No abstract

No abstract

Part of the case for higher density development is based on the belief that compact urban forms are more efficient than low density development known as suburban sprawl. Some broad relationships among driving, transit use, urban form, and congestion using urban area data, and special analysis of the 1990 National Personal Transportation Survey are examined. Although generally supporting the prevailing wisdom, the regional data show that there are other factors involved in explaining such differences, and the national household data present a less robust relationship. The national data show that there are significant differences in the household characteristics of persons living at different density levels—characteristics that are themselves important determinants of travel. Issues relating to these findings in the context of public policies on development and transportation are explored.

Transit-Oriented Development in the United States Transit-oriented development (TOD) has attracted interest as a tool for promoting smart growth, leveraging economic development, and catering to shifting market demands and lifestyle preferences. This study, based on a combination of stakeholder survey responses, interviews, and in-depth case studies, paints a national portrait of contemporary TOD practice in the United States. TOD is viewed and defined differently throughout the country, with its most common traits being compact, mixeduse development near transit facilities and high-quality walking environments. Joint development is a form of TOD that is often project specific, taking place on, above, or adjacent to transit-agency property. The results of a national survey suggest that the principal aim of TOD and joint development is to boost ridership and, thereby, boost revenue income. Community economic development and broader smart-growth agendas are secondary objectives.

Transit-oriented development (TOD) has become popular across the nation not just as a partial solution for rampant highway traffic congestion but also as a way of life. The emphasis of TOD on creating a close-knit, pedestrian-friendly, distinctively designed form of urban and suburban development appears able to elicit support even where transit service is minimal or nonexistent. TOD is solidly ensconced as a significant component of smart growth, sustainable development, and new urbanism. Public officials often view the concept as a valuable building block for developing accessible and attractive communities, and transit agencies value its generation of increased ridership. The benefits of TOD for transit operators and broader transportation policies are fairly well established. Less well appreciated is that urban sites most suitable for TODs are transit friendly but often developer unfriendly, since they are often more expensive and more complicated to develop. In contrast, the suburban locations most desired by residents and businesses are developer friendly but transit unfriendly. For them to support transit requires special efforts to increase density, mixed uses, and pedestrian orientation, qualities uncommon and often resisted in the suburbs. A number of projects generally considered among planners and developers to be effective TODs were examined, and their strengths and weaknesses are reviewed from a transit perspective, on the basis of several specific principles. The TOD concept is demonstrated to be alive and well and evolving toward the described ideals.

No abstract

This is one of a series of reports produced as a result of the Transportation Energy Futures (TEF) project, a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-sponsored multi-agency project initiated to identify underexplored strategies for abating greenhouse gases and reducing petroleum dependence related to transportation. The project was designed to consolidate existing transportation energy knowledge, advance analytic capacity-building, and uncover opportunities for sound strategic action.Transportation currently accounts for 71% of total U.S. petroleum use and 33% of the nation's total carbon emissions. The TEF project explores how combining multiple strategies could reduce GHG emissions and petroleum use by 80%. Researchers examined four key areas -lightduty vehicles, non-light-duty vehicles, fuels, and transportation demand -in the context of the marketplace, consumer behavior, industry capabilities, technology and the energy and transportation infrastructure. The TEF reports support DOE long-term planning. The reports provide analysis to inform decisions about transportation energy research investments, as well as the role of advanced transportation energy technologies and systems in the development of new physical, strategic, and policy alternatives.In addition to the DOE and its Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, TEF benefitted from the collaboration of experts from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Argonne National Laboratory, along with steering committee members from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Transportation, academic institutions and industry associations. More detail on the project, as well as the full series of reports, can be found at http://www.eere.energy.gov/analysis/transportationenergyfutures. ...................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................. 69 References ......................................................................................................................... Contract LIST OF TABLES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Designing the Built Environment to Reduce Energy Use and EmissionsUrban form has evolved in response to a variety of demographic, social, economic, technological, and policy drivers. While direct authority over land use resides primarily at the local level, the federal government's transportation and housing policies have indirectly influenced the built environment. These policies accelerated mid-and late-20 th century trends of decentralization and declines in population density that were driven by increasing automotive mobility and the post-World War II baby boom. Suburbanization now shows some signs of slowing or reversing in response to demographic, economic, and cultural changes, renewing interest in smaller homes in urban settings. Local governments are increasingly impl...

No abstract