Comprehensive Evaluation of Smart

Growth Benefits

Todd Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute

Presented

Smart Growth Debate Langley, BC

23 February 2012

Farmland Preservation Vs Sprawl

• Farms are subdivided.

• Land values and taxes

increase.

• Infrastructure costs rise

(water, sewage,

roads).

• Road traffic increases.

• Farming becomes less

viable, forcing other

farms to subdivide.

Farmland Preservation Vs Sprawl

• Farms are subdivided.

• Land values and taxes

increase.

• Infrastructure costs rise

(water, sewage,

roads).

• Road traffic increases.

• Farming becomes less

viable, forcing other

farms to subdivide.

Farmland Preservation Vs Sprawl

• Farms are subdivided.

• Land values and taxes

increase.

• Infrastructure costs rise

(water, sewage,

roads).

• Road traffic increases.

• Farming becomes less

viable, forcing other

farms to subdivide.

15

Smart Growth Development

Land use and transport policies that encourage development of compact, mixed, walkable urban villages where commonly-used goods and services (shops, restaurants, elementary schools, parks, etc.) are nearby, and high quality public transit provides convenient access to other regional destinations.

Victoria’s Cook Street Village is a example of a

multi-modal urban village where walking,

cycling, automobile and public transport are all

convenient and safe transport options

16

Retrofitting Suburbs

Many smaller cities, towns and suburban strips are now being retrofitted based on smart growth principles to create compact, walkable and bikeable, mixed use neighborhoods, reflecting traditional development practices.

Linking the Centers across US29 by Dan Burden, Walkable & Livable Communities Institute

18

Ped/bike bridge from mall to transit stop/garage

19

Mixed-use redevelopment on mall parking lot

20

Landscaping matures

21

Additional redevelopment

22

Landscaping matures over time

Household Transport Costs

Sprawl Smart Growth

Cars per household

Annual transport expenses $18,000 $6,000

Mobility for non-drivers Poor (requires

chauffeuring)

Moderate to good

(independent mobility)

Commute Automobile Walk, bike, automobile or

convenient public transport

Local errands Auto Walking, cycling and auto

Child’s travel to school and

friends

Poor (requires

chauffeuring)

Walking, cycling and

chauffeured in auto

24

Land Use Impacts On Travel

Smart Growth Safety Impacts

Healthy Communities

Walkability

• Improves public

fitness and

health

• Improves

mobility options

for non-drivers

• Transport cost

savings and

affordability

• Increases

community

livability

“A Heavy Load” Report

Lower-income households

in neighborhoods located

closer to the central cities

spend a much smaller

portion of their income on

housing and transport than

those located in more

sprawled neighborhoods.

Return on Investment

High quality public transit

typically requires about $268 in

additional subsidies and $104

in additional fares annually per

capita, but provides vehicle,

parking and road cost savings

averaging $1,040 per capita,

plus other savings and benefits:

• Parking cost savings.

• Congestion reductions

• Accident reductions

• Pollution reductions Improved

mobility for non-drivers,

• Improved fitness and health

Equity

A more diverse transportation

systems helps achieve equity

objectives:

• A fair share of public resources for

non-drivers.

• Financial savings to lower-income

people.

• Increased opportunity to people who

are physically, socially or economically

disadvantaged.

32

Sprawl Is Costly

• Increases infrastructure

and public service costs.

• Increases transportation

costs and reduces travel

options.

• Environmental costs

(reduced greenspace and

wildlife habitat).

$-

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

Smart

Growth

Sprawl

An

nu

al

Tra

ns

po

rt E

xp

en

dit

urs

33

Smart Growth Benefits

Economic Social Environmental

Infrastructure cost savings

Public service cost savings

Transportation efficiencies

Agglomeration efficiencies

Economic reliance

Supports industries that depend on high quality environments (tourism, farming, etc.)

Improved transport options, particularly for non-drivers

Increased housing options

Community cohesion

Cultural resource preservation (historic sites, traditional neighborhoods, etc.)

Increased physical exercise and health

Greenspace & habitat preservation

Energy savings

Air pollution reductions

Water pollution reductions

Reduced “heat island” effect.

Memo From Future Self

Hope for the best but prepare for the worst:

• Physical disability – diverse and integrated transport with universal design (accommodates people with disabilities and other special needs).

• Poverty and inflation – affordable housing in accessible, multi-modal locations.

• Higher fuel prices – improve efficient modes (walking, cycling and public transport).

• Isolation and loneliness – community cohesion (opportunities for neighbors to interact in positive ways).

Trends Supporting Multi-Modalism

• Motor vehicle saturation.

• Aging population.

• Rising fuel prices.

• Increased urbanization.

• Increased traffic and parking congestion.

• Rising roadway construction costs and declining economic return from increased roadway capacity.

• Environmental concerns.

• Health Concerns

Housing Demand By Type (Nelson 2006)

The current supply of

large-lot suburban is

approximately adequate

to satisfy demand for

the next two decades.

Most growth will be in

smaller-lot and multi-

family housing.

High Quality Public Transit

• Geographic coverage (serves many

worksites, schools, stores, recreational

areas, neighborhoods).

• Relatively fast, reliable and and frequent.

• Comfortable and clean vehicles and

waiting areas.

• Convenient information and payment

systems.

• Affordable relative to incomes and

driving costs.

• Safe and secure.

• Courtesy and responsiveness.

Walking and Cycling Improvements

• More investment in

sidewalks, crosswalks,

paths and bike lanes.

• Improved roadway

shoulders.

• More traffic calming.

• Bicycle parking and

changing facilities.

• Encouragement, education

and enforcement programs.

Motorists Benefit Too

More balanced transport policy is no more “anti-car” than a healthy diet is anti-food. Motorists have every reason to support these reforms:

• Reduced traffic and parking congestion.

• Improved safety.

• Improved travel options.

• Reduced chauffeuring burden.

• Often the quickest and most cost effective way to improve driving conditions.

Supported by Professional Organizations

• Institute of Transportation

Engineers.

• American Planning Association.

• American Farmland Trust.

• Federal, state, regional and

local planning and

transportation agencies.

• International City/County

Management Association

• National Governor’s Association

• Health organizations.

• And much more...

Roadway Costs

Transport Canada reports that in

2009–10, all levels of Canadian

government spent $28.9 billion on

roads, about $900 annually per

capita, and collected $12.1 billion

in fuel taxes and $4.4 billion in

other road user fees, indicating

that in Canada, user fees cover

about 64% of roadway costs.

Transport In Canada: An Overview,

Transport Canada

(www.tc.gc.ca/eng/policy/report-aca-

anre2010-index-2700.htm).

“Where We Want To Be: Home Location Preferences & Their Implications for Smart Growth”

“If Health Matters: Integrating Public Health Objectives into Transportation Decision-Making”

“Evaluating Transportation Economic Development Impacts”

“Affordable-Accessible Housing In A Dynamic City”

“The Future Isn’t What It Used To Be”

“Evaluating Smart Growth Benefits”

“Online TDM Encyclopedia”

and more...

www.vtpi.org