Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 15, Land Use and Site Design (2003)

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.

15-122 housing prices mainly reflecting capitalization of more efficient development — leading over time to a better local economy — and a better place to live. ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Results from TCRP Project H-1, An Evaluation of the Relationship Between Transit and Urban Form, are available in TCRP Report 16, “Transit and Urban Form,” a two-volume set (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 1996a and b, and companion Volume 2). This major reference document for planners and transit professionals addresses many facets of the relationships between land use and public transportation, and their implications for cost-effective multimodal public transportation investment decisions. The reader should note that most of the density-related conclusions of this study are framed from the perspective of assignment to density of all attributes that it serves as a proxy for, most notably (but not only) levels of transit service. The LUTRAQ project (1000 Friends of Oregon) represents a significant, comprehensive, and forward reaching effort to understand, model, and apply the principles of coordinated transportation and land use planning. LUTRAQ produced 11 technical reports, between 1991 and 1997, on topics including integrated land-use and transportation modeling, urban design, and market feasibility of transit-oriented development (1000 Friends of Oregon, 1997; and companion volumes). Three recent syntheses organize and add to the body of knowledge concerning the land use and transportation linkage. “Travel and the Built Environment — A Synthesis,” a paper in TRR 1780, draws from and provides a tabular summary of over 50 empirical studies on the subject, and also offers meta-study elasticities of travel demand relative to build environment variables (Ewing and Cervero, 2001). The Environmental Protection Agency monograph Our Built and Natural Environments — A Technical Review of the Interactions between Land Use, Transportation, and Environmental Quality, carefully sets forth findings from about 500 studies of all types concerning urban form impacts on public and private costs, transportation and travel, land preservation, and quality of life/social issues (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2001). TCRP Report 39, “The Costs of Sprawl Revisited,” summarizes the pro and con literature on development form and costs, and identifies the extent of agreement or disagreement found concerning the premises and conclusions (Burchell et al., 1998). TCRP Report 74, “Cost of Sprawl — 2000,” published in 2002 after the primary development of this “Land Use and Site Design” chapter, presents research on the incidence of sprawl, the impact on national and local resources, the personal costs of sprawl, and policy responses. Transportation is one of a half-dozen or so issue areas covered. Sprawl is found to be the dominant form of urban growth, not quite the villain it is often portrayed, but certainly an increasing and unnecessary drain on fiscal and natural resources (Burchell et al., 2002). Also available are “first person” presentation and dissection of contrary viewpoints and interpretations about the land use/transportation connection, and most particularly the basic precepts underlying land use controls and new urbanism, set out in a pair of Journal of the American Planning Association “Point”/“Counterpoint” articles (Gordon and Richardson, 1997; Ewing, 1997). A layman’s summary of contrary perspectives and associated counter- evidence with notes and resource listings is found in the recent book The Vanishing Automobile and Other Urban Myths — How Smart Growth Will Harm American Cities (O’Toole, 2001). A comprehensive topic-by-topic examination of smart growth criticisms accompanied by a rebuttal of positions taken by Gordon, Richardson, O’Toole and others is provided in