bycle.2 pdf

Active Transportation and Smart GrowthThomas Gotschi, PhDthomas@railstotrails.org

[ Active Transportation = Bicycling and Walking for Utilitarian Purposes]

Session Overview

• The role of active transportation in smart growth– Thomas Gotschi, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy

• Trail Oriented Development– Billy Fields, University of New Orleans

• Non-motorized Transportation Pilot Program– Dan Dawson, Marin County Department of Public Works

Focus on transportation related aspects of smart growth

Goals of Smart GrowthA more sustainable form of development, in terms of

environmental, social and economic criteria

• Energy efficiency– smarter mobility– smarter building designs

• Social benefits– Quality of life– Social interaction– Health benefits

• Economic efficiency– Energy savings– Time savings– Infrastructure savings– Health care savings

Smart Growth Principles• Mix land uses • Provide a variety of transportation choices• Create walkable neighborhoods• Take advantage of compact building design • Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place • Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities • Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost effective• Create a range of housing opportunities and choices • Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical

environmental areas • Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration in development

decisions

Sorted by relevance for transportation

Land Use

Transportation Choices

Walk and Bike Friendly Neighborhoods

Public Transportation

• Longer trips

• Less vehicles per traveler

• Less emissions per traveler

Land use

• Increased density

• Mixed use

• Sense of place

Walking and Bicycling

• Short trips

• Transit feeder

• Zero emissions

Smart Mobility

Goals• Reduce travel distances• Reduce the need to drive• Improve quality of travel• Maximize benefits• Minimize regrets

Smart Mobility

Chicken and Egg (and Rooster)

Smart Mobility

Why Smart Mobility must be about more than just Transit

APTA numbers• SAIC report

– GHG transit/cars: 0.76• ICF international

– PMPG transit: 57 (gasoline only)– VMTPG: 41 (cons. Auto occupancy)

GermanyShort distance• Regional rail (RE, RB, S-Bahn) averaged:

59mpgUrban short distance (Subway, Tramway, Bus) averaged: 91mpg

RegionalExpress (RE): 54mpgRegionalBahn (RB): 47mpgS-Bahn: 63mpg

Bus: 88mpgSubway, Tramway: 140mpg

Long distance rail• Averaged over types of trains (ICE, EC, IC) and

speeds: 107mpg

ICE up to 124 m/h: 118mpgICE over 124 m/h: 91mpg EC/IC: 125mpg

100%

40%

20%

Fuel use compared to 25mpg

80%

60%

US

Ger

Ref: Cars

What is the key to efficient transit?

Back to the roots…

Mycorrhizal mycelia are much smaller in diameter than the smallest root, and can explore a greater volume of soil, providing a larger surface area for absorption.

Plant root w/out mycorrhiza

Plant root with mycorrhiza

Driving Forces of MobilityPush (Sticks)• Cost of driving• Gas price/tax• Pay as you drive

insurance• Congestion• Congestion fee• Toll lanes• Parking restrictions

Pull (Carrots)• Transportation

choices• Convenience• Safety

Example: Does car sharing reduce GHG emissions?

Early Conclusion

• Start wherever you can

Bonus: Health Benefits• Unique to Active Transportation• In itself a reason to increase walking and bicycling

Obesity – a Ticking Time Bomb

• 300,000 premature deaths every year– Allison, D.B., et al., Annual Deaths Attributable to Obesity in the United States. JAMA, 1999

• Reduces life expectancy of children by 5 years– Levine, S., et al., Obesity Threatens a Generation: Catastrophe of Earlier Deaths, Higher

Health Costs. The Washington Post, May 18, 2008

• Causes more preventable disease than smoking– Mokdad, A.H., et al., Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000. JAMA, 2004

• Costs at least $100 billion a year– Anderson, L.H., et al., Health care charges associated with physical inactivity, overweight,

and obesity. Prev Chronic Dis, 2005

In contrast to many diseases, obesity is almost completely preventable

Americans’ (In)Activity LevelsCDC Recommendation: “30 minutes of moderate exercise on most days”

48% fulfill activity recommendation

52% insufficiently active

156 M

25% no leisure time activity75 M

14% not active at all

42 M

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System: 2007 Codebook Report. 2008

Why Active Transportation Works

• Reduction in physical labor, routine activity

• Lack of opportunities

• Too busy• Too tired• Lack of motivation

• Financial constraints• Skills, confidence

• Social, cultural factors

• Steady increase in mobility• 27% of all trips <1 mile,

48% of all trips <3 miles

• Exercise secondary purpose• Low intensity exercise• Convenient transportation

• Affordable, saves money• No skills required, suitable for

everyone• “Build it and they come”

Leisure Time Exercise Active Transportation

Making the Case

Notes from the Field

Quantification of Benefits

Increase in Bicycling and

Walking

Benefits from Bicycling and

Walking

Investment in Safe and Convenient Infrastructure

Transportation

Economic Value

Climate Change

Oil Dependence

Health

Quality of Life

Status Quo

Modest Scenario

Substantial Scenario

Mode Share Assumptions for Benefits Calculations

10%1.4%

87%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

13%

5%25%

79%

53%Other

Driving

Transit

Transit from Bike & Walk

Bicycling & Walking

Mode Share Status Quo Modest Scenario

Substantial Scenario

15%

5%

Benefits Calculation

Congestion Relief

Congestion Relief

Miles Driven Avoided

Fuel

CO2

Physical Activity

Replace Short Trips

Synergy with Transit

Induce Smart Growth

$$

VMT reduction from Active Transportation

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1 Mile or less

1 – 3 Miles 1 – 15 Miles

Trip Distance

Mile

s Tr

avel

ed (B

illio

ns)

% of all Trips 27 21 39 87

% of Miles Traveled 2 7 39 48

SQ

1. Shift Short Trips to Bicycling and Walking

SQ MS SS

MS SS

Status Quo

Modest Scenario Substantial

Scenario

2. Boost Transit Ridership through Improved Access

3. Reduce Trip Distances through Mix-Use Development

Monetary Value of Benefits• Under current conditions, fuel savings from short

bicycling and walking trips alone offset current expenditures more than 6-fold.

• Under modest assumptions about shifting trips to bicycling and walking, the resulting annual benefits will be worth close to 20 times the current level of federal funding for bicycling and walking.

• Assuming substantially increased growth of bicycling and walking, nationwide benefits would skyrocket to a magnitude approaching that of total federal surface transportation spending.

$4B

$10B

Compared to ~$500 million in current federal spending for bike/ped

$66B

How Comprehensive is our Analysis?- biased towards the quantifiable

Local example: Portland, Ore.

How much investment is needed?

Portland

Costs of Portland's Bikeway Network

http://www.railstotrails.org/resources/documents/whatwedo/case_statements/Portland%20CS%20for%20Web.pdf

• ~50 million over 28 years• 2 million/year• $3.50/resident and year

Portland’s Benefits from Bicycling

Congestion Relief

Congestion Relief

Miles Driven Avoided70-150M

Fuel Savings3-7M gal

CO2 Emission 30-70K tons

Physical Activity0.3 min/pers day

Direct Replacement of Short Trips

Increase in Transit Ridership Thanks to Bicycling and Walking

Reduce Trip Distances Thanks to Mixed-Use Induced by Bicycling and Walking

$9 - $22 million / year

Based on “Active Transportation for America” methodology

Conclusions

• Land use, transit, and AT complement and support each other

• Active Transportation is a cost-effective starting point for smart growth

• Efficient smart growth policies balance:– Carrots and sticks– Land use, transit, and active transportation

How Much Funding is Needed?

p.17

Strong correlation, but not necessarily a causal relationship

Some figures may not be exactly comparable due to source of funds, duration of funding, and funding purposes.

Infrastructure Investments and Increase in Bicycling in Portland (p.28)

Health and Climate Benefits• Physical activity for 50-90 million Americans

– Enough to lift all currently insufficiently active people to being sufficiently active (30+ min/day)

• Billions of dollars in health care savings every year– $0.4 - $28 billion per year (depending on assumptions)– $20 - $330 per individual and year

• CO2 reduction equivalent to 3-8% of all personal vehicles– 33-91MMT/year (equivalent to 19 – 50 million add. hybrids)

Barriers to Bicycling and Walking

• Safety concerns, perception of risk• Lack of facilities• (Mis-)perception of inconvenience• Density, diversity of development (Lack thereof)• Traffic regulation (Lack thereof)

We need focused investments in safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure

Assume same effect on congestion for NMT as for transit (per mile driven avoided)

Methodological Challenges

Assume health care savings of $19 - $330 per person and year from gained activity

Assume 1-3% reduction in length of trips up to 15 miles

How Fuel Savings are Calculated (p.22)

Based on Miles Driven Avoided• Fuel savings from short trips (<3 miles):

– 20 mpg (http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_04_23.html)

• Fuel savings from increase in public transportation– Need fuel economy assumption for public transportation

• Status Quo: 75% of current vehicle fleet (APTA)• Modest Scenario: 70% of current vehicle fleet• Substantial Scenario: 50% of current vehicle fleet

– Need assumptions on how much bicycling and walking increases public transportation

• Status Quo: unknown (reference)• Modest Scenario: 10%• Substantial Scenario: 30%

Based on Congestion Relief from Miles Driven Avoided• Texas Transportation Institute

– Estimates effect of miles driven avoided by public transportation: • Total passenger miles over urban areas: 45.1 billion

– Equivalent to 45.1 / 1.33 persons/vehicle = 33.8 billion VMT• Total fuel saved thanks to public transportation: 323.4 million gal• Fuel saved per 1000 VMT avoided: 323.4 million gal / 33.8 billion VMT = 9.6 gal / 1000 VMT

– http://mobility.tamu.edu/ums/congestion_data/

How CO2 Reduction is Calculated (p.22)

Based on Fuel Savings• CO2 emission reduction:

– 19.6 pounds per gallon of gasoline– 1 pound = 0.45 kg– 1 ton (metric) = 1000 kg

How Time of Physical Activity is Calculated (p.30)

Based on Bicycling and Walking for short Trips (3 miles or less)– Walking speed: 3 mph– Biking speed: 10 mph– Bike share among

active transportation miles:• Status Quo: 20%• Modest Scenario: 30%• Substantial Scenario: 50%

Conversion to calories: – Bicycling, 10mph, leisure, 155lbs: 281 cal per hour

(http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm)– Walking, 3mph, mod. pace, 155lbs: 246 cal per hour

(http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm)

How Benefits are Monetized (p.38)

Fuel Savings– Status Quo: $3.50 per gallon, minus 15% tax– Modest Scenario: $3.00 per gallon, minus 15% tax– Substantial Scenario: $4.00 per gallon, minus 15% tax

CO2 Emission Reductions– Status Quo: $0– Modest Scenario: $10– Substantial Scenario: $30

In Billion Dollars: $4B $10B $66B

How to Compare Benefits between Scenarios?

Benefits are “totals”, NOT “in addition” to lower scenario or status quo