IMPROVING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PERFORMANCE THROUGH PLACE MAKING
Whit Blanton, AICP
Chair, American Planning Association Transportation Planning Division (www.apa-tpd.org)

       For all the studies, plans and programs to move people and goods more efficiently and effectively, transportation planning in large cities is mostly an incremental process that all too often results in marginal system improvements. Transportation systems largely follow historical precedent shaped by geography, climate and early settlement patterns based primarily on trade and defense. Cities have grown around ancient footpaths, waterways, rail hubs or regional highways using natural and man-made systems to shape and ultimately broaden travel options. Land development patterns that are decades, hundreds or even thousands of years in the making effectively shape how the transportation system can function. Additionally, learned behavior established by myriad social influences is extremely difficult to change. These factors combine to form a sturdy template that frames transportation system performance and how people may respond to various types of investments.
       In light of those intransigent historical and behavioral influences that frame transportation planning endeavors, new approaches are needed. If transportation planners focus primarily on mobility by expanding capacity, change indeed will be measured in small increments from the status quo. Capacity-driven plans, designed to resolve congestion and reduce delays, may yield short-term results, but often fail to improve overall transportation system performance in the long term. New investments in transit, while achieving varying levels of success, do not typically change the regional mode share percentage by more than a few points.
       A reasonable argument can be made that most of our transportation problems are really land use problems. Transit fails to capture ridership because it operates in places lacking sufficient density, diversity or intensity of land uses; suburban areas experience extreme traffic congestion because single-use land patterns dominate and design virtually precludes walking; urban centers with a dense street network and capacity for civic, commercial or social interaction whither because economic and political forces push newer developments to the suburban fringe areas. Effectively solving transportation problems must entail a comprehensive strategy aimed simultaneously at land use, economic, transportation and quality of life factors. When considering how best to solve transportation problems, we should first ask, “What are the land use objectives?”
       We have become a profession of specialists, compartmentalizing our expertise into different disciplines rather than applying our comprehensive planning skills to resolve transportation, environmental and land use problems jointly. To have meaningful improvement in the transportation systems, the profession must reach back to its origins before specialization took hold and broaden its focus to truly integrate land use, environmental and economic factors into the long-range transportation planning process.

Transportation’s Role in Place-Making
       The greatest benefit to improving transportation system performance is to focus on place making through the skills of regional planning and design. In this way, transportation becomes more efficient by increasing access to more travel choices. Creating hubs of activity at various scales is the cornerstone for improving transportation efficiency and effectiveness within metropolitan areas. Whether in the form of regional airfront districts comprising land uses and transportation systems that support and thrive in proximity to international airports, development of new traditional town centers, or simply defining civic focal points within communities or neighborhoods, hubs can satisfy multiple trip purposes by fostering more efficient land use and transportation patterns. They do so by reducing vehicle trip lengths when located strategically within a metro area; and, when smaller community focal points occur at roughly quarter mile intervals, tend to encourage walking and extend the distance people are willing
       to go on foot or bicycle. Even in large regional activity centers, having focal points every ¼ mile – a park, a plaza, a transit station – is critical to maintaining a sense of pedestrian scale and visual attraction that promotes walking and transit.
       To have meaningful impact on transportation, place making cannot occur in a regional vacuum. Take the case of Martin and St. Lucie Counties on Florida’s east coast, which is an area typical of most suburban high growth areas. It suffers from an inherited, master planned, low-density land use pattern with relatively little public transportation and a rapidly increasing level of traffic congestion. In a Regional Land Use Study of 200 square miles in both counties, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and its state and local partners found that creation of multiple sub-regional mixed use “community centers” eliminated the need to build two highway interchanges on US Route 1 at a cost of $80 million. Through strategic redevelopment and creation of new mixed use centers within the study area, demand for travel to the region’s major commercial corridor along US 1 decreased substantially. Forecasts of traffic with the new land use pattern showed automobile trips were being satisfied closer to residential areas, and the proportion of walk trips increased. Perhaps more important, however, is the plan to create places that offer a richer array of choices in housing styles, amenities and transportation services that be evolve as livable focal points. Without taking a regional perspective, neither county nor any of its member cities alone could begin to solve the congestion and land use problems plaguing their transportation facilities.
       The notion of airfront districts takes the same concept a bit further. An initiative being explored by the American Planning Association, airfronts are comprised of the commercial and industrial land area near regional or international airports that include a unique combination of offices, hotels, warehouses, entertainment venues and compatible uses that has tremendous economic pull within a region that rivals or exceeds traditional downtowns. Airfront districts, in much the same ways as waterfront districts, require special treatment by planners to define their boundaries, provide for complementary activities and proper urban design, and ensure a high level of transportation accessibility. As a regional hub with multiple economic activities, airfronts are unique in their ability to support state-of-the-art forms of public and personal rapid transit, and often serve as a regional catalyst for expansion of those systems to other hubs.
       The trick is not to decide land use or transportation first, but to look at where logical focal points can be created, and design both systems in concert to promote these hubs as places where people can gather, conduct business, change modes, etc. The market will largely determine size and scale; the planning profession must work to ensure integration of the hubs with the surrounding area.

Influencing Travel Behavior
       Changing behavior requires identifying intrinsically motivating factors that make people respond. Recycling programs are successful in large part because people feel that separating their trash is a small but effective thing to do that is good for the environment. It requires no monetary or timesaving reward, but has a motivational pull nonetheless.
       Lifestyle or quality of life conditions as they relate to transportation have similar potential for intrinsic reward. If people perceive a quality of life benefit from being able to walk to the coffee shop, grocery store or a job, or by taking the bus and reading a newspaper rather than being stuck in traffic or finding a parking spot, they will seek out those opportunities. As a profession, we often fail to present those opportunities in ways that work from a locational and lifestyle perspective. By changing our thinking to ensure transportation strategies and investments support the provision of a broader array of locational, housing, and mobility choices, we can make dramatic improvements in the situation. Traditionally, transportation planners have used cost and travel time as variables for determining whether people will consider using a different mode or route. Clearly, those are important considerations, but they fail to capture the intrinsic influences of lifestyle and quality of life on behavior. If
       we expect people’s behavior to change as it relates to transportation choices, we need to find better ways to market them through a process of social learning. The field of public health has begun to make tremendous strides to demonstrate the connection between so-called “active living” and the influences of community design on obesity and sedentary behavior.

New Measures
       Too often, the planning and regulatory tools employed by the transportation profession to guide land development and transportation project selection reinforce a cycle of incremental “improvements” that do not consider the concepts of place making. Our tools, from travel forecasting models to roadway level of service, have an exclusive focus on travel speed and delay, which result in predictable solutions. Communities that wish to break the cycle of capacity-driven roadway plans need to develop new measures of system performance that acknowledge other values of transportation and land use integration beyond mobility.
       The State of Florida has pioneered the development of multi-modal level of service measures that are based on the quality of service and the supportive environment for walking, bicycling and public transportation. While not perfect and still evolving, these measures offer another option for communities seeking an alternative, and consider the perception of safety, comfort and convenience on the part of bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders using connectivity, on-time performance, physical barriers that limit access, and urban design-related factors. More information can be found on the Florida Department of Transportation’s website at http://www11.myflorida.com/planning/default.asp.
       Transportation planning is a difficult task with no easy successes. Achieving lasting and meaningful improvement in how we travel and interact requires a renewed and dedicated focus on integrating land use and transportation decisions in ways that promote place making. To put livability and mobility back into balance, the planning profession needs to return to its City Beautiful roots and blend our skills as comprehensive planners to shape our regions, cities, towns and neighborhoods.
       In summary, there are several steps that should be taken by transportation planners to move beyond marginal improvements in metropolitan areas:

1. Take a regional, comprehensive approach to planning that establishes focal points or hubs at various scales to frame and provide context for transportation system investments;

2. Develop and apply design standards that support place-making;

3. Establish a broader set of performance measures for project selection and prioritization;

4. Create incentives for private sector investment in both land use and transportation systems, and

5. Develop and fund improved education and marketing programs that capitalize on motivating factors for behavior.

Whit Blanton, AICP, is chair of the American Planning Association’s Transportation Planning Division and Vice President of Renaissance Planning Group, an urban planning consulting firm based in Orlando, Florida.