Upload
marc-nebb
View
6
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
7. CONTEMPORARY INTRAURBAN
TRANSPORTATION PATTERNS AND
ISSUES IN METROPOLITAN AREAS
2
TRANSPORTATION USES ARE STRONGLY LINKED TO INTERNAL SETTLEMENT PATTERN OF
THE CONTEMPORARY METROPOLITAN AREA
• Transportation: key in determining the overall residential settlement pattern of the metropolitan area.
• The density of the residential developments differs the most
between a metropolitan area that is primarily transit-oriented as opposed to automobile oriented.
• Lower residential density patterns preferred by American
public.
3
4
TRANSPORTATION-RELATED DEFINITIONS
• Person trip: A trip made by one person by any mode and for any purpose from an origin to a destination (address or sometimes a traffic zone).
• Vehicle trips: A vehicle trip includes all trips made by a
privately owned vehicle/transit without regard to the number of occupants in the vehicle.
A married couple drives from their home to restaurant
and then return home.They will make 4 person trips, but only two vehicle trips.
• Vehicle miles of travel (VMT): Each mile traveled by a
privately owned vehicle without regard to the number of occupants in the vehicle.Example: two people making a five-mile car trip would
generate five vehicle miles of travel.
5
MORE DEFINITIONS• Privately owned vehicle (POV) or Personal Vehicle (PV):
All owned personal vehicles available to the household such as cars, vans, pickup trucks, other trucks, recreational vehicles, and motorcycles, but not private aircrafts or boats.
SOV = single occupancy vehicle includes vehicles with
driver and no passengersHOV = high occupancy vehicle includes vehicles with two
or more occupants
• Transit: Local public transit buses, commuter buses, commuter trains, subway/elevated trains, streetcar/trolleys.
• Daily trip: Defined as going from one address to another. A daily trip does not have to originate from home, and can begin from the last address traveled.
• Trip purpose: Reason that motivates the travel.
6
Purposes of Daily trips• Family Business and Personal Business—Window shopping or
purchase of goods, doctor or dentist visits, picking up or dropping off someone, and other personal reasons, such as the purchase of services, haircuts, banking, and car repair.
• Shopping
• School/Church—School, college or university classes, or religious activities.
• Social and Recreation—Vacation, visits to friends and relatives, and other activities such as participating in sports, and going to movies or other entertainment venues.
• Work—Trips to and from one's place of work, or where one reports to work. Also referred to as commuting trips.
• Work Related—Trips made for one's job, other than travel to and from the place of work. This may include going to a meeting, conference, or visiting clients.
7
OUR LOVE AFFAIR WITH CARS• Results from the 2009 NHTS show that daily travel in the
United States totaled about 3.7 trillion miles.• An average of just under 20,000 miles per household annually.
Americans daily averaged just under 4 trips per day, totaling on average 29 miles
Average person trip length just under 10 milesTransport is second largest expense for most American
households
• U.S. has by far highest rate of personal vehicle ownership in world, about 50% higher than most Western European countries.
• Transportation accounts for about 19% of consumer
expenditures (same as food and health care combined).
8
Economic Prosperity: Rapid Increase in Truck and Freight Traffic: 2001-2007
9
Travel Demand Forecasting: The Mind of the Transportation Planner
• Planner needs various types of information to choose between various transportation scenarios.
• How many vehicle trips will be made in the future and for what purpose?
• From where to where will these trips be made?What modes of travel will be used?Which transportation systems will become congested in
the future?How much ridership will new transportation service
attract?
10
11
Influences of Travel Behavior
• Socio-Economic Conditions Household growth Economic prosperity and job growth Increase in per capita travel More complex life styles Increased labor force participation of women
• Land Use Low density, suburban settlement patterns Urban form Land uses scale (e.g., big box, regional shopping center vs.
neighborhood retail strip)
• Transportation System Preference for private vehicles rather than transit Multiple car households
• While household size has declined in the U.S., all other travel indicators increased between 1969 and 2009
• During past four decades, growth in workers and drivers far outpaced the growth in households and persons
• Growth in the number of vehicles has outpaced other indicators
• Since 1969 annual rate of increase in the number of personal vehicles was almost one and one-half times the annual rate of increase in the number of drivers
12
Major Travel Indicators
13
14
Households are getting smaller with more vehicles…
U.S. Census0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Vehicles per Household Persons per Household
15
16
Who Are The Zero-Vehicle Households?
• Households with annual incomes of less than $25,000, nine times as likely to be a zero-vehicle household than households with incomes greater than $25,000.
• Newer foreign born residents• African-American residents• Older people (over the age of 80)• Older (over the age of 65) women• Households living in a rented or condominium residences
are about five times as likely to be zero vehicle households compared to other types of residences.
• These households more likely found in the largest metropolitan areas and particularly in their central cities. Extreme example: Close to 80% of Manhattan
households do not own a personal vehicle
17
Almost 30% of the households in areas with a population density greater than 10,000 persons/sq miledid not own a vehicle in 2009.
18
19
Recent Changes in Americans’ Travel Behaviors
• After a sixty-year “Driving Boom” of travelling more behind the wheel almost every year, Americans have reduced their average driving miles each of the last eight years (2004-2012)
• Per capita vehicle miles traveled peaked in 2004 and had fallen 7.4 percent by the end of 2012.
• As of June 2013, decline continued• Decline in average vehicle miles travelled led by the
Millennial generation• Average driving miles for Americans aged 26 to 34 fell by
23% between 2001 and 2009• Also decline in drivers licenses: 87% of 19 year olds held
drivers licenses in 1983; only 69% in 2011
20
21
Reasons for Driving Decline• Higher gas prices
In 2008, when gas prices hit record levels, mass transit use in the United States hit its highest mark since 1957, up about 4% from 2007
SUV sales also declined sharply over this period Smaller (more gas efficient) and hybrid car sales and prices
increased.
• Unemployment, people not driving to work• Shopping at physical stores smaller share• Information technology: not driving, but telecommuting• Higher share of workers in home offices• Physical social interactions replaced by texting• Small rise in transit usage• Big question: Temporary (poor economy) or something
permanent22
23
Driving Decline (con’t)• But as Americans drive less, the federal Highway Trust Fund
receives less revenue from gasoline and diesel sales – 18.4 cents per gallon and 24.4 cents per gallon, respectively. Important because key source for funding our roadsAnd fuel taxes not keeping up with inflationThe federal gasoline and diesel tax rates have not been
raised in 18 years. After adjusting to account for the rising cost of transportation construction, both taxes have seen the real value of their rates fall by 41 percent.
• State gas taxes are most important source of transportation revenue under control of state.
• But state gas taxes not kept pace with the rising cost of asphalt, concrete, labor, and everything else that goes into maintaining a transportation network.
24
25
TRAFFIC INCREASES AND THE CHANGING ROLES OF WOMEN
• The growth of the female labor force an important contributor to increases in traffic and use of automobile.
• 46% of the labor force comprised of women (age 20+) compared with 28% in 1950.
• New financial realities of 2-person income earner household.
• Social and psychological basis for work has changed.
26
Change in Population, Workers & Drivers 1969–2001Focus on Gender Differences
52.7%
63.0% 61.3%
49.7%
112.9%
145.1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
160%
Percent Change inPopulation 16+
Percent Change in Drivers Percent Change in Workers
Men Women
27
Changing Workforce
In 1960:• 38% of all women
work, but few women with young children go to work
• Majority of families have only one worker
In 2007:• 61% of women 20 years and
over work, including two-thirds of women with children under 6.
• Shift to dual-earner families, higher income households, and one vehicle per worker
• 71% of women aged 20 to 64 work.
28
29
WOMEN AND CARS: ARE YOU PRACTICING SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION IF YOU OPPOSE THE
GROWTH OF AUTO USE AND NEW ROADS?
• Woman along with their work roles still maintain traditional female roles as mother, housewife, homemaker.
• Still have most of the responsibility for household’s shopping
needs, social and entertainment plans, children’s day care, medical care.
• Many also serve as caregivers to their older mothers or fathers. • Thus, women have multiple roles and multiple responsibilities. • So, what has this to do with transportation? • EVERYTHING!
30
31
32
Women’s Complex Life Styles
• Their lifestyles—INCLUDING JOB & CAREER—require them to complete multiple tasks outside home in limited time periods.
• They must quickly and efficiently move among numerous
destinations. • Rarely are these trips neatly concentrated in a single mall or
compact downtown. • Rather, dispersed among multiple locations. • Contrast, with male worker and simpler travel pattern.
33
What Mode of Transportation Works Best?
• For females, most appropriate type of transportation to achieve these multiple dispersed trips is the automobile.
• Public transportation and female lifestyles mix like oil and water.
• Opposing highway expansion and increased auto use therefore a form of de facto sexual discrimination.
34
Distribution of Person Trips by Trip Purpose (%)
Trip Purpose Percent
Work 15
Work-related 3
Shopping 20
Family or personal business 23
Medical/dental 2
School/church 10
Social/recreational 26
Other 1
Total 100
SOURCE: The 2001 National Household Travel Survey, Daily Trip File, U.S. Department of Transportation.
35
MEASURING IMPORTANCE OF THE WORK TRIP
• Work or commute trips accounted for about 18% of all person trips in the U.S.
• Work or commute trips accounted for about 22% of all vehicle
trips. • Work or commute trips accounted for about 27% of all miles
traveled. • How to explain these differences?
36
Hypothetical Example Showing the Computing of Work Trip Shares
• 5 social person-trips 33%
• 10 work person-trip 66%
• 15 total person-trips 100%
• 2 vehicle social trips 20%
• 8 vehicle work trips 80%
• 10 total vehicle trips 100%
37
Vehicle Occupancy Per Vehicle Mile by Daily Trip Purpose
Trip Purpose Mean Number of Persons
All personal vehicle trips 1.63
Work 1.14
Work-related 1.22
Family or personal business 1.81
Church/school 1.76
Social/recreational 2.05
SOURCE: The 2001 National Household Travel Survey, household file, U.S. Department of Transportation.
38
DISPROPORTIONATE IMPORTANCE OF JOURNEY TO WORK OR COMMUTING
1. Impact on community development and economy.
2. Major factor in residential location decisions.
3. Fundamental cause of peak travel demand and therefore defines transportation system’s capacity requirements.
4. For the majority of adults who work, the workplace location is a major force in the stimulus for travel, the direction, location, and time of travel and—often—the mode of travel as well.
Temporal Pattern of Vehicle Trips By Purpose
• Looking at vehicle trips by time of day and purpose shows that the morning and evening peak periods include not just commutes, but family and personal errands, school trips, and other non-work trips which add to the number of vehicles during the peak periods.
• But as expected, commuting to and from work began predominately between 6 and 9 o’clock in the morning and between 4 and 7 o’clock in the afternoon
• In contrast, more than half of non work-related trips started between 9 am and 4 pm.
39
40
Travel Time to Work Has Increased
• Average travel time to work was about 24 minutes in the year 2009 up from 18 minutes in 1980.
• Increased travel time to work may indicate the effects of sprawl, congestion, or fewer nearby affordable housing choices.
• But mediated by larger share of intra-suburban trips.
• But varies by metro: e.g.: New York city has largest average commute time of 34.6 minutes
41
42
U.S. Work Access Mode: 1960-2010
43
44
Hispanics have the double the carpooling rate than NonHispanics.
Recent foreign born arrivals more likely to carpool.
45
When is Transit Competitive with Cars?
• For journeys to the CBD with large employment opportunities• For short trips from neighborhoods to the CBD or to suburban
shopping malls and colleges (large number of jobs or people).• For trips within higher-density neighborhoods (above 4,200
persons per square mile) with frequent service• When relatively dense housing is clustered close to transit
stations or stops (transit oriented developments)• Most transit commuting concentrated in few large, densely
settled metropolitan areasNew York, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Boston
and Washington • Outside of New York City, only 3.5% of workers in other
places use public transit (compare with 4.9%)
46
The Economics of Transit Use
• Why only these types of trips and locations? • A function of the economics of transit operations. • Large fixed costs of public transit operation independent of
whether bus/train is filled or not (driver salary, fuel, wear and tear, insurance, cost of bus).
• Profitable operations only when the fixed costs can be offset by large numbers of passengers.
47
Contemporary Transit Development• Beginning in the late 1970s, a new wave of rail transit was
built in growing metropolitan areas that previously did not have systems.Washington, DC, San Francisco, and Atlanta.
• Another major wave of new transit was built beginning in the 1980’s, consisting mainly of new light rail systems, most in existing freight rail corridors and on abandoned freight right-of ways.San Diego (1981), Portland (1986), Los Angeles (1990),
St. Louis (1993), Denver (1994), and Dallas (1996).
• During the 1990’s and 2000’s the transit boom has continued. Cities such as Portland, Seattle, Little Rock, Tacoma, Tampa, and Memphis built new streetcar systems.
48
Benefits of Transit
49
But Substandard Transit Exists in Most Metropolitan Areas
• Percentage of metropolitan jobs that can be reached by transit for the average worker is very low
• Brookings Institution data: less than 10% of the jobs in major metropolitan areas can be reached within 45 minutes by transitBecause transit service is infrequentBecause it operates so slowly or is nonexistent
50
SPATIAL PATTERNS OF THE JOB COMMUTE: METRO RESIDENCE TO WORKPLACE COMMUTING
PATTERNS: U.S. CENSUS, 2000
Residence to Workplace Workers 16 years
and older Percent
WITHIN CENTRAL CITY 28,221,936 27.0
CENTRAL CITY TO SUBURBS 9,167,469 8.8
CENTRAL CITY TO NONMETRO 422,154 0.4
Subtotal 37,811,559 36.2
WITHIN SUBURBS 44,579,498 42.7
SUBURBS TO CENTRAL CITY 20,806,907 19.9
SUBURBS TO NONMETRO 1,185,667 1.1
Subtotal 66,572,072 63.8
Total Workers in Metropolitan Areas 104,383,631 100.0
51
SPATIAL PATTERNS OF THE JOB COMMUTE: NONMETROPOLITAN RESIDENCE TO
WORKPLACE COMMUTING PATTERNS: U.S. CENSUS, 2000
Total Workers in Nonmetropolitan
Areas 23,895,597 100.0
NONMETROPOLITAN AREAS 20,406,590 85.4
CENTRAL CITY 1,572,496 6.6
SUBURBS 1,916,511 8.0
52
Commuting Flow Patterns: Major Conclusions
• Dominant flow pattern is suburb to suburb—likely to increase in time.
• Far more important than traditional suburbs to central city. • Majority of job commuting end in suburbs. • Central city job commutes still substantial. • In smaller metropolitan areas, suburb to suburb flows
somewhat less predominant. • In smaller metropolitan areas, suburb to central city flows
more important.
SOCIETAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS OF CURRENT
TRANSPORTATION PATTERNS
53
54
The Vulnerability of Transit-Dependent Populations
• The poor: who cannot easily afford the costs of private vehicle transportation
• Particularly, the poor inner city working population who without cars has difficulty accessing suburban job opportunities, because public transit typically serves only major suburban employment centers.
55
• Older people who are carless must totally rely on public transportation and thus are highly restricted in their accessibility.
Especially true if they live in more suburban locations.Elderly persons have many problems using public
transit: Inclement weather, waiting, inflexible route systems, etc.
• Physically disabled persons of all ages who require
specially equipped bus vehicles to successfully navigate from one place to another.
56
Responses to the needs of transit dependent
• Specialized door to door transportation systems--para-transit or demand-responsive transportation for nutrition, health trips.
• Rights of disabled transit travelers greatly strengthened by Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).
• Public Law 101-336. The ADA prohibits discrimination and ensures equal opportunity for persons with disabilities in employment, State and local government services, public accommodations, commercial facilities, and transportation.
CONGESTION PROBLEMS
Source: Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A & M University
57
58
Measuring congestion:
• The Travel Time Index (TTI) measures the amount of additional time needed to make a trip during a typical peak travel period in comparison to traveling at free-flow speeds at off-peak times.
• The index is defined as the travel time during the peak
period divided by the travel time in the off-peak.
Travel time (minutes) peak period____________________
Travel time (minutes) off-peak period
• A TTI of 1.30 indicates that the average peak trip takes 30% longer than in uncongested conditions, that is, a 20-minute trip becomes a 26-minute trip. That is: 26/20 = 1.3 (20*1.3)
Traffic Congestion Patterns and Trends
• In 2011, average TTI for all 498 urban areas was 1.18 • Thus, an average 20-minute off-peak trip takes almost 24
minutes to complete during peak due to heavy traffic demand• Congestion problems more severe in larger cities• Average TTI ranges from 1.27 in the very large areas down
to 1.11 in the small urban areas. • The TTI has increased in urban areas of all sizes
59
60
61
Travel delay per peak auto commuter is the other individual measure that
provides estimates of the mobility levels
62
Congestion Wastes A Massive Amount of Time, Fuel And Money, 2011
• 2.9 billion gallons of wasted fuel (equivalent to about 2 months of flow in the Alaska Pipeline).
• 5.5 billion hours of extra time
• $121 billion of delay and fuel cost
• $27 billion of the delay cost was the effect of congestion on truck operations; this does not include any value for the goods being transported in the trucks.
• The cost to the average commuter was $818 in 2011 compared to an inflation-adjusted $342 in 1982 and, spent an extra 38 hours travelling 63
Congestion Costs Are Increasing
• The congestion “invoice” for the cost of extra time and fuel in 498 urban areas was (all values in constant 2011 dollars): In 2011 – $121 billion In 2000 – $94 billion In 1982 – $24 billion
64
65
Solutions to Congestion (according to Anthony Downs of Brookings Institution)
• Charge peak-hour tolls (congestion pricing)Government charge people money to use all lanes at
peak hours as means to reduce vehicles on roadNegatives: favors wealthy, harms poor
• Greatly expand road capacity for peak hr. travelNegatives: impractical and prohibitively expensiveUnderutilized at nonpeak hoursLead to demolishing buildings & trees to widen roads
• Greatly expand public transit capacity Increasing transit will make small dent in auto useEven if transit capacity tripled, estimated peak-hour
morning transit would rise to 11% of all morning trips.Will not notably reduce peak-hour congestion
66
Other Possible Solutions• Encourage more people to work at home/flexible hours• Increase the efficiency of the system (traffic light controls,
improvements in freeway entrance ramps, traffic accident incident management
• Better management of road construction projects
• Living With CongestionThis is the sole viable option.
Peak-hour congestion makes it possible for Americans to pursue other goals they value, including working or sending their children to school at the same time as their peers, living in low-density settlements, and having a wide choice of places to live and work.
67
CONGESTION IS OUR FRIEND?
Validity of Ideas of Dom Nozzi,
former senior planner for the City of
Gainesville for 20 years
(Gainesville Sun, February 10, 2008
68
Dom Nozzi: Congestion is our friend
69
Nozzi Argues That Congestion Results in the Following Outcomes: Agree or Disagree
1) Traffic congestion is a sign of a healthy community, that has so many attractive features that a great many people want to live there.– “healthy” or “economically growing”?
2) Congestion is a powerful disincentive for sprawl—With congestion, the sprawl market withers. Is that true?
3) Congestion leads to regional reduction in air pollution and fuel consumption because “low-value” car trips are reduced, more people travel in non-car ways, and more people live closer to their destinations. Is that true?
4) Congestion promotes in-fill development, mixed use, and higher residential densities—so people can avoid congestion when going to jobs, schools and shopping.—but to what extent?
70
Congestion Results in the Following Outcomes: Agree or Disagree (continued)
5) Congestion creates political pressure to create quality transit, bicycle, and walking systems. Large numbers of citizens become enraged by the congestion and demand that politicians do something about it. Are you enraged?
6) Congestion is a sign of healthy community that has resisted the ruinous temptation of build its way out of congestion by building monster-sized roads.
(Is that the same as saying, air pollution is a sign of a healthy community—but should we tolerate it?
7) The best way to ease congestion is to charge fees (i.e., tolls), particularly during rush hour. Yes, tolls may discourage travel—but what about issues of social equity?
71
Congestion Results in the Following Outcomes: Agree or Disagree (continued)
8) We must create travel options so that if congestion is awful, we can opt use transit, a bicycle, or a sidewalk to avoid congestion. Is this a feasible option? Make a difference?
9) Smart growth advocates must start looking upon congestion as a friend. Friends like this?
10) Large consumer demand for auto-dependent sprawl is fueled by a market heavily distorted with enormous governmental subsidies, such a free roads, free parking, and under-priced gas. Historically, a long tradition—but free? Under-priced gas?
11) Ending those subsidies will encourage radical changes in travel and lifestyle. Do you think?
72
Air pollution
Vehicle Emissions• Vehicles produce a number of gases that are by-products of
internal combustion, such as carbon monoxide. Emissions known as volatile organic compounds mix with nitrogen oxides in atmosphere, and in the presence of ultraviolet light, form smog.
Greenhouse Gases• Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a natural by-product of both internal
combustion and human respiration.
• While not a pollutant, increased CO2 emissions may affect
the Earth’s climate. Because CO2 is known to trap heat in the Earth’s atmosphere, it is often referred to as a “greenhouse gas.”
73
Climate Change May be Affected
74
Physical Infrastructure
• According to a 2013 analysis of the Federal Highway Administration’s most recent data by the national transportation research group TRIP and USA Today, just 38 percent of the pavement on America’s roads is in “good” condition.
• Nearly half the roads in largest cities are uneven, cracked or
rutted, and nearly a fourth need immediate repairs.
• In these areas, motorists pay an average of nearly $580 a
year in additional costs, such as replacing shocks and tires, and refilling their gas tanks because of lower fuel efficiency.
Physical Infrastructure (con’t)
• More than one in nine (11 percent) (66,405) of all bridges in the U.S. are structurally deficient in 2012.
• Require significant maintenance, rehabilitation or replacement.
75
76
The Interstate 35W bridge over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis on Aug. 2, 2007
77
Noise pollution• Buses, cars, trains
Visual Impacts • Signs, billboards, asphalt, cement, cars-beaches/Daytona beach
Auto As An Energy Waster
• Automobiles one the least efficient modes of transportation with respect to the use of energy.
• Compare with bus, subways, railroads.
Auto as Source of Destruction• Personal accidents, insurance, property damage, medical costs. • But there are always winners along with the losers.
Auto repairPersonal injury lawyersOrthopedic surgeons, etc.