2. Transportation Planning in Case Study Cities All of the cities selected for case study in this class have had decades of experience with transportation planning that is oriented towards improving the quality of life in those cities. What set these cities apart from most other cities is that they have successfully implemented a holistic approach to transportation planning and provision. A major aspect of the project in this class is the characterization of the transportation plan for your city: What were the goals? What are the main elements? How was it implemented? Who is in charge of implementing it? How is it different from convention transportation planning?, and How successful has it been? Today we will look at the issue of what makes an effective transportation plan.

3. What is Transportation Planning? To answer this question, I drew on the following discussion from Todd Litman of the Victoria Transport Policy Institute http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm50.htm#_Toc28050889 It provides a comprehensive context for understanding transportation planning issues

4. What is Transportation Planning? Planning is the process of deciding what to do and how to do it. Effective planning allows people’s needs, preferences and values to be reflected in decisions. Planning occurs at many different levels, from day-to-day decisions made by individuals and families, to major decisions made by governments and businesses that have comprehensive, long-term impacts on society. A basic principle of good planning is that individual, short-term decisions are coordinated in order to support strategic, long-term objectives. Comprehensive planning should allow transportation, land use, economic development and social planning decisions to be coordinated. In short, the overall goal of transportation planning should be to create a better, more prosperous and more sustainable place.

5. Some Pitfalls to avoid in Effective Transportation Planning (The Six Deadly No-Nos?) In most cases, transportation provision and planning work against the broad goals of creating better places. Some common pitfalls in contemporary transportation planning that contribute to this problem include: 1.Confusion between goals and objectives 2.Confusion between development and growth 3.Overlooking the wider impacts of transportation plans 4.Planning based solely on projection of past trends 5.Focusing only on those issues that are easy to measure 6.Focusing on mobility and not accessibility

6. 1. Don’t Confuse Goals and Objectives Goals are desired outcomes to be achieved, such as health, equity and happiness. Objectives are ways to achieve goals. During a planning process it is helpful to ask regularly, “What are we trying to achieve?” The ‘what’ is the goal – we develop objectives to achieve this goal. It is important not to confuse goals and objectives.

7. 2. Plan for Development not for Growth Planners make a distinction between growth (increased quantity) and development (increased quality). In other words, growth means getting bigger while development means getting better. Transportation plans should contribute to the development of a place not simply to its growth. Zurich – The Little Big City In Zurich in the 1970s, transportation planning was done with the explicit intent that they wanted to develop but not necessarily to grow. Other places might be willing to accommodate both development and growth. But the important point is that development should be accorded the higher priority – not growth.

8. 3. Don’t Overlook the Wider Impacts of Transportation Plans Transportation plans can have wide ranging impacts, affecting not just travel but also economic, social and environmental aspects of life. These impacts may also be short term or much longer term, and They also may extend across geographic and political boundaries. If we don’t consider these wider impacts, our plans will lead to unintended and undesirable consequences.

9. Understand the Wider Impacts of Transportation Planning Litman define three levels of impact from transportation planning First level – Direct impacts (changes in travel conditions and costs). Second level – Current indirect impacts (changes in travel behavior, tax revenue, and external impacts). Third level – Long-term indirect impacts (changes in land use, economic development).

10. Example of the Different Levels of Impact of a Transportation Plan Increasing roadway capacity has first-level impacts of initially reducing traffic congestion and increasing vehicle traffic speeds. A second-level impact is that the increased traffic capacity may attract additional travel from other routes and times (Rebound Effects), and it may create barriers to walking and cycling. A third-level impact may be that over the long run, land use patterns become more dispersed and automobile dependent (Land Use Impacts). This is one source of so called 'induced traffic' - traffic over and above what one would expect from just extrapolating from the past rate of growth.

11. The Different Geographic Scales of Planning Planning also occurs at many different geographic scales. Some geographic scales reflect natural areas and boundaries and others just reflect political jurisdictions (see table below). In your project you need to be careful in understanding at which level of geography you are working. This can be very confusing since some times, plans apply to overlapping levels of geography. Also, the impact of transportation planning often extends beyond the boundary of the jurisdiction for which the plan was developed.

12. 4. Do Not Base Plans Simply on Predicting Past Trends Contemporary transportation planning is often based on using past trends to predict future vehicle traffic. This predicted traffic volume is then used to determine the size of new transportation facilities. One problem with this approach is that it assumes that the factors that led traffic volume to increase in the past will continue into the future. Supposedly in banking they know that this is not a reasonable approach since they warn you ‘Past performance is no guarantee of future results’. But even if this were true, we also have to consider the long term impact of widening roads for example – as we discussed earlier - because they change the conditions they can lead to induced traffic, which in turn makes the prediction useless. The approach of basing planning on past trends is derisively referred to as ‘predict and provide’ planning by some.

13. Road Widening Resulting from "Predict and Provide" Planning in Kingston, Jamaica (source: Garrick, Half-way-Tree Rd, Kingston 2004) Kingston is an example of a place which has experienced induced traffic

14. Traffic Capacity: The Ultimate Solution And yet traffic still seems not to be moving With Canada and Mexico we could add a few more lanes in each direction

15. But even moving west to Beijing – a six-lane stretch that winds past popular Great Wall tourist sites – traffic jams can stall drivers for hours. On a recent evening, a passenger whiled away two hours on a deadened stretch 60 miles from Beijing, as thousands of coal trucks idled and vendors darted among the vehicles, selling apples and other treats. “The more roads they build, the more congested it gets,” one trucker, 45-year-old Wang Haihe, volunteered. “And then they build some more roads.” - From a NYT Article on the Great August Traffic Jam in China August 27, 2010 http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/08/23/drivers-trapped-for-nine-days-in-chinese-traffic-jam/

16. 5. Do not focus just on those issue that can be easily measured Vehicle traffic is relatively easy to measure, so transportation system quality tends to be evaluated based largely on automobile travel conditions (e.g., average traffic speeds, roadway Level-of-Service, vehicle congestion delay, vehicle operating costs, parking supply). Accessibility impacts, including impacts on transit service quality, non- motorized transport and land use accessibility are often harder to measure and tend to be ignored. This approach tends to favor automobile-oriented solutions, and undervalues alternative solutions to transportation problems

17. 6. Focus on Accessibility not Mobility Accessibility versus Mobility. In order to understand this issue we need distinguish between traffic, mobility and access as follows: Traffic Conventional transportation often reflects the assumption that transportation means motor vehicle traffic. Mobility A more comprehensive approach reflects the assumption that transportation means personal mobility, measured in terms of person-trips and person-kilometers. Accessibility The most comprehensive definition of transportation is Accessibility, the ability to reach desired goods, services and activities. This is the ultimate goal of transportation, and so is the best definition to use in transportation planning.

18. Next Seven Slides Courtesy of Ian Lockwood and Paul Moore Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin, Inc. Understanding the Difference between Accessibility and Mobility

19. Access versus Mobility

20. Detroit 1949 Street Network – Access or Mobility?

21. Detroit Existing Street Network: Access or Mobility? Viewpoint in next slide

23. Proof that you can build your way out of congestion

24. What are the physical differences between these two places?

25. Access versus Mobility Which of these two places provide more access with less mobility? would you expect more congestion? would you expect more people walking?

26. Before Chattanooga, TN

27. Mobility or Access? Why? Before Chattanooga, TN