Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Transportation and the 5Ds
Reid Ewing Department of City and Metropolitan Planning
University of Utah
U.S. Focus
I am not xenophobic
Chapter 3
Fuels Vehicles
Transportation
CO2
VMT
Aggressive Case: 50 mpg in 2030 & -20% Fuel GHG
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
110%
120%
130%
140%
150%
160%
170%
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
2005 =
100%
Source: S. Winkelman based on EIA AEO 2008 (revised), HR6,
stock model calculat ions and sources cited in Growing Cooler .
CO2
2030 New
50 MPG
Fuel GHG:
-20%
VMT
CO2
Target
1990
Chapter 4
Main Question Addressed
What reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is possible in the United States with compact development rather than continuing urban sprawl?
Aggregate Travel Studies
35% Less VMT with Compact Development
14.7
21.5 22.020.3
22.9
19.9
15.2
26.3
33.2
28.9 29.2
33.4
28.9
22.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
New
Yor
k, N
Y
Provide
nce,
RI
San F
ranc
isco
, CA
Hon
olulu, H
I
Bosto
n, M
A
Portla
nd, O
R
New
Orle
ans, L
A
Dallas-
Fort
Wor
th-,
TX
Knoxv
ille, T
N
Gre
enville
--Spa
rtanb
urg,
SC
Atlant
a, G
A
Raleigh
--Dur
ham
, NC
Gre
ensb
oro-
-Winston
-Salem
, NC
River
side
--San
Ber
nard
ino, C
A
VM
T p
er
Cap
ita
Disaggregate Travel Studies
5Ds of Compact Development
Destination Accessibility Distance
to Transit
Density
Diversity
Design Mobility
Accessibility
Livability
Density
Boardings vs. Residential Density
Boardings vs. Employment Density
TOD Densities
33 Units per Acre (gross)
Diversity
Seamless Pattern
Design
Bethesda – Index of 1.49
Interconnected and Varied Spaces
Design Details
Pedestrian-Friendly Design
Once More for Emphasis
Effect of Density
Effect of Diversity
Effect of Design
The Fourth D
Regional Accessibility
Most Complete System
The Fifth D
Distance to Transit
At Both Ends
Classic Density Gradient
The Sixth D
Parking
Parking Prices vs. Transit Share
Clear Relationship
Limited Parking
Meta-Analysis
Ewing, R., Cervero, R.: Travel and the built environment: a meta-
analysis. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 76(3), 265–294 (2010)
Answer to 1st Question
20-40% VMT Reduction for Each
Increment of Compact
Development
Doing the Math through 2050
60-90% Compact
x
67% New Development
x
30% VMT Reduction
=
12-18% Reduction in Metropolitan VMT
Add Smart Growth -15% VMT
2030 CO2 is 14% below 1990
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
110%
120%
130%
140%
150%
160%
170%
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
2005 =
100%
Source: S. Winkelman based on EIA AEO 2008 (revised), HR6,
stock model calculat ions and sources cited in Growing Cooler .
CO2
VMT:
-15%
CO2
Target
1990
2030 New
50 MPG
Fuel GHG:
-20%
Chapter 8
The Combined Effect of Compact
Development, Transportation
Investments, and Road Pricing
Urban VMT Reduction
Elasticities of
VMT with
Respect to Policy
Variables
Change in Annual
Growth Rates of
Policy Variables (%
above/below Trend)
Effect on Annual
VMT Growth
Rate (% below
Trend)
Population
density –0.30 1 –7.7%
Highway lane
miles 0.55 –1 –11.4%
Transit
revenue
miles –0.06 2.5 –4.6%
Real fuel
price –0.17 2.7 –14.4%
Compact Development
+ Transit
+ Road Pricing
- Highway Expansion
= 38% VMT reduction by 2030
Portland Case Study
Specifically in Climate Action
In 2001, with
Multnomah County
created the Local
Action Plan on Global
Warming
In 1993, became first U.S. city to adopt a Carbon Dioxide Reduction Strategy
Local Action Plan on Global Warming 2001
10% reduction in carbon emissions below 1990
by 2010
150 items on “To Do” list in six focus areas
Policy Research and Education
Energy Efficiency and Green Building
Transportation, Telecommunications, and Access
Renewable Energy Resources
Waste Reduction and Recycling
Forestry and Carbon Offsets
Outside Land Use and Transportation
Compared to the U.S.
Challenge
Waste
disposal
1%
Industry
16%
Commercial
buildings
24%
Homes
20%
Transportation
39%
Multnomah County CO2 Emissions (2007)
17.419.3 18.5
13.2
6.7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Mil
es
1990 1995 2007 2030 2050
Daily VMT per person (private vehicles)
“Even the Portland version of business-as-usual won’t cut it.”
Michael Armstrong
Senior Sustainability Manager
Land Use and Mobility
VMT Growth
0
5
10
15
20
25
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
VM
T p
er
cap
ita
Portland OR-WA Raleigh-Durham NC
Regional Growth Management
Policy Tools
2040 Plan
Urban Growth Boundary
Density Targets (10/8/6)
Multifamily Targets
Transportation Investments
Open Space Acquisition
Planning Scenarios
Comparing the Concepts
Adopted Concept
2040 Regional Growth Concept (1995)
UGB and Transit
Urban Growth Boundary
Portland vs. Raleigh
Density Targets/Multifamily Targets
Transportation Investments
Open Space Acquisition
Transit and Transit-Oriented Development
LRT Lines
TOD Map
Centers
Streetcar Loop
Pedestrian- and Bike-Friendly Design
Streetscape Improvements
Complete Streets
"Wait Here." One of Portland's new bike boxes
(Courtesy of www.BikePortland.org).
Regional Bicycle Network
Bicycle Commute Mode Split 1990
…and 1990 mode splits
(by census tract)
With 1990 bikeway network...
0 - 2%
2 - 3%
3 - 5%
5 - 8%
8 - 10%
10+%
Bike Commute Mode Split
Bicycle Commute Mode Split 2000
With 2000 bikeway network…
…and 2000 mode splits
0 - 2%
2 - 3%
3 - 5%
5 - 8%
8 - 10%
10+%
Bike Commute Mode Split
Skinny Streets
Traffic Calming
It is a Choice
“The task of holding global emissions constant would be out of reach, were it not for the fact that
all the driving and flying in 2056 will be in vehicles not yet designed, most of the buildings that will be around then are not yet built, the locations of many
of the communities that will contain these buildings and determine their inhabitants’
commuting patterns have not yet been chosen”
Socolow and Pacala 2006