Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2014 www.TRB.org The Second S T R A T E G I C H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M RepoRt S2-C16-RR-1 Effect of Smart Growth Policies on Travel Demand Maren Outwater and COlin SMith Resource Systems Group Jerry walterS and Brian welCh Fehr & Peers rOBert CerverO Kara KOCKelMan J. riChard KuzMyaK Renaissance Planning Group
Subscriber Categories Environment Highways Planning and Forecasting
SHRP 2 Reports Available by subscription and through the TRB online bookstore: www.TRB.org/bookstore Contact the TRB Business Office: 202-334-3213 More information about SHRP 2: www.TRB.org/SHRP2 The Second Strategic Highway Research Program Americaâs highway system is critical to meeting the mobility and economic needs of local communities, regions, and the nation. Developments in research and technologyâsuch as advanced materials, communications technology, new data collection tech- nologies, and human factors scienceâoffer a new opportunity to improve the safety and reliability of this important national resource. Breakthrough resolution of significant transportation problems, however, requires concentrated resources over a short time frame. Reflecting this need, the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2) has an intense, large-scale focus, integrates multiple fields of research and technology, and is fundamentally different from the broad, mission-oriented, discipline-based research programs that have been the mainstay of the highway research industry for half a century. The need for SHRP 2 was identified in TRB Special Report 260: Strategic Highway Research: Saving Lives, Reducing Congestion, Improving Quality of Life, published in 2001 and based on a study sponsored by Congress through the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). SHRP 2, modeled after the first Strategic Highway Research Program, is a focused, time- constrained, management-driven program designed to com- plement existing highway research programs. SHRP 2 focuses on applied research in four areas: Safety, to prevent or reduce the severity of highway crashes by understanding driver behavior; Renewal, to address the aging infrastructure through rapid design and construction methods that cause minimal disruptions and produce lasting facilities; Reliability, to reduce congestion through incident reduction, management, response, and mitigation; and Capacity, to integrate mobility, economic, environmental, and community needs in the planning and designing of new trans- portation capacity. SHRP 2 was authorized in August 2005 as part of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The program is managed by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) on behalf of the National Research Council (NRC). SHRP 2 is conducted under a memo- randum of understanding among the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the National Academy of Sciences, parent organization of TRB and NRC. The program provides for competitive, merit-based selection of research contractors; independent research project oversight; and dissemination of research results. SHRP 2 Report S2-C16-RR-1 ISBN: 978-0-309-27288-9 Library of Congress Control Number: 2014946501 Â© 2014 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Copyright Information Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copy- right to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. The second Strategic Highway Research Program grants permission to repro- duce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, or FHWA endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing material in this document for educational and not-for-profit purposes will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from SHRP 2. Note: SHRP 2 report numbers convey the program, focus area, project number, and publication format. Report numbers ending in âwâ are published as web documents only. Notice The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the second Strategic Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical committee and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the second Strategic Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
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. On the authority of the charter granted to it by Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone 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 achieve- ments of engineers. Dr. C. D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., 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, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau 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 Academyâs 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. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisci- plinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transporta- tion, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration in cooperation with the American Asso- ciation of State Highway and Transportation Officials. It was conducted in the second Strategic Highway Research Program, which is administered by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. The project was managed by Jo Allen Gause, Senior Program Officer for SHRP 2 Capacity. The authors acknowledge additional research team members from Resource Systems GroupâPeter Plumeau, Michael Geilich, Chris Hoffman, John Lobb, Jeremy Wallis, and Stephen Laweâfor their assistance with key planning decisions and software development. They also acknowledge Fehr & Peers team membersâ Christopher Gray and Paul Herrmannâfor their assistance with pilot tests and software design. Three pilot agencies provided valuable feedback on the use of the tool: Maryland Department of Trans- portation (Don Halligan, Alyssa Seibert, Subrat Mahapatra, and Sabyasachee Mishra); Atlanta Regional Com- mission (Guy Rousseau and Steve Lewandowski); and Thurston Regional Planning Council (Thera Black). The authors also thank those who gave their time for interviews on how smart growth is considered in their planning activities. These individuals include Don Halligan from the Maryland Department of Transporta- tion, Barbara Fraser from the Oregon Department of Transportation, Chris OâNeil from the Capital District Transportation Committee, Ron Milone from the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Thera Black from the Thurston Regional Planning Council, Eric Pihl from the Federal Highway Administration, John Thomas from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and Mike McKeever from the Sacramento Area Council of Governments. The quality of the products was enhanced by the direction and feedback of the Technical Expert Task Group: John Thomas, Chair; Ayalew Adamu; Stacey Bricka; Sundar Damodaran; Jack Fain; John Fuller; Gordon Garry; Richard Lobron; Jerry Lutin; Jianming Ma; Elaine Murakami and Eric Pihl (each for part of the project); Jim Schultz; Jennifer Stults; Tom Werner; and Lynn Wilson. The quality was also enhanced by the Transportation Research Board Senior Program Officer Jo Allen Gause and Deputy Director Stephen Andrle. The authors owe a debt of gratitude to Brian Gregor from the Oregon Department of Transportation, Transportation Planning Analysis Unit, who developed the Greenhouse Gas Statewide Transportation Emissions Planning (GreenSTEP) software. This software was adapted for use in our Smart Growth Area Planning (SmartGAP) software. In addition, the authorsâ research benefited from sharing information on a parallel research project on smart growth and freight led by Alon Bassok from Puget Sound Regional Council. SHRP 2 STAFF Ann M. Brach, Director Stephen J. Andrle, Deputy Director Neil J. Pedersen, Deputy Director, Implementation and Communications Cynthia Allen, Editor Kenneth Campbell, Chief Program Officer, Safety JoAnn Coleman, Senior Program Assistant, Capacity and Reliability Eduardo Cusicanqui, Financial Officer Richard Deering, Special Consultant, Safety Data Phase 1 Planning Shantia Douglas, Senior Financial Assistant Charles Fay, Senior Program Officer, Safety Carol Ford, Senior Program Assistant, Renewal and Safety Jo Allen Gause, Senior Program Officer, Capacity James Hedlund, Special Consultant, Safety Coordination Alyssa Hernandez, Reports Coordinator Ralph Hessian, Special Consultant, Capacity and Reliability Andy Horosko, Special Consultant, Safety Field Data Collection William Hyman, Senior Program Officer, Reliability Linda Mason, Communications Officer Reena Mathews, Senior Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability Matthew Miller, Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability Michael Miller, Senior Program Assistant, Capacity and Reliability David Plazak, Senior Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability Rachel Taylor, Senior Editorial Assistant Dean Trackman, Managing Editor Connie Woldu, Administrative Coordinator
F o r ewo r d Jo Allen Gause, SHRP 2 Senior Program Officer, Capacity This report documents the findings of SHRP 2 Project C16, Effect of Smart Growth Poli- cies on Travel Demand. The project will help practitioners in two ways to understand how smart growth impacts travel: first, through a synthesis of research, and second, through a user-friendly software tool that can be used to evaluate the impact of smart growth policies on regional travel demand. The software application offers a reliable tool that transporta- tion and land use planners can apply to better understand how smart growth strategies can influence travel demand in their regions by capturing time-of-day effects. This capability can differentiate between smart growth benefits on both peak and nonpeak travel. Although considerable research has been done on the well-established relationship between smart growth and daily travel demand, research on travel effects by trip purpose or by time of day is much more limited. This creates a challenge for estimating the effects of smart growth development patterns and transportation management on peak period traffic con- ditions and congestion. For smart growth to be a component of regional congestion relief, transportation planners need to understand what types of smart growth development work and in what types of environments, as well as how best to link the development strategies to specific transportation solutions. Under SHRP 2 Project C16, a research team led by Maren Outwater of Resource Systems Group conducted an extensive review of existing research to understand the dynamics and interrelationships of smart growth policies with the performance of transportation invest- ment. The research focused on five topics: (1) the built environment impact on peak auto- mobile demand, (2) mobility by mode and purpose, (3) induced traffic and induced growth, (4) the relationship between smart growth and congestion, and (5) smart growth and freight. This synthesis of existing research documented well-established relationships and identified gaps in the research. During the next phase of the research, the research team developed a software tool to help decision makers of transportation and land use policies conduct scenario planning of smart growth policies and determine their impact on regional travel demand. The scenario-planning tool, initially called Smart Growth Area Planning (SmartGAP) and recently renamed the Rapid Policy Assessment Tool (RPAT), estimates smart growthâs effect on both peak and nonpeak travel, as well as its effects on sprawl, energy reduction, active travel, and carbon footprints. The SmartGAP tool measures the travel demand impacts of smart growth policies through robust modeling of individual households and firms in a metropolitan region. All of the input data can be developed from nationally available data sets that are provided with the application. Users also have the option of replacing these data with local data sources. The tool is easier and faster to use than traditional planning models and is therefore useful for quickly evaluating scenarios of growth, pricing, and other demand management strate- gies. SmartGAP is free and open sourced. To test the usefulness and reasonableness of the SmartGAP tool, three planning agencies conducted test implementations of the software. The agencies included a small metropolitan planning organization, a large metropolitan planning organization, and a state department of transportation. The pilot tests provided valuable feedback to improve the software and the accompanying userâs guide.
C O N T E N T S 1 Executive Summary 1 Overview of the Project 2 Background Research 3 Smart Growth Area Planning (SmartGAP) 4 Pilot Tests 5 Products 6 CHAPTER 1 Introduction 6 Project Objectives 6 Research Approach 8 Organization of this Report 9 CHAPTER 2 Background Research 9 Key Decision Points for Smart Growth in the Planning Process 15 The Built Environmentâs Impacts on Peak Auto Demand 20 Mobility by Mode and Purpose 22 Induced Traffic and Induced Growth 25 Relationship Between Smart Growth and Congestion 31 Smart Growth and Freight Traffic 36 Summary and Recommendations 42 CHAPTER 3 Smart Growth Area Planning (SmartGAP) Tool 42 Background and Use 42 Model Structure 48 Household and Firm Models 49 Urban Form Models 49 Vehicle Models 49 Accessibility 51 Travel Demand 52 Congestion 54 Induced Demand and Urban Form Effects on Travel Demand 55 Policies 58 Performance Metrics 62 Additional Resources 69 CHAPTER 4 Pilot Tests 69 Pilot Test Objectives 69 Pilot Test Process 70 Maryland Department of Transportation 74 Atlanta Regional Commission 79 Thurston Regional Planning Council 82 Test Implementation in Portland 87 Summary of Pilot Test Findings
89 CHAPTER 5 Research Findings and Conclusions 89 Research Findings 89 SmartGAP Use 89 Future Enhancements to SmartGAP 91 References 97 Appendix A. Performance Metrics and Tools 119 Appendix B. Smart Growth Area Planning Tool (SmartGAP) Documentation Color versions of the figures in this report are available online: http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/168761.aspx.