Presentation to George Washington University

1
Transportation/Land-Use Scenarios for the
Washington Region The Role of Transit-Oriented
Development, Value Capture, and Implications for
Climate Change

• Presentation to George Washington University
• Transit-Oriented Development Seminar
• Ronald Kirby, Director of Transportation Planning
• Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments
• September 30, 2008

2
Transportation Planning in the Washington Region

• Approximately 3,000 square miles
• Includes 5 million people and 3 million jobs
• The National Capital Region Transportation
  Planning Board (TPB) prepares a financially
  constrained, 30-year transportation plan for the
  TPB planning area

3
Growth in the Region
4
Where is the growth occurring in the region?
Estimates based on Round 7.1 of the Cooperative
Land Use Forecast
5
Greatest Congestion in Inner Suburbs

• The Most Dramatic Change is in Outer Suburbs

Urban core defined as The District, Arlington and
Alexandria. Inner suburbs defined as Fairfax
county in Virginia and Montgomery and Prince
Georges counties. Outer Suburbs defined as
Loudoun, Prince William, and Stafford counties in
Virginia Frederick, Calvert and Charles counties
in Maryland.
6
Shifting Funding Sources
Total CLRP Revenues 2007 2030 4.5 Billion per
year (2006 dollars)
7
Most Transportation Dollars Are Needed for
Maintenance
New Roads and Transit
30
70
Operations Preservation
Based on regions 2007 Constrained Long-Range
Plan
8
Land Use and Population Issues

• The region is growing at a rapid pace
• People are living farther from their jobs
• People on the eastern side of the region are
  commuting long distances to jobs in the west due
  to uneven development patterns
• The land around transit stations is not being
  used as efficiently as we would like

9
5 Scenarios to address the issues
TPB Regional Mobility and Accessibility Study,
2001-2006
1. More Households Scenario 2. Households In
Scenario 3. Jobs Out Scenario 4. Region Undivided
Scenario 5. Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)
Scenario
10
Impacts of the Scenarios Congestion would
decrease Compared to baseline forecasts for 2030
11
Successful Strategies From the Five Scenarios

• Put jobs and households closer together
• Encourage mixed-use development around transit
• Provide more transit to support regional activity
  centers.

12
Outreach Program Throughout Region
2004-2006

• Yellow Stars Interactive Program
• Orange Stars Study Briefing

13
Recommendations from Outreach Program

• Need to ensure adequate transit capacity to
  support TOD
• Assist local jurisdictions to do density right
• Look at composite scenarios and localized impacts
• Consider broader quality of life factors
• Explore ways to prioritize transportation
  projects on a regional level

14
The TPB Transportation/Land Use Connections (TLC)
Program Initiated January 2007 TLC
provides Information Sharing Comprehensive
website on transportation/land use techniques and
experience Technical Assistance Consultants
provide up to 20k in assistance to local
jurisdictions. Continuity Program approved
for next year with max assistance increased to
60k To date 22 projects initiated in 16
jurisdictions 6 completed
15
TPB Value Pricing Study October 2006-February 2008
3 Scenarios of Variably Priced Lanes (VPLs)
looking at All Freeways Arterials outside
Beltway Convert existing HOV lanes Direct
access ramps at key interchanges Add high
quality bus transit to VPLs
16
Comprehensive Cost-Benefit Analysis

• Practices and procedures firmly in place for
  virtually all types of public infrastructure
• Transit the exception assessment confined to
  ridership and related performance measures
  (transit user time savings)
• Ridership reflects mobility, but not other
  objectives and benefits of transit
• Congestion management
• Environment
• Safety
• Economic development
• Transit-oriented development

Dr. David Lewis, HDRDecision Economics
17
Why is Transit Treated Differently?

• Stems from FTA New Starts Process
• FTA process designed to rate applicant projects
  for pool of federal funds
• FTA process not designed to guide local
  infrastructure investment choices and trade-offs
• FTA process not designed to enable comparisons of
  value among infrastructure alternatives (highway
  options congestion pricing options technology
  options)

Dr. David Lewis, HDRDecision Economics
18
Need Comprehensive Recognition of Transit
Benefits

• Mobility
• Congestion Management
• Community Economic Development

Dr. David Lewis, HDRDecision Economics
19
Mobility

• Time savings to transit users
• Cash savings to low income households for
  reallocation to housing, nutrition, child care
• Cross-sector benefits reduced financial burden
  on social services

Dr. David Lewis, HDRDecision Economics
20
Congestion Management

• Reduced delay
• Improved reliability, predictability and
  productivity
• Reduced environmental emissions
• Lower vehicle operating costs
• Safety (lives, injuries, property)

Dr. David Lewis, HDRDecision Economics
21
Community Economic Development

• Location Efficiency
• Measurement

• High density economic activity
• Less demand for motorized trips
• Reduced auto-ownership requirements, dependence
• Higher density life-style

• Development benefits measured as increased
  economic growth
• land value

Dr. David Lewis, HDRDecision Economics
22
CASE Streetcar Investment(Cincinnati, Ohio)
Focus on ridership benefits alone can miss
financing opportunities and lead to the mistaken
conclusion that a project is not economically
worthwhile
Dr. David Lewis, HDRDecision Economics
23
Value of Cost-Benefit Analysis

• Enables quantitative understanding of
• significance of transit investment for economic
• well-being of region
• Facilitates understanding of development-based
• financing capacity of transit investment
• Facilitates community understanding,
• deliberation and consensus
• Allows comparative ranking of alternative
• scenarios for the region, including transit,
• highways, pricing and other policy options

Dr. David Lewis, HDRDecision Economics
24
Two New Scenarios
CLRP Aspirations
What Would it Take?
Draws on past scenarios (5 transportation/land
use scenarios and 3 value pricing scenarios) to
provide an ambitious yet attainable vision of
land use and transportation for the 2010 CLRP
update.
Starts with CO2 goals (80 below 2005 levels in
2050 and 20 reduction by 2020) and assesses what
scales and combinations of interventions will be
necessary to achieve the goal.
25
Land Use Changes Based on Previous Scenarios
New Scenario Growth Shifts from 2010-2030
Employment
Households
26
Proposed BRT Network on Variably Priced Lanes
Bus stations are located in activity centers,
park and ride lots and existing Metrorail
stations via dedicated access ramps
27
Addressing New Issues Climate Change
Changes in Travel Demand, Mobile Emissions and
Demographics (for the 8-Hour Ozone
Non-Attainment Area)
28
Responding to Climate Change
Goal To reduce CO2 emissions by 10, 20 and 80
below 2005 levels in 2012, 2020 and 2050
respectively
29
Reducing Mobile GHG Emissions
3 categories of strategies to reduce mobile CO2
emissions
Fuel Efficiency
Fuel Carbon Intensity
Travel Efficiency
Reduce VMT through changes in land use, travel
behavior, prices Reduce congestion Improve
operational efficiency
Beyond CAFE standards currently 35 mpg by
2020
Alternative fuels (biofuels, hydrogen,
electricity) Vehicle technology (hybrid engine
technology)
30
Key Strategies for the Future

• Keep making the case for increased federal and
  state funding
• Consider a wide variety of other funding sources,
  including tolls and local proffers, impact fees
  and bonding
• In the short-run, address localized choke-points
  manage demand and improve operations and
  incident management
• In the longer-run, do a better job of integrating
  land use and transportation