Urban Transportation Research

1
Travel Behaviour in the GTATrends Prospects
Eric J. Miller, Ph.D. Bahen-Tanenbaum
Professor Interim Chair, Dept. of Civil
Engineering Director, UTRAC University of
Toronto Presented to the Greater Toronto
Transportation Conference November 30, 2007
2
Presentation Outline

• This presentation discusses the relationship
  between urban form, travel demand and urban
• sustainability.
• Focus is on
• current travel trends
• policy implications

3
Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) Since 1986 a
major survey of travel behaviour in the GTA (and
beyond) has been undertaken at the University of
Toronto, funded by all planning agencies in the
survey area. With a 5 sample (135,000
households in 2001), TTS is the largest travel
survey program in the world. TTS provides an
unparalleled database for urban transportation
research.
4
In the GTA, as in most cities, all travel trends
with respect to auto usage are in the wrong
direction, moving towards a less sustainable
system.
5
Long-Term GTA Growth Trends
GTA population, cars daily trips all increased
by about 33 from 1986 to 2001. Daily auto trips
increased by 44, and the share of auto trips
increased by 10 from 72.1 to 79.1 of all
trips. Transit ridership only increased by 5
and its market share declined by 28, from 21.6
to 15.7 of daily trips.
6
Suburban regions

• GTA population growth has been largely occurring
  in lower-density suburban regions
• 38-109 in suburban regions
• 11 in Toronto
• 15 in Hamilton

7

• 1996-2001 increases in
• daily trips per person
• auto ownership
• auto-drive mode shares
• (continuation of long
• term trends)

8
Summary 1. More trips/person 2. More
cars/household 3. More auto-driving/trip
Trips growing faster than pop.
Auto trips growing faster than total travel.
Highest growth rates generally in suburban
fringe areas
9
Accessibility

• Transportation affects land use and location
  choice
• by providing accessibility to land and
  activities.
• Several measures can be used to quantify the
• concept of accessibility. These measures all
  are
• defined for a specific point in space
• a function of the magnitude/attractiveness
• of alternative locations
• a function of the distance/time required to
• reach these locations

10
Accessibility Measures
The simplest measure is the number (or fraction)
of jobs (other activities) with x km (or min.) of
a point
Ai å Ej jÎSxi
x
i
Ai Accessibility of zone i to employment Ej
Employment in zone j Sxi Set of employment
zones within x min of zone i
11
Employment Accessibility By Car, AM Peak Period
12
Employment Accessibility By Transit, AM Peak
Period
13
Accessibility by Mode
Given the way we have built our cities our
transportation systems, the automobile provides
much higher levels of accessibility for most
people for most activities.
Auto-based trips dominate travel, except
in special circumstances
14
(No Transcript)
15
Transit Usage

• Transit usage depends upon
• Auto ownership levels
• Residential densities
• Employment densities
• Transit service levels
• Socio-economics
• Walkability to/from transit
• Local transit coverage connectivity to/from
  mainline services

16
Auto Ownership
17
Population Density
18
1996 Employment Density (Source Haider, 2003)
1996 GTA Employment (Source Haider, 2003)
While many employment centres exist across the
GTA, from a density perspective, the GTA is still
very monocentric. This has strong implications
for transit usage.
GTA Employment Distributions
19
(No Transcript)
20
Trip lengths total auto usage vary with urban
form.
21
So too does environmental impact.
1996 Avg. Daily CO2 Emissions Per Household
22
and average annual transportation costs
per household
23
Macro vs. Micro Design
Urban form is defined at both a macro level
(spatial distribution of people, jobs, activities
land use) and the micro level of detailed
neighbourhood design (street layouts, density,
fine-grain mix of uses, etc.). Both are
important in the determination of travel
demand and transportation system sustainability.
But, macro location effects tend to dominate
micro neighbourhood design impacts.
24
Macro vs. Micro Design, contd
Source Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Urban
Travel Tool for Evaluating Neighbourhood
Sustainability, Prepared by IBI Group for CMHC
and Natural Resources Canada, Feb. 2000
25
GTA Growth Transportation Impacts
Pop. Growth Rate
In a Business as Usual scenario with respect
to GTA growth and transit system investment,
auto usage is projected to grow faster than
population transit usage will grow at about half
the rate of population.
Pop. Growth Rate
26
Summary of Findings

• Where we grow is critical to transportation
  sustainability.
• Employment concentration along corridors and in
  nodes
• critical to transit usage.
• Mixed-use, neighbourhood design critical to
  walkability and
• local transit use.
• Transit investment critical to transportation
  sustainability,
• but it must be
• combined with land use design (macro micro)
• deal with local distribution as well as
  long-distance
• line haul

27
Policy Implications
28
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Air Pollution Urban
Sprawl Congestion Accidents Lack of Exercise
Global Climate Change Respiratory Other
Diseases Loss of Farmland, Natural Urban
Habitat Loss of Productivity Leisure Time
Stress Injuries/Deaths Productivity/Property
Loss Obesity, Other Health Problems
-
Accessibility to Activities / Mobility

QUALITY OF LIFE
Participation in Social, Recreational Economic
Activities Economic Productivity
29
Findings Implications

• In many respects the GTA taken as a whole is
  representative
• of other North American cities
• increasing auto ownership
• increasing person trip rates
• increasing suburbanization of
• population and employment
• increasingly complex travel
• patterns
• more non-work/school trips
• more non-home-based trips
• more non-peak-period
• travel
• declining transit mode shares

30
Findings Implications, contd

• At the same time, the GTA (City of Toronto in
  particular)
• deviates from the North American norm
• Transit per capita ridership,
• mode share cost/revenue
• ratios still very high by
• North American standards
• GO-Transit (commuter rail)
• very successful in competing
• for long-distance commuters
• Continuing strength/vitality of
• the Toronto Central Area
• Overall high density transit
• orientation within the
• amalgamated city is highly
• supportive of transit

31
Findings Implications, contd

• Important to remember/learn from our own
  experience
• Coordinated land use - transportation planning
• designed to emphasize transit does work
• It is possible to maintain a strong, livable
  urban
• core, which is the economic heart of an
  extensive
• urban system
• serviceable by an attractive, cost-effective
• transit system
• supportable without continuously expanding
• road capacity

32
Findings Implications, contd

• Lessons from the Toronto experience, contd
• It is possible to build at higher densities
  without
• loss of quality of life (indeed, the opposite
  is true)
• Regional sub-centre concept works
• keeps growth within the core within manageable
  limits
• new foci for transit network development

33
Findings Implications, contd
At the same time, there is little evidence from
anywhere that low density, auto-oriented,
suburban sprawl generates anything other than the
consumption of more land, more congestion and the
need for even more roads.
This never-ending, decentralizing spiral
of development is simply not sustainable in the
long run.
34
Findings Implications, contd

• Elements of a sustainable transportation policy
  include
• transit- (and walk-) supportive urban
  development
• promotion of non-motorized modes of travel
• reinvestment in transit infrastructure
  services
• innovative transit services
• road pricing
• parking price/supply
• tax reform
• .

35
Policies for Sustainability

• None of the ideas listed on the previous slide
  are new.
• What is required is
• The political will/leadership to undertake
  change.
• A willingness to invest in our transportation
  infrastructure
• Taking neighbourhood design seriously
• Recognizing that change must occur

Business as usual simply will not work in the
future (it isnt even working now)
36
THANK YOU. QUESTIONS?
Auto Ownership
Transit Service
Residential Density
Socio- Economics
Nbhd. Design
Employment Density
Road Network
Accessibility
Demographics
ILUTE Simulation Model