National Academy of Sciences

National Academy of Engineering

Institute of Medicine

National Research Council

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Dr. Susan Cutter, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Appointed by the

National Research Council, she was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

In addition, we wish to thank the participants in the Workshop on Transportation Decision Making: Place, Community, and Quality of Life that was held at the Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center in Irvine, California, on January 27-29, 2001. These participants’ names are listed in Appendix B. Several of the participants presented case histories at the workshop that are included in this report. For contributing to the development of case studies presented in this report, the committee thanks Stacy Fehlenberg, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta, Georgia; Dennis Goreham, Automated Geographic Research Center, Salt Lake City, Utah; Natalie Gochnour, Demographic & Economic Analysis, Salt Lake City, Utah; Jacky Grimshaw, Center for Neighborhood Technology; Transportation and Air Quality Programs, Chicago, Illinois; Bob Nagel, Automated Geographic Research Center, Salt Lake City, Utah; Carol Swenson, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis; Hannah Twaddell, Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, Charlottesville-Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization, Charlottesville, Virginia; Dennis Welsch, City of Roseville, Minnesota.

A workshop on federal data provision was held at the National Research Council on February 5, 2001. We thank the following participants: Geoffrey Anderson, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.; Daniel K. Cavanaugh, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia; John Eltinge, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Washington, D.C.; Hugh W. Knox, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.; Richard Reeder, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.; U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C.; Leo B. Dougherty, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C.; David E. Chase, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C.; Paul Dresler, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.; and Stacy Fehlenberg, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta, Georgia.

The committee also expresses its gratitude to other individuals who provided advice and materials for the report. We were assisted by Katherine Wallman, chief statistician, Office of Management and Budget; Andrew Reamer, principal, Andrew Reamer and Associates; Keith Laughlin, director, and Christopher Thomson, associate director, of Vice-President Gore’s White House Task Force on Livable Communities; Robert Sloane, senior planner, Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates; Michael Meyer, professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology; Roy Sparrow, professor of public administration, Robert F.

Wagner School of Public Service, New York University; and Tom Palmerlee, senior program officer, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council.

We are grateful for the assistance of the National Research Council staff in organizing the study and preparing the report. Staff members who contributed to this effort are Lisa M. Vandemark, study director and staff director of the Committee on Geography; Susan Mockler, research associate; Monica Lipscomb, research assistant and author of the case studies; and Verna Bowen, administrative associate. For preparation and editing of the final report, we also thank Shannon Ruddy, Winfield Swanson, and Teresia Wilmore.

In recent decades, dramatic changes have taken place in the nature of information, analyses, decision tools and processes, and the core considerations that go into transportation decision making. This expansion of scope and the profound democratization of planning and decision-making processes have created new requirements for data and associated analytical and decision-support tools. One challenge that has emerged is how to capture and reflect the complex interrelationships between transportation and the social, economic, land use, and environmental contexts of host communities so as to incorporate these into thoughtful decision making that will support, rather than harm, the livability of communities. A related challenge is how to meet the needs of diverse stakeholders, including planners and analysts who develop and assess both regional system-level transportation plans and potential project investments; public officials, charged with decision responsibilities but often lacking technical expertise in the disciplines that go into the analysis of decision choices; and community members and interest groups who care about the livability of their places, which are significantly impacted by transportation facilities and services.

In proposing this project to the National Research Council (NRC), the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) sought to meet the significant and growing need for more informed consideration of the complex and interrelated impacts of transportation decisions on the livability of communities. This effort was carried out under the auspices of the Committee on Geography of NRC’s Board on

Earth Sciences and Resources. The National Research Council charged the project committee with identifying the data and measures needed to make local and regional public decisions on transportation, land use planning, and economic development that aim to enhance “livability.” The committee was both inspired and challenged by a topic of such breadth and significance. The resulting work draws upon a wide body of knowledge and practice in disciplines ranging from geography to transportation planning, engineering, environmental analysis, and the economic, social, and political sciences.

One early issue that the committee revisited throughout its work was how to honor the broad scope of the topic while producing findings and recommendations that would be specific enough to be helpful to transportation planners, community members, and decision makers. In order to achieve this goal, the committee examined the concept of livable communities, the selection of livability indicators, and the means of measuring these indicators. Committee members also provided information on the use and availability of these data for public decision making. Additionally, the committee identified opportunities for meeting data needs at the federal level and reviewed the plans of federal agencies to make needed data available to the public.

Although much work remains to be done, the committee hopes that this report fulfills the expectations of its sponsors and aids all participants in the transportation decision process. We commend the wisdom and foresight of the Bureau of Transportation Statistics in requesting this study and in providing financial support to carry it out. In certain sections of this report, the committee focused on transportation in order to respond to the concerns and needs highlighted by BTS. Similar attention might be given to other major elements of public infrastructure, including water supply, because the issue of impacts on the livability of communities is equally germane there.

In addition to the acknowledgments, I extend my heartfelt thanks to Lisa Vandemark, our study director, who contributed wise guidance and hard work at every step along the way, and to the committee members who gave generously of their expertise, energy, and insights in researching this topic and preparing the following report.

Kathleen E. Stein

Chair