and will underpin most future advanced modelling. Unlike traditional trip-based
models that analyse trips from origin to destination, ABMs consider a person's daily activities, their
sequencing, and the associated travel choices. ABMs simulate individual activity patterns and travel
behaviour and account more accurately for the heterogeneity of the community.

Reviews of ABMs span from as recent as 2019 (Yang, et al. 2019) (Soteropoulos, Berger and Ciari
2019)to as early as the 1990s and 2000s (Axhausen and Gärling 1992) and (Algers, Eliasson and
Mattsson 2005) (Bhat and Koppelman 2003). There are significant constraints in developing an ABM
that limit realising their potential to deliver more realistic model outputs. The primary constraint is
the complexity of the model and the data requirements. An ABM requires data to depict each
individual and their activities within a transport system, requiring comprehensive demographic, land
use, travel cost, activity type and duration, and household characteristic data. Data availability can
be overcome with the emergence of big data, however the ability to use the data for calibration and
validation has historically been a challenge which requires computational resources, expertise, and
considerable financial support to deliver an effective model. Najmi, Rashidi, and Miller and Najmi et
al present novel methodologies to reduce the resourcing required to calibrate and validate ABMs,
thus promoting future large-scale adoption (Najmi, Rashidi and Vaughan, et al. 2020).

Guidance related to ABM has primarily been developed by research institutions or by the U.S. state
transport authorities. Of note are the following documents:

• Strategic Highway Research Program 2 (SHRP 2), Activity Based Modelling Primer, 2015
(Castiglione, Bradley and Gliebe 2015).

• Virginia Department of Transportation, Implementing Activity-Based Models in Virginia

(Virginia Department of Transport 2009).

• University of Texas, Austin, Guidebook on Activity-Based Travel Demand Modelling for

Planners (Bhat, et al. 2003).

There have been numerous applications of ABMs in North America (Travel Forecasting Resource
2023) and Europe including but not limited to the following:
Page | 51

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Netherlands Ministry of Transport, ALBATROSS (A Learning Based Transportation

Oriented Simulation System): Albatross uses a sequential decision process (decision tree)
to generate daily activities of individuals at a household level (Arentze and Timmermans
2004).

• Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC): Leverages the CT-RAMP ABM modelling platform for
a region wide strategic model. This has been used to guide policy decision and formulate a
vision for future strategic transport planning (Atlanta Regional Commission 2017).

• Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG), FOCUS model: The organisation

provides details of the purpose behind the modelling, the model’s theoretical and software
structures as well as the calibration and validation of the model (Denver Regional Council of
Governments 2024).

• San Francisco County Transportation Authority (SFCTA), SF-CHAMP model: The San
Francisco city travel forecasting tool that has leveraged a series of travel surveys and traffic
data collection efforts to develop an ABM used for strategic decision making (San Francisco
County Transportation Authority 2002).

Activity-based and trip-based models serve different purposes and both approaches should be
used depending on the context of transport problem being evaluated.

• ABMs offer greater granularity and depict travel behaviour at an activity level, providing
greater insights in terms of traveller behaviour and capturing the complexities of user
choice in multi-modal environments.

• Trip-based models are tailored to identify and measure congestion dynamics within a
transport system, supporting performance evaluation of the infrastructure.

Thus, ABMs are suited for long-term strategic planning, as evident by the use cases presented
above while trip-based models that are generally supported by dynamic traffic assignment (DTA)
models are better suited for operational traffic modelling use cases.

Big Data

The use of big data in travel demand forecasting models may potentially revolutionise transport
planning by providing unprecedented insights into mobility behaviour. Traditional transport demand
models rely on conventional data sources such as travel diary surveys and population census data,
which have limited scale and representativeness. However, the availability of emerging big data
sources, including mobile phone call data records, smart card data, and geo-coded social media
records, present an opportunity to observe and understand travel behaviour in more detail.

Anda, Erath, and Fourie examined recent advances in harnessing big data sources to inform travel
demand models and enable “what-if” scenario testing for transport planners (Anda, Erath and
Fourie 2017). The review highlights the importance of data mining methods, such as trip
identification and activity inference, in leveraging these opportunistically collected mobility traces.
The study emphasises the potential of probabilistic models and machine learning techniques to
handle the uncertainty inherent in sparse and noisy big data. The integration of different data sets
through data fusion schemes, including information from travel diaries, enriches big data and
enhances the accuracy of travel demand models. The review provided by Anda, Erath, and Fourie
also emphasises the need for multidisciplinary collaboration between transport modellers and data
scientists to address the challenges posed by these new data sources (Anda, Erath and Fourie
2017).

Precise geo-referenced mobility data from individuals can be used in calibration and validation of
travel demand models. Such emerging data sources serve as large-scale opportunistic human
Page | 52

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

mobility sensors, offering valuable insights into urban dynamics and activities. Additionally,
supplementary datasets like GPS traces, and Points of Interest (POI) can be utilised to validate
model outcomes, scale results, and extract higher-level patterns.

• Integration of multiple data sources: Brederode et al discussed the potential role of big
data to enhance travel demand models by leveraging more detailed and accurate
destination and mode choice information (Brederode, et al. 2019) . The availability and
quality of emerging big data sources including mobile phone, automatic license plate
recognition, and smart card data is expected to increase with advancements in technology.
Traditionally, demand models have relied on a single data source, such as survey data, to
estimate travel demand. However, a paradigm shift is occurring towards a data-driven
approach that simultaneously incorporates multiple data sources. This approach involves
fusing all data sources into a common operational picture of total travel demand before
parameter estimation. The data fusion step ensures that observed mode and destination
choices from different sources are replicated as closely as possible. This approach avoids
information loss and allows for more comprehensive estimation of behavioural parameters.
The resulting models can be used in tactical, strategic, and operational contexts.

• Trends: The most significant trends that have emerged in the field of travel demand
forecasting using big data include increased sample sizes, improved accuracy of individual
samples, and a focus on disaggregated methods that consider individual travellers. Growing
availability of big data has also led to the integration of different forecasting models, the
use of non-traffic data for prediction, and the removal of cost limitations in data acquisition.

The impact of big data on travel demand forecasting models varies based on different factors (Zhao,
et al. 2018). Short-term forecasting benefits more from big data compared to long-term forecasting,
as real-time data is more readily available. Nonlinear forecasting methods are also more impacted
by big data than linear methods, as they require larger data samples. Big data has a greater
influence on non-aggregated models that focus on individual travel behaviour rather than
aggregated models that rely on traffic flow data. Integrated models that incorporate real-time travel
information and combine trip distribution, mode selection, and traffic assignment are gaining
traction. Additionally, big data enhances the forecasting of walking and cycling demand, addressing
limitations of traditional methods. Data acquisition methods have also evolved in the big data era,
expanding from static datasets to dynamic and multi-source data collection. Unstructured data
from sources such as social networks and web click flows provide valuable insights into travel
behaviours and are integrated with spatial GIS data to create comprehensive travel information.

Overall, big data has the potential to significantly impact travel demand forecasting models by
enabling more accurate predictions, incorporating real-time data, and expanding data sources. It
has opened new avenues for understanding and predicting travel demand behaviour, improving the
effectiveness of transportation planning and decision-making.

Multi-Resolution Modelling

Multi-resolution modelling (MRM) combines different modelling scales to analyse traffic conditions
and simulate transport scenarios. MRM is a less studied area in the academic literature. It has also
been less frequently applied in practice due to extensive model conversion requirements and
ongoing challenges (e.g., macro-meso, meso-micro).

The process begins by converting the macroscopic strategic model which lacks a time component,
into a mesoscopic model incorporating Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA), which introduces a time
component into the routing assignment. Unlike traditional planning models, mesoscopic models
account for real-time traffic congestion, peak hour queuing, bottleneck locations, and accidents.

Page | 53

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

They also consider capacity constraints, meaning vehicles will switch to alternate routes if
congestion becomes too severe, mimicking real-world driving behaviour more accurately.

Calibration is a crucial step in MRM modelling. Traffic signals and timing plans are coded into the
simulation model, and traffic flow models are adjusted for both freeways and arterials at a regional
level. Calibration also involves estimating the origin-destination matrix for trip tables. However,
once the model is in DTA format, further calibration of demand tables or micro-level origin-
destination pairs is often required but may not be performed due to intensive data requirements for
time-dependent origin-destination demand estimation. The MRM modelling process is expected to
provide a comprehensive and detailed analysis of transportation scenarios, allowing modellers to
simulate and understand traffic patterns, congestion, and the impact of various factors on the
transportation system. It combines the strengths of different modelling platforms to provide more
accurate and realistic insights for transportation planning and decision-making.

The core challenge with hybrid or MRM approach is the consistency issue, including data, time,
space, boundary, and simulation result consistency. A study by Zhang and Ma provides an overview
of several general MRM methods, such as the Aggregation/Disaggregation approach (AD), Select
Viewing (SV) method, Integrated Hierarchical Variable Resolution Modelling (IHVRM), and the
UNIFY method (Zhang and Ma 2012).

Following provides a few examples of MRM application in practice:

• MRM of I-35 in Austin, TX running from south of Riverside Dr. to Parmer Ln: A study by
Shelton et al applied a multi-resolution modelling approach to understand the potential
effects of connected vehicle technology on congestion and mobility on a stretch of I-35
state highway in Austin, TX, incorporating all three levels of macroscopic, mesoscopic, and
microscopic models (Shelton, et al. 2019) .

Figure 7: The multi-resolution modelling (MRM) process developed by (Shelton, et al. 2019)

Page | 54

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

• Wenatchee Valley Transportation Council MRM: An MRM developed by Ma, et al for the
State Route 285, North Wenatchee Avenue Corridor in Washington State (Ma, et al. 2010).
The developed approach utilised a tri-level modelling that combines macroscopic regional
travel demand forecast modelling, mesoscopic dynamic traffic management modelling, and
microscopic traffic simulation modelling. By integrating a DTA model with traditional travel
demand forecast modelling, the project overcomes limitations in tracing temporal evolution
and network flow patterns. DTA serves as a screening tool for identifying improvement
projects, which are further refined in microscopic simulation models for assessment. The
project's comprehensive modelling approach enables detailed assessment of infrastructure
improvements and ITS measures, leading to recommended plans for the Wenatchee Valley
Transportation Council.

• Tactical Adelaide Model (TAM): was also developed with MRM in mind, integrating different
modelling resolution (Holyoak, Taylor and Oxland, et al. 2005). TAM has been developed to
be a versatile model with the capability of creating mesoscopic, microscopic, and hybrid
models as well as providing the opportunity for macroscopic traffic assignment (a shadow
of the Strategic Adelaide Model, known as SAM) to inform high level planning studies. Both
the Tactical Adelaide Model (TAM) and the Strategic Adelaide Model (SAM) are main
components of South Australia’s Department of Infrastructure and Transport’s integrated
modelling framework.

Page | 55

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

References
Abrantes, Pedro A L, and Mark R Wardman. 2011. “Meta-analysis of UK values of travel time: An
update.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 1-17.

Acheampong, Ransford A, and Elisabete A Silva. 2015. “Land use–transport interaction modeling: A
review of the literature and future research directions.” Journal of Transport and Land Use 11-
38.

Ahmed, Hafiz U, Ying Huang, and Pan Lu. 2021. “A Review of Car-Following Models and Modeling
Tools for Human and Autonomous-Ready Driving Behaviors in Micro-Simulation.” Smart
Cities 314-335.

Aimsun. 2022. Aimsun Next Users Guide 22.0.2. User Guide, Aimsun.

AITPM. 2021. Pedestrian Modelling Guidelines. Guidelines, Lutwyche: Australian Institute of Traffic
Planning and Management Ltd.

Algers, Staffan, Jonas Eliasson, and Lars-Goran Mattsson. 2005. “Is it time to use activity-based
urban transport models? A discussion of planning needs and modelling possibilities.” The
Annals of Regional Science 767-789.

Alipour, Dorsa, and Hussein Dia. 2023. “A Systematic Review of the Role of Land Use, Transport, and
Energy-Environment Integration in Shaping Sustainable Cities.” Sustainability 6447.

Alomari, Ebtesam, Iyad Katib, and Rashid Mehmood. 2020. “Iktishaf: a Big Data Road-Traffic Event
Detection Tool Using Twitter and Spark Machine Learning.” Mobile Networks and
Applications 1-16.

Ameli, Mostafa, Jean-Patrick Lebacque, and Ludovic Leclercq. 2021. “Computational Methods for
Calculating Multimodal Multiclass Traffic Network Equilibrium: Simulation Benchmark on a
Large-Scale Test Case.” Journal of Advanced Transportation 8815653.

Anda, Cuauhtemoc, Alexander Erath, and Pieter Jacobus Fourie. 2017. “Transport modelling in the
age of big data.” International Journal of Urban Sciences 19-42.

Anvari, Bani, Michael G.H Bell, Aruna Sivakumar, and Washington Y Ochieng. 2015. “Modelling
shared space users via rule-based social force model.” Transportation Research Part C:
Emerging Technologies 83-103.

Aoun, Alisar, Julie Bjornstad, Brooke DuBose, Meghan Mitman, and Mollie Pelon. 2015. Bicycle and
Pedestrian Forecasting Tools: State of the Practice. Technical Paper, Washington DC: Federal
Highway Administration.

Arellana, Julian A, Vilma Alvarez, Daniel Oviedo, and Luis A Guzman. 2021. “Walk this way:
Pedestrian accessibility and equity in Barranquilla and Soledad, Colombia.” Research in
Transportation Economics 101024.

Arentze, Theo A, and Harry J P Timmermans. 2004. “A learning-based transportation oriented

simulation system.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 613-633.

Ashfaq, Mudabber, Ziyuan Gu, Steven T Waller, and Meead Saberi. 2021. “Comparing Dynamic User
Equilibrium and Noniterative Stochastic Route Choice in a Simulation-Based Dynamic
Traffic Assignment Model: Practical Considerations for Large-Scale Networks.” Journal of
Advanced Transportation 1-16.

Page | 56

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Asuka, M, and K Komaya. 1996. “A simulation method for rail traffic using microscopic and
macroscopic models.” In Transactions on the Built Environment, 10. UK: Wessex Institute of
Technology Press.

ATAP. 2016. Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines - F0.2 Integrated Transport and
Land Use Planning. Guidelines, Canberra: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional
Development and Communications.

ATAP. 2016. Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines - T1 Travel Demand Modelling.
Guidelines, Canberra: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and
Communications.

ATAP. 2023. Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines : M4 Active Travel. Guidelines,
Canberra: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and
Communications.

ATAP. 2021. Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines : O8 Land-use benefits of
transport initiatives. Guidelines, Canberra: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional
Development and Communications.

—. 2019. Overview of transport modelling. 22 10. https://www.atap.gov.au/tools-techniques/travel-

demand-modelling/2-overview.

Atlanta Regional Commission. 2017. Activity-Based Model User Guide. User Guide, Atlanta: Atlanta
Regional Commission. https://atlantaregional.org/what-we-do/transportation-
planning/modeling/.

Atta, Ayesha, Muhammad A Khan, Sagheer Abbas, Muhammad S Khan, and Gulzar Ahmad. 2021.
“Adaptive IoT Empowered Smart Road Traffic Congestion Control System Using Supervised
Machine Learning Algorithm.” The Computer Journal 1672-1679.

Aumann, Peter, and Peter Arnold. 2017. Guide to Road Design Part 6A: Paths for Walking and Cycling.
Guidelines, Sydney: Austroads.

Austoads. 2021. Management of Traffic Modelling Processes and Applications. Research report,
Sydney: Austoads.

Austroads. 2001. Forecasting Demand for Bicycle Facilities. Guidelines, Austroads.

Axhausen, Kay W, and Tommy Gärling. 1992. “Activity‐based approaches to travel analysis:
conceptual frameworks, models, and research problems.” Transport Reviews 323-341.

Axhausen, Kay W, and Tommy Gärling. 1992. “Activity‐based approaches to travel analysis:
conceptual frameworks, models, and research problems.” Transport Reviews 323-341.

Beeston, Lucy, and Robert Blewitt. 2023. Model Auditing Process (MAP). Guidelines, London:
Transport for London.

Beeston, Lucy, Robert Blewitt, Sally Bulmer, and James Wilson. 2021. Traffic Modelling Guidelines.
Guidelines, London: Transport for London.

Ben-Akiva, Moshe, and Steven R Lerman. 2021. “Disaggregate Travel and Mobility-Choice Models
and Measures of Accessibility.” In Behavioural Travel Modelling, by Peter R Stopher and
David A Hensher, 654-679. London: Routledge.

Bhat, C.R, J Guo, S Srinivasan, and A Sivakumar. 2003. Guidebook on Activity-Based Travel Demand
Modeling for Planners. Technical Report, Austin: University of Texas.

Page | 57

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Bhat, Chandra R, and Frank S Koppelman. 2003. “Activity-Based Modeling of Travel Demand.” In
Handbook of Transportation Science, by Randolph W Hall. New York: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.

Bhat, Chandra, and Frank S Koppelman. 2003. “Activity-Based Modeling of Travel Demand.” In
Handbook of Transportation Science, by Randolph W Hall, 39-65. Kluwer Academic
Publishers.

Brand, Christian, Jillian Anable, and Craig Morton. 2019. “Lifestyle, efficiency and limits: modelling
transport energy and emissions using a socio-technical approach.” Energy Efficiency 187-
207.

Brederode, Luuk, Mark Pots, Ruben Fransen, and Jan-Tino Brethouwer. 2019. “Big Data fusion and
parametrization for strategic transport demand models.” 6th International Conference on
Models and Technologies for Intelligent Transportation Systems (MT-ITS). Cracow, Poland:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).

Calvert, Simeon, Hani Mahmassani, Jan-Niklas Meier, Pravin Varaiya, Samer Hamdar, Danjue Chen,
Xiaopeng Li, Alireza Talebpour, and Stephen P. Mattingly. 2018. “Traffic Flow of Connected
and Automated Vehicles: Challenges and Opportunities.” Road Vehicle Automation 235-248.

Cambridge Systematics. 2002. San Francisco Travel Demand Forecasting Model Development -
Executive Summary. Technical Report, San Francisco: San Francisco County Transportation
Authority.

Cambridge Systematics. 2020. Travel Demand Modelling Policies and Procedures. Guidelines,
Richmond: Virginia Department of Transportation.

Cambridge Systematics. 2010. Travel Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking Manual Second
Edition. Guidelines, Cambridge: Federal Highway Administration.

Camporeale, Rosalia, Leonardo Caggiani, and Michele Ottomanelli. 2019. “Modeling horizontal and
vertical equity in the public transport design problem: A case study.” Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice 184-206.

Carrion, Carlos, and David Levinson. 2012. “Value of travel time reliability: A review of current
evidence.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 720-741.

Cascetta, Ennio. 2001. “Transportation Supply Models.” In Transportation Systems Engineering -

Theory and Methods, by Ennio Cascetta, 23-94. New York: Springer Nature.

Castiglione, Joe, Mark Bradley, and John Gliebe. 2015. Activity-Based Travel Demand Models: A
Primer. Research Report, Washington D.C: Transport Research Board.

Chao, Qianwen, Huikun Bi, Weizi Li, Tianlu Mao, Zhaoqi Wang, Ming C Lin, and Zhigang Deng. 2019.
“A Survey on Visual Traffic Simulation: Models, Evaluations, and Applications in Autonomous
Driving.” Computer Graphics Forum 287-308.

Chaudhuri, Gargi, and Keith Clarke. 2013. “The SLEUTH Land Use Change Model: A Review.”
Environmental Science, Geography 88 - 105.

Chiu, Yi-Chang, Jon Bottom, Michael Mahut, Alex Paz, Ramachandran Balakrishna, Travis Waller, and
Jim Hicks. 2011. Dynamic Traffic Assignment: A Primer. Circular, Washington DC:
Transportation Research Board.

Chun, Gyounghoon. 2022. Enhanced Analytical Delay and Queue Models at Signalized Intersections.
PhD Thesis, Raleigh: North Carolina State University.

Page | 58

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Clarke, Keith C, James A Brass, and Phillip J Riggan. 1994. “A cellular automaton model of wildfire
propagation and extinction.” Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing 1355-1367.

Clear, Caroline, and Howard Wong. 2016. Station modelling with Legion Spaceworks: Best Practice
Guide. Guidelines, London: Transport for London.

Crainic, Teodor G, and Gilbert Laporte. 1997. “Planning models for freight transportation.” European
Journal of Operational Research 409-438.

Cui, Boer, Geneviève Boisjoly, Ahmed El-Geneidy, and David Levinson. 2019. “Accessibility and the
journey to work through the lens of equity.” Journal of Transport Geography 269-277.

Davidson, Peter. 2011. “Modelling toll roads: where have we gone wrong?” Australasian Transport
Research Forum (ATRF). Adelaide, South Australia: Australasian Transport Research Forum.

de Dios Ortúzar, Juan, and Luis G Willumsen. 2011. Modelling Transport. West Sussex: John Wiley &
Sons.

Deffner, Jutta, Torben Ziel, Tomas Hefter, and Christian Rudolph. 2012. Handbook on cycling inclusive
planning and promotion. Capacity development material for the multiplier training within the
mobile2020 project. Hamburg: Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH).

Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. 2011. DVRPC Travel Demand Model Upgrade - Travel
Improvement Model (TIM) 1.0. Guidelines, Philadelphia: Delaware Valley Regional Planning
Commission.

Denver Regional Council of Governments. 2024. Data modeling. https://www.drcog.org/data-maps-

modeling/data-modeling.

Department for Transport. 2022. TAG Unit A5.1 - Active Mode Appraisal. Guidelines, London:
Department for Transport.

Department for Transport, UK. 2022. TAG UNIT 4.3 - Place-Based Analysis. Guidelines, London:
Department for Transport, UK.

Department for Transport, UK. 2014. TAG Unit M1 - Principles of Modelling and Forecasting.
Guidelines, London: Department for Transport, UK.

Department for Transport, UK. 2014. Transport analysis guidance: Supplementary guidance - Land
Use/Transport Interaction Models. Guidelines, London: Department for Transport, UK.

Department of Transport and Main Roads Queensland. 2021. Guideline: Pedestrian demand
forecasting. Guidelines, Brisbane: Department of Transport and Main Roads Queensland.

Duell, M, H Grzybowska, D Rey, and S T Waller. 2019. “Strategic dynamic traffic assignment
incorporating travel demand uncertainty.” Transportmetrica B: Transport Dynamics 950-966.

Engelberg, Daniel, He He, Diem-Trinh Le, and P. C Zegras. 2021. “Accessibility, land use models, and
modeling.” Urban Form and Accessibility 379-409.

Flötteröd, Gunnar, and Gregor Lämmel. 2015. “Bidirectional pedestrian fundamental diagram.”
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 194-212.

Frosch, Colin, David Martinelli, and Avinash Unnikrishnan. 2019. “Evaluation of Shared Space to
Reduce Traffic Congestion.” Journal of Advanced Transportation 6510396.

Garbolino, Emmanuel, and Jacques Baudry. 2021. “Chapter 2 - Anticipating the impacts of future
changes on ecosystems and socioecosystems: main issues of geoprospective.” Ecosystem
and Territorial Resilience 25-56.
Page | 59

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Gartner, Nathan H. 1973. “Microscopic Analysis of Traffic Flow Patterns for Minimizing Delay on
Signal-Controlled Links.” Highway Research Record 12-23.

Golias, Mihalis M, Sabyasachee Mishra, and Ioannis Psarros. 2014. A Guidebook for Best Practices on
Integrated Land Use and Travel Demand Modeling. Technical Report, Memphis: University of
Memphis.

Greenshields, B, J Bibbins, W Channing, and H Miller. 1935. A study of traffic capacity. Technical
Report, Ohio: Ohio State Highway Department.

Gyergyay, Bernard, Syrus Gomari, Markus Friedrich, Jörg Sonnleitner, Johan Olstam, and Fredrik
Johansson. 2019. “Automation-ready framework for urban transport and road infrastructure
planning.” Transportation Research Procedia 88-97.

Hänseler, Flurin S, William H.K Lam, Michel Bierlaire, Gael Lederrey, and Marija Nikolić. 2017. “A
dynamic network loading model for anisotropic and congested pedestrian flows.”
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 149-168.

Hao, Qing-Yi, Rui Jiang, Mao-Bin Hu, Bin Jia, and Qing-Song Wu. 2011. “Pedestrian flow dynamics in a
lattice gas model coupled with an evolutionary game.” Physical Review E 036107.

Hasan, Mahmud, Daniel Perez, Yuzhong Shen, and Hong Yang. 2021. “Distributed Microscopic Traffic
Simulation with Human-in-the-Loop Enabled by Virtual Reality Technologies.” Advances in
Engineering Software 102985.

Haustein, Sonja, Anders F Jensen, and Thomas A S Nielsen. 2019. “Active transport modes.” In DTU
International Energy Report, by B H Jørgensen, K K Andersen and O A Nielsen, 38-48.
Kongens Lyngby: Technical University of Denmark.

Hawkins, Jason, and Khandker Nurul Habib. 2019. “Integrated models of land use and transportation
for the autonomous vehicle revolution.” Transport Reviews 66-83.

Helbing, Dirk, and Peter Molnar. 1995. “Social Force Model for Pedestrian Dynamics.” Physical
Review E 4282 .

Hensher, David A, and Collins Teye. 2019. “Commodity interaction in freight movement models for
New South Wales.” Journal of Transport Geography 102506.

Hensher, David A, Edward Wei, Wen Liu, Loan Ho, and Chinh Ho. 2022. “Development of a practical
aggregate spatial road freight modal demand model system for truck and commodity
movements with an application of a distance-based charging regime.” Transportation 1031-
1071.

Hensher, David A, Zheng Li, and John M Rose. 2013. “Accommodating Risk in the Valuation of
Expected Travel Time Savings.” Journal of Advanced Transportation 206-224.

Holyoak, Nicholas, and Michael A P Taylor. 2006. “Modelling trip timing behaviour and the influence
of peak spreading.” In Urban Transport XII: Urban Transport and the Environment in the 21st
Century, by V Dolezel and C A Brebbia, 205-213. UK: Wessex Institute of Technology Press.

Holyoak, Nicholas, and Yee May Chang. 2006. “Peak Spreading Behaviour and Model Development.”
29th Australasian Transport Research Forum. Gold Coast: Queensland Transport.

Holyoak, Nicholas, Michael A P Taylor, Lindsay Oxland, and John Gregory. 2005. “Development of a
New Strategic Transport Planning Model for Adelaide.” 28th Australasian Transport Research
Forum. Sydney: Australasian Transport Research Forum.

Page | 60

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Hoogendoorn, S P, W Daamen, V L Knoop, J Steenbakkers, and M Sarvi. 2018. “Macroscopic

Fundamental Diagram for pedestrian networks: Theory and applications.” Transportation
Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 172-184.

Hymel, Kent. 2019. “If you build it, they will drive: Measuring induced demand for vehicle travel in
urban areas.” Transport Policy 57-66.

Iliashenko, Oksana, Victoria Iliashenko, and Ekaterina Lukyanchenko. 2021. “Big Data in Transport
Modelling and Planning.” Transportation Research Procedia 900-908.

Infrastructure Australia. 2021. Guide to Economic Appraisal - Technical guide of the Assessment
Framework. Guidelines, Sydney: Infrastructure Australia.

Infrastructure Australia. 2019. Urban Transport Crowding and Congestion - The Australian
Infrastructure Audit 2019. Technical, Sydney: Infrastructure Australia.

Ishibashi, Keisuke, Shigeaki Harada, and Ryoichi Kawahara. 2019. “Inferring Latent Traffic Demand
Offered to an Overloaded Link with Modeling QoS-Degradation Effect.” IEICE Transactions
on Communications 790-798.

Ishii, Hiroshi, John Underkoffler, Dan Chak, Ben Piper, Eran Ben-Joseph, Luke Yeung, and Zahra Kanji.
2002. “Augmented urban planning workbench: overlaying drawings, physical models and
digital simulation.” International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality. Darmstadt:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

Jafari, Afshin, Alan Both, Dhirendra Singh, Lucy Gunn, and Billie Giles-Corti. 2022. “Building the road
network for city-scale active transport simulation models.” Simulation Modelling Practice and
Theory 1-16.

Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky. 2013. “Prospect Theory: An analysis of decision under risk.”
Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: Part I 99-127.

Keirstead, James, Mark Jennings, and Aruna Sivakumar. 2012. “A review of urban energy system
models: Approaches, challenges and opportunities.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 3847-3866.

Kii, Masanobu, Hitomi Nakanishi, Kazuki Nakamura, and Kenji Doi. 2016. “Transportation and spatial
development: An overview and a future direction.” Transport Policy 148-158.

Kockelman, Kara M, Ling Jin, Yong Zhao, and Natalia Ruíz-Juri. 2005. “Tracking Land Use, Transport,
and Industrial Production using Random-Utility Based Multiregional Input-Output Models:
Applications for Texas Trade.” Journal of Transport Geography 275-286.

Kouskoulis, George, Ioanna Spyropoulou, and Constantinos Antoniou. 2018. “Pedestrian simulation:
Theoretical models vs. data driven techniques.” International Journal of Transportation
Science and Technology 241-253.

Kriger, David, Suzette Shiu, and Sasha Naylor. 2006. Estimating Toll Road Demand and Revenue.
Research Report, Washington DC: Transport Research Board.

Kucharski, Rafał, and Guido Gentile. 2019. “Simulation of rerouting phenomena in Dynamic Traffic
Assignment with the Information Comply Model.” Transportation Research Part B:
Methodological 414-441.

Lee, Kyuhyun, and Ipek N Sener. 2020. “Emerging data for pedestrian and bicycle monitoring:
Sources and applications.” Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 100095.

Page | 61

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Lee, Kyuhyun, and Ipek Nese Sener. 2021. “Strava Metro data for bicycle monitoring: a literature
review.” Transport Reviews 27-47.

Li, Zheng, and David A. Hensher. 2010. “Toll Roads in Australia: An Overview of Characteristics and
Accuracy of Demand Forecasts.” Transport Reviews 541-569.

Li, Zheng, David A Hensher, and John M Rose. 2010. “Willingness to pay for travel time reliability in
passenger transport: A review and some new empirical evidence.” Transportation Research
Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 384-403.

Lilasathapornkit, Tanapon, and Meead Saberi. 2022. “Dynamic pedestrian traffic assignment with
link transmission model for bidirectional sidewalk networks.” Transportation Research Part C:
Emerging Technologies 103930.

Lilasathapornkit, Tanapon, David Rey, Wei Liu, and Meead Saberi. 2022. “Traffic assignment problem
for footpath networks with bidirectional links.” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging
Technologies 103905.

Loomes, Graham, and Robert Sugden. 1982. “Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational
Choice Under Uncertainty.” The Economic Journal 805-824.

Loudon, William R, Earl R Ruiter, and Mark L Schlappi. 1988. “Predicting Peak-Spreading Under
Congested Conditions.” Transportation Research Record 1-9.

Lovelace, Robin, Anna Goodman, Rachel Aldred, Nikolai Berkoff, Ali Abbas, and James Woodcock.
2017. “The Propensity to Cycle Tool: An open source online system for sustainable transport
planning.” Journal of Transport and Land Use 505-528.

Lowry, Ira S. 1964. A Model of Metropolis. California: RAND.

Ma, Jingtao, Robert M Shull, Chetan Joshi, and Ed Hayes. 2010. “Applying a Multi-Resolution
Modeling Approach for Master Planning of State Route 285 Corridor at Wenatchee Valley,
WA.” 12th National Conference on Transportation Planning for Small and Medium-Sized
Communities. Williamsburg: Transport Research Board.

Maadi, Saeed, Sebastian Stein, Jinhyun Hong, and Roderick Murray-Smith. 2022. “Real-Time
Adaptive Traffic Signal Control in a Connected and Automated Vehicle Environment:
Optimisation of Signal Planning with Reinforcement Learning under Vehicle Speed
Guidance.” Sensors 7501.

Macmillan, Alexandra, Melody Smith, Karen Witten, Alistair Woodward, Jamie Hosking, Kirsty Wild,
and Adrian Field. 2020. “Suburb-level changes for active transport to meet the SDGs:
Causal theory and a New Zealand case study.” Science of The Total Environment 136678.

Main Roads Western Australia. 2021. Mesoscopic and Hybrid Modelling Guidelines. Guidelines, Perth:
Main Roads Western Australia.

Main Roads Western Australia. 2021. Operational Modelling Guidelines. Guidelines, Perth: Main
Roads Western Australia.

Manski, Charles F. 1977. “The structure of random utility models.” Theory and Decision 229–254.

McFadden, Daniel. 1972. “Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior.” UC Berkeley:
Institute of Urban and Regional Development 1-48.

Miller, Eric J. 2018. “Accessibility: measurement and application in transportation planning.”

Transport Reviews 551–555.

Page | 62

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Mizdrak, Anja, Tony Blakely, and Christine L, Cobiac, Linda J Cleghorn. 2019. “Potential of active
transport to improve health, reduce healthcare costs, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions:
A modelling study.” PLOS ONE e0219316.

Moeckel, Rolf, Carlos Llorca, Ana Tsui Moreno, and Matthew B Okrah. 2018. “Trends in integrated
land use/transport modeling: An evaluation of the state of the art.” Journal of Transport and
Land Use 1-14.

Moore, Paul. 2011. LinSig 3.1 User Guide. User Guide, Lincoln: JCT Consultancy Ltd.

Moustaid, Elhabib, and Gunnar Flötteröd. 2021. “Macroscopic model of multidirectional pedestrian
network flows.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 1-23.

Mueller, N, D Rojas-Rueda, H Khreis, M Cirach, D Andrés, J Ballester, X Bartoll, et al. 2020.

“Changing the urban design of cities for health: The superblock model.” Environment
International 105132.

Næss, Petter, Morten S Nicolaisen, and Arvid Strand. 2012. “Traffic Forecasts Ignoring Induced
Demand: a Shaky Fundament for Cost-Benefit Analyses.” European Journal of Transport and
Infrastructure Research 2967.

Najmi, Ali, Taha H Rashidi, and Eric J Miller. 2019. “A novel approach for systematically calibrating
transport planning model systems.” Transportation 1915-1950.

Najmi, Ali, Taha H Rashidi, James Vaughan, and Eric J Miller. 2020. “Calibration of large-scale
transport planning models: a structured approach.” Transportation 1867-1905.

Nicolaisen, Morten S, and Patrick A Driscoll. 2014. “Ex-Post Evaluations of Demand Forecast
Accuracy: A Literature Review.” Transport Reviews 540-577.

Nikolić, Marija, Michel Bierlaire, Bilal Farooq, and Matthieu de Lapparent. 2016. “Probabilistic
speed–density relationship for pedestrian traffic.” Transportation Research Part B:
Methodological 58-81.

NSW Government Architect. 2021. Practitioner's Guide to Movement and Place. Guidelines, Sydney:
NSW Government.

NZTA. 2013. Economic evaluation manual. Guidelines, Wellington: New Zealand Transport Agency.

Oregon Metro. 2020. 2018 Kate v2.0 Trip‐Based Travel Demand Model - Methodology Report. Technical
Report, Portland: Oregon Metro.

Papadimitriou, Eleonora, George Yannis, and John Golias. 2009. “A critical assessment of pedestrian
behaviour models.” Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 242-
255.

Perez, Daniel, Mahmud Hasan, Yuzhong Shen, and Hong Yang. 2019. “AR-PED: A framework of
augmented reality enabled pedestrian-in-the-loop simulation.” Simulation Modelling Practice
and Theory 237-249.

Planung Transport Verkehr (PTV). 2018. PTV VISSIM 10 - User Manual. User Guide, Karlsruhe:
Planung Transport Verkehr (PTV).

Qiu, Esta, Navreet Virdi, Hanna Grzybowska, and Travis Waller. 2022. “Recalibration of the BPR
function for the strategic modelling of connected and autonomous vehicles.”
Transportmetrica B: Transport Dynamics 779-800.

Page | 63

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Raju, Narayana, and Haneen Farah. 2021. “Evolution of Traffic Microsimulation and its Use for
Modeling Connected and Automated Vehicles.” JournalJournal of Advanced Transportation 1-
29.

RAND Europe. 2013. Modelling Transport Demand in Sydney, Australia. 24 July.

https://www.rand.org/randeurope/research/projects/2013/sydney-travel-demand-
model.html.

Rasouli, Soora, and Harry Timmermans. 2014. “Activity-based models of travel demand: promises,
progress and prospects.” International Journal of Urban Sciences 31-60.

Robles-Serrano, Sergio, German Sanchez-Torres, and John Branch-Bedoya. 2021. “Automatic

Detection of Traffic Accidents from Video Using Deep Learning Techniques.” Computers 148.

Saberi, Meead, Mahmassani, and Hani S. 2014. “Exploring Areawide Dynamics of Pedestrian
Crowds: Three-Dimensional Approach.” Transportation Research Record 31-40.

San Francisco County Transportation Authority. 2002. SF-CHAMP Modeling.

https://www.sfcta.org/sf-champ-modeling.

Schnittger, Stephan, and Dirk Zumkeller. 2004. “Longitudinal Microsimulation as a Tool to Merge
Transport Planning and Traffic Engineering Models "The Mobitopp Model".” European
Transport Conference. Strasbourg: Association for European Transport.

Schoemaker, Paul J. 1982. “The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and
Limitations .” Journal of Economic Literature 529-563.

Seddon, Philip A. 1972. “A program for simulating the dispersion of platoons of road traffic.”
Simulation 81-90.

Shelton, Jeffrey, Jason Wagner, Swapnil Samant, Ginger Goodin, Tim Lomax, and Ed Seymour. 2019.
“Impacts of connected vehicles in a complex, congested urban freeway setting using multi-
resolution modeling methods.” International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology
25-34.

Shen, Zuo-Jun Max, Bo Feng, Chao Mao, and Lun Ran. 2019. “Optimization models for electric
vehicle service operations: A literature review.” Transportation Research Part B:
Methodological 462-477.

Shires, J D, and G C de Jong. 2009. “An international meta-analysis of values of travel time savings.”
Evaluation and Program Planning 315-325.

Shoman, Wasim, Sonia Yeh, Frances Sprei, Jonathan Köhler, Patrick Plötz, Yancho Todorov, Seppo
Rantala, and Daniel Speth. 2023. “A Review of Big Data in Road Freight Transport Modeling:
Gaps and Potentials.” Data Science for Transportation 2.

SIDRA Solutions. 2023. Traffic Modelling Guidelines : SIDRA Intersection. User Guide, Adelaide:
Department for Infrastructure and Transport.

Singleton, Patrick A, and Ferdousy Runa. 2021. “Pedestrian Traffic Signal Data Accurately Estimates
Pedestrian Crossing Volumes.” Transportation Research Record 429-440.

Sinha, Amolika, Sai Chand, Kasun P Wijayaratna, Navreet Virdi, and Vinayak Dixit. 2020.
“Comprehensive safety assessment in mixed fleets with connected and automated vehicles:
A crash severity and rate evaluation of conventional vehicles.” Accident Analysis & Prevention
105567.

Page | 64

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Soteropoulos, Aggelos, Martin Berger, and Francesco Ciari. 2019. “Impacts of automated vehicles on
travel behaviour and land use: an international review of modelling studies.” Transport
Reviews 29-49.

Tavasszy, Lorant A. 2008. “Freight modelling: an overview of international experiences.” International

conference on freight modelling. Washington : Transportation Research Board. 47-55.

Teye, Collins, and David A Hensher. 2021. “A commodity-based production and distribution road
freight model with application to urban and regional New South Wales.” Transportmetrica A:
Transport Science 566-592.

TfNSW. 2020. Cycleway Design Toolbox - Designing for cycling and micromobility. Guidelines, Sydney:
Transport for NSW.

—. 2019. Freight Data Hub. 31 July. https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/data-and-research/freight-

data.

TfNSW. 2016. Mesoscopic Network Representation. Guidelines, Sydney: Transport for NSW.

TfNSW. 2023. Practitioner's guide to Movement and Place: Implementing Movement and Place in NSW.
Sydney: Transport for NSW.

TfNSW. 2016. Principles and Guidelines for Economic Appraisal of Transport Investment and Initiatives.
Guidelines, Sydney: Transport for NSW.

—. 2018. Strategic Freight Forecasts. 14 August. https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/data-and-

research/freight-data-19/strategic-freight-forecasts.

TfNSW. 2018. Technical Direction - Traffic Signals in Microsimulation Modelling. Guidelines, Sydney:
Transport for New South Wales.

TfNSW. 2021. Technical Note on assessing the impacts of COVID-19 for business cases. Technical
Report, Sydney: Transport for NSW.

TfNSW. 2017. Tecnical direction - Operation Modelling Reporting Structure. Guidelines, Sydney:
Transport for NSW.

TfNSW. 2013. Traffic Modelling Guidelines. Guidelines, Sydney: Transport for NSW.

TfNSW. 2020. Walking Space Guide: Towards Pedestrian Comfort and Safety. Guidelines, Sydney:
Transport for NSW.

Thomas, Isabelle, Jonathan Jones, Geoffrey Caruso, and Philippe Gerber. 2018. “City delineation in
European applications of LUTI models: review and testsIsabelle Thomas a.” Transport
Reviews 6-32.

Tordeux, Antoine, Gregor Lämmel, Flurin S Hänseler, and Bernhard Steffen. 2018. “A mesoscopic
model for large-scale simulation of pedestrian dynamics.” Transportation Research Part C:
Emerging Technologies 128-147.

Transport for London. 2021. Traffic Modelling Guidelines. Guidelines, London: Transport for London.

Travel Forecasting Resource. 2023. Activity Based Models. 18 05. Accessed 05 18, 2023.
https://tfresource.org/topics/Activity_based_models.html.

United States Department of Transportation. 2014. Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of
Pedestrian Facilities. Guidelines, Washington DC: United States Department of
Transportation.

Page | 65

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Van Vuren, T, S Carmichael, J Polak, G Hyman, and S Cross. 1999. “Modelling peak spreading in
continuous time.” European Transport Conference - Proceedings of Seminar F : Transportation
Planning Methods. London: PTRC Education and Research Services. 93-105.

Verburg, Peter H, Welmoed Soepboer, A Veldkamp, Ramil Limpiada, Victoria Espaldon, and Sharifah
S.A. Mastura. 2014. “Modeling the Spatial Dynamics of Regional Land Use: The CLUE-S
Model.” Environmental Management 391–405.

VicRoads. 2019. Transport Modelling Guidelines - Volume 4 : Simulation Modelling. Guidelines,

Melbourne: Department of Transport Victoria.

VicRoads. 2019. Transport Modelling Guidelines - Volume 4: Simulation Modelling. Guidelines,

Melbourne: VicRoads.

VicRoads. 2020. Transport Modelling Guidelines - Volume 5: Intersection modelling. Guidelines,

Melbourne: Department of Transport Victoria.

Virdi, Navreet. 2020. Development of a Connected and Autonomous Vehicle Modelling Framework,
with Implementation in Evaluating Transport Network Impacts and Safety. PhD Thesis, Sydney:
University of New South Wales.

Virdi, Navreet, Hanna Grzybowska, S. Travis Waller, and Vinayak Dixit. 2019. “A safety assessment of
mixed fleets with Connected and Autonomous Vehicles using the Surrogate Safety
Assessment Module.” Accident Analysis & Prevention 95-111.

Virginia Department of Transport. 2009. Implementing Activity-Based Models in Virginia: VTM

Research Paper 09-01. Guidelines, Virginia: Virginia Department of Transport.

Voigt, B, and A Troy. 2008. “Land-Use Modeling.” Encyclopedia of Ecology 2126-2132.

Waddell, Paul. 2002. “UrbanSim: Modeling Urban Development for Land Use, Transportation, and
Environmental Planning.” Journal of the American Planning Association 297-314.

Waller, S T, and Kasun Wijayaratna. 2021. All your transport options in one place: why mobility as a
service needs a proper platform. 27 April.
https://www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/news/2021/04/all-your-transport-options-in-one-
place--why-mobility-as-a-servi.

Waller, Travis, S, and Athanasios K Ziliaskopoulos. 2006. “A chance-constrained based stochastic

dynamic traffic assignment model: Analysis, formulation and solution algorithms.”
Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 418-427.

Wijayaratna, Kasun, Cecilia da Rocha, Michelle Zeibots, Nicholas Bradbury, and Nafisa Nishandar.
2022. Evaluation and Implementation of Shared Spaces in NSW: Framework for road
infrastructure design and operations to establish placemaking. Sydney: University of
Technology Sydney.

Wilson, Alan. 1970. Entropy in Urban and Regional Modelling. London: Routledge Revivals.

Wojtowicz, Jeffrey, and William A Wallace. 2010. “Traffic Management for Planned Special Events
Using Traffic Microsimulation Modeling and Tabletop Exercises.” Journal of Transportation
Safety & Security 102-121.

Yang, Liu, Koen van Dam, Arnab Majumdar, Bani Anvari, Washington Y Ochieng, and Lufeng Zhang.
2019. “Integrated design of transport infrastructure and public spaces considering human
behavior: A review of state-of-the-art methods and tools.” Frontiers of Architectural Research
429-453.

Page | 66

OFFICIAL
Transport
for NSW

Zare, Parisa, Christopher Pettit, Simone Leao, and Ori Gudes. 2022. “Digital Bicycling Planning: A
Systematic Literature Review of Data-Driven Approaches.” Sustainability 16319.

Zhang, Liyan, and Jian Ma. 2012. “A Study on Multi-Resolution Modeling of Mesoscopic-Microscopic
Traffic Simulation Model.” CICTP 2012: Multimodal Transportation Systems—Convenient,
Safe, Cost-Effective, Efficient. Beijing: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).

Zhang, Tingting, Chence Niu, Divya Jayakumar Nair, Vinayak Dixit, and S. Travis Waller. 2023. “Equity
analysis and improvement in transportation resilience optimisation at the pre-event stage.”
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 103892.

Zhang, Xiang, and S. Travis Waller. 2019. “Implications of link-based equity objectives on
transportation network design problem.” Transportation 1559-1589.

Zhao, Xianbo, Yongjian Ke, Jian Zuo, and Wei, Wu, Peng Xiong. 2020. “Evaluation of sustainable
transport research in 2000–2019.” Journal of Cleaner Production 120404.

Zhao, Yongmei, Hongmei Zhang, Li An, and Quan Liu. 2018. “Improving the approaches of traffic
demand forecasting in the big data era.” Cities 19-26.

Ziemke, Dominik, Simon Metzler, and Kai Nagel. 2019. “Bicycle traffic and its interaction with
motorized traffic in an agent-based transport simulation framework.” Future Generation
Computer Systems 30-40.

Page | 67

OFFICIAL
 © Transport for NSW
Users are welcome to copy,
reproduce and distribute the
information contained in this report
for non-commercial purposes only,
provided acknowledgement is given
to Transport for NSW as the source.

OFFICIAL