As of September 1, 2012, the University Transportation Center for Mobility (UTCM) is no longer an active center of the Texas A&M Transportation Institute. The archived UTCM website remains available here.

UTCM HomeConference Site MapContact Conference Webmaster

Conference on Performance Measures for Transportation and Livable Communities

SEPTEMBER 7-8, 2011 • AUSTIN, TEXAS

BREAKOUT SESSION 5:
Land Use, Social Justice, and Environmental Performance Measures

Click on the icon to view a PDF of the slide presentation.

Presiding

LUCY GALBRAITH, Capital Area Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Austin, Texas

	Mobility 2035 CHAD McKEOWN, North Central Texas Council of Governments
	Social Equity Impact Assessment MARK BRENMAN, Social Justice Consultancy
	Transportation, Sustainability, and Urbanization JASON ZHENG, University of Connecticut
	On Modeling the Travel Behavior – GHG Emissions Linkage CHANDRA BHAT, University of Texas at Austin

---

Mobility 2035

CHAD McKEOWN, North Central Texas Council of Governments

Slides [PDF , 1.9M]

Chad McKeown discussed Mobility 2035, the MTP for the Dallas-Fort Worth area developed by NCTCOG.  He described the planning and public involvement process, the mobility performance indicators, and the active transportation performance indicators.  Chad covered the following topics in his presentation.

• The Mobility 2035 MTP is a blueprint for a multimodal transportation system in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex.  It responds to the goals of mobility, quality of life, system sustainability, and implementation.  The plan identifies policies, programs, and projects for continued development of the region.  It guides expenditures of federal and state funds.
• The mobility goal focuses on improving the availability of transportation options for people and goods, and assuring all communities are provided with access to the regional transportation system and to the planning process.  The quality of life goal focuses on preserving and enhancing the natural environment, improving air quality, and promoting active lifestyles.  It also encourages livable communities that support sustainability and economic vitality.
• Mobility 2035 includes major policy objectives focusing on the regional needs, which exceed available revenues.  The region cannot build its way out of congestion.  There is a regional need to maximize the existing transportation system.  Another policy objective is to use sustainable development strategies to reduce demand on the transportation system, to provide multimodal options, to emphasize the environmental aspects and quality of life issues of programs and projects, and to invest strategically in the infrastructure.
• Development of the Mobility 2035 plan included a number of steps and activities.  There were 12 public meetings held to introduce the planning process and three public meetings were held in the development of the plan goals and priorities.  The next two steps were determining the funding scenarios and evaluating and developing policies, programs, and projects.  There were three public meetings conducted as part of the program and project selection process and nine public meetings were held as part of the Regional Transportation Commission approval process.  The final steps were approval by the Executive Board and U.S. DOT on the air quality conformity determination.
• Mobility 2035 includes overall recommendations and funded recommendations for different transportation system elements.  These elements include freeway, tollway, and HOV/managed lanes improvements, passenger rail improvements, and bicycle and pedestrian off-street facilities.  The plan includes mobility performance indicators.  These indicators include the number of jobs accessible within 30 minutes by automobile, the number of jobs accessible within 60 minutes by transit, and congestion levels by traffic analysis zone (TAZ).  Other indicators are average travel time and access to special generators, such as hospitals and universities.
• The plan also includes active transportation performance indicators.  These indicators include bicycle and pedestrian accessibility to transit, major employers, and other major destinations; bicycle and pedestrian facility gaps and missing connections; and parks, open space, and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and amenities built in an effort to increase physical activity and improve the quality of life in the region.  Other active transportation performance indicators are the number of local governments that are actively involved in bicycle and pedestrian facility planning, design, and implementation, and safety enhancements for bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists through infrastructure improvements.
• Current and forecast traffic congestion levels were analyzed.  Based on 2012 congestion levels, the annual cost of congestion is estimated at $4.5 billion.  The cost of congestion in 2035 is estimated at $10.1 billion.  The plan includes descriptions of major projects.
• In summary, Mobility 2035 is developed around four goal themes.  The goals and policies are reflected in the plan recommendations and the new direction of the MTP.  Metrics are identified to measure the attainment of goals in Mobility 2035 and future transportation plans.  With limited financial resources, continually monitoring the performance of the transportation system is key to managing congestion.  More information on Mobility 2035 is available at www.nctcog.org/mobility2035.

[ Top ]

Social Equity Impact Assessment

MARK BRENMAN, Social Justice Consultancy

Slides [PDF , 66K]

Marc Brenman discussed social equity impact assessments.  He described some of the basic elements of environmental and civil rights laws and provided a recent example of a social equity impact assessment.  Marc covered the following topics in his presentation.

• Social equity has been defined by the National Academy of Public Administration as the fair, just, and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract; the fair and equitable distribution of public services and the implementation of public policy; and the commitments to promote fairness, justice, and equity in the formation of public policy.  Social equity impact assessments grew out of both civil rights and environmental law.  It requires that the potential effects of plans and projects be examined in advance to avoid adverse impacts on minority and low-income groups.  Typically, from the standpoint of civil rights law, the affected individuals or groups file a complaint against the funding agency to seek redress.  The recipient of federal funding is then subject to an investigation.
• A social equity impact assessment was conducted on the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) a few years ago.  BART was planning to extend the rail system from downtown Oakland to the Oakland International Airport.  Its initial plan was for direct service from the downtown area to the airport, with no intermediate stops.  Low-income and minority neighborhoods would not be provided with service under this plan.  A number of advocacy groups brought action against BART.  These initial efforts failed.  An administrative complaint was filed with the FTA, based on Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Administrative Complaint process.  The complaint alleged that the extension would bypass several minority and low-income neighborhoods, and that BART had not conducted a social equity impact assessment before developing the plan.  The FTA conducted an investigation and found that BART had discriminated against the minority and low-income groups.  The FTA deferred $70 million in federal stimulus funds as a result of the findings.
• There were no guidelines for conducting social equity impact assessments when the BART case was filed.  A process was developed, with assistance from the Social Justice Consultancy, after the BART decision that was supported by the FTA and the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division.  The process is that every study and review by a government agency or recipient of federal financial assistance needs to include the following elements:
• A clear description of the planned project;
• An analysis of the impacts on all populations;
• An analysis of available alternatives;
• The documented inclusion of minority and low-income populations in the study and decision-making processes; and
• An implementation plan to address any concerns identified in the equity analysis.
• Social equity impact assessments are somewhat akin to environmental law, where the presence of an endangered species at a project site is found in advance and avoided.  The focus in a social equity impact assessment is on endangered people.  One of the ways environmental and civil rights laws have separated over the past few years is that there are more protections under the laws for endangered animals than for endangered humans.  Conducting social equity impact assessments is a step in correcting this disparity between the two bodies of law.
• Several principles of social equity impact assessments can be identified.  First, projects built by agencies receiving federal funding should serve people, not harm them.  Second, some demographic groups have traditionally been discriminated against, and therefore, deserve a higher level of protection to avoid more harm.  Third, a civil rights violation can be found by showing what the logical and foreseeable consequences would be from decisions taken by a recipient of federal financial assistance.
• The largest category of transportation disadvantaged individuals is those without personal vehicles.  The aftermath of Hurricane Katrina brought home the fact that African-Americans own private vehicles at the lowest rate of any demographic group.  An evaluation plan based on the use private vehicles would automatically disadvantage African-Americans and other groups that own private vehicles at lower rates than Caucasians.
• Social equity impact assessments use a variety of tools to determine the logical and foreseeable consequences of a project on different groups.  Simulation and modeling may be used.  If the negative consequences from a project weigh more heavily on protected and disadvantaged communities, then the project should not be built or it should be changed to equalize the negative effects or shift them away from the potentially injured group.  Under federal law, a protected class is a group of people who are protected from employment services or other discrimination by law.  In the U.S., these groups include men and women on the basis of sex; any group that shares a common race, color, or national origin; people over 40 years of age; and people with mental or physical disabilities.
• The Social Justice Consultancy grew the requirements for a social equity impact assessment under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin by recipients of federal financial assistance.  Most agencies and contractors in public transportation, public housing, public education, and public health are recipients or sub-recipients of federal funding.  The Clean Air Act (CAA), ADA, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and some state laws also contain equity provisions.  Administrative complaints can be filed under the federal laws, and federal agencies are obligated to investigate and resolve these complaints.  Law-suits may be filed in limited situations.
• The Environmental Justice Executive Order was also used in developing the social equity impact assessment.  Environmental justice adds to the Title VI protection because it specifically includes low-income individuals.  There are very few federal statutes that protect the rights of low-income individuals against discrimination.  There are many service laws and benefits laws that cover low-income individuals, but there are very few laws that protect them from discrimination.
• The Social Justice Consultancy feels that social equity impact assessments are consistent with sustainable development.  The following questions should be asked as part of a social equity impact analysis.  Who will most likely be affected by the policy, plan, or proposal?  What is known or understood about the areas of the community most likely to be affected?  What will be the nature of the effects?  Are the effects likely to be differentially distributed by socio-economic status, race, ethnicity, gender, geography, age, disability, or other factors?  What is the evidence base for predicting the impacts?  How likely and how severe will the impacts be?  What are the risks involved and what are the benefits and burdens?  How will the benefits and burdens be distributed in terms of dimensions of equity, accessibility, travel time, social and physical mobility, funding, safety, quality of life, and the cumulative and secondary impacts?
• Cumulative impacts are supposed to be examined under NEPA.  Cumulative impacts occur both over geography and over time.  Examining cumulative impacts is important because some communities suffer more adverse impacts over longer periods of time.
• Social equity impact analyses may be thought of as dispute avoidance.  It can be a preventative measure to address potential negative impacts before they occur.  There is tension between the social equity view of doing the right thing and the desire to build projects quickly, especially under job creation and economic stimulus programs.  There may also be tension within the EPA if permits that are granted under environmental law also meet the requirements of civil rights laws.  HUD has recently established new guidelines on regional housing equity analyses, which have some similarities to social equity impact assessments.
• The social equity impact assessment concept is still developing.  It is not yet a fully developed and accepted concept.  As the country’s population continues to change, transportation planners and decision makers should be sensitive to the needs of minority and low-income communities.

[ Top ]

Transportation, Sustainability, and Urbanization

JASON ZHENG, University of Connecticut

Slides [PDF , 1.2M]

Jason Zheng discussed the Transportation Index for Sustainable Places (TISP) research project at the Center for Transportation and Livable Systems (CTLS) at the University of Connecticut.  He described the key elements of the project and future activities.  Jason covered the following topics in his presentation.

• Transportation sustainability has been examined by the Canadian Centre for Sustainable Transport (CST), the Centre for Sustainable Transportation in France, the European Commission on Sustainable Development, and other organizations.  The three elements typically associated with transportation sustainability are the environment, society, and the economy.  The environment includes resource consumption, ecological systems, land use, and pollution.  Society includes health and safety, community input, social equity, and accessibility.  The economy includes affordability, efficient mobility, finance equity, and resiliency.
• The environmental elements can be further defined to include minimizing the consumption of renewable and non-renewable resources for transportation, and designing transportation and place-making systems to maximize land use efficiency.  Other environmental elements are minimizing transportation and the place-making system’s impact on ecological systems and limiting transportation-related wastes and pollution.
• The social elements can be further defined to include transportation that provides access, but is consistent with human health and safety, and planning and managing transportation that incorporates government and community input.  Other social elements are transportation and place-making systems that promote social equity and meet the basic access needs of all individuals.
• The economic elements can be further defined to include transportation that is affordable for all individuals, that is financed in an equitable manner, and that provides further efficient movement of people and goods for economic growth.  A final economic element is transportation that is resilient to economic fluctuations.
• The World Commission on Environment and Development defined sustainable development in 1987 as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."  The Principles of Equity by Graham Haughton defines sustainability as equity issues between groups of people.  The Green & Brown Environmental Agendas defines sustainability with perspective for direct, indirect, short-term, and long-term issues.  The triple foundation for sustainability includes the economy at the center surrounded by society and the environment.
• A number of economic elements and variables have been identified to further define sustainability at a statewide level.  Examples of these elements include affordability for individuals defined as the percentage of household income spent on transportation, and equitable financing, defined as federal funding for transportation per capita.  Other elements are the efficient movement for economic activity, defined as a change in ratio of gross domestic product (GDP) per VMT and the current ratio of GDP per VMT, and resiliency to economic fluctuations, defined as fuel expenditure as a percentage of GDP.
• These variables were examined at the state level.  The percentage of household income spent on transportation measures the cost of vehicle ownership, vehicle use, and transit use compared to median household income.  As an example, in New York 23 percent of household incomes are spent on transportation, compared to 44 percent in Mississippi, and 38 percent in Montana.  Federal funding per capita is $96 in Virginia, $103 in California, $111 in Nevada, $333 in Montana, and $612 in Alaska.
• Efficient mobility was examined by both the level of GDP per VMT and the growth rate of GDP per VMT.  The current level of GDP per VMT ranges from $6.90 in New York to $1.60 in Mississippi.  The growth in GDP per VMT ranges from +41 percent in Oregon to -17 percent in Mississippi.  Resiliency, which was measured as fuel expenditure as a percent of GDP, ranged from 7 percent in Montana, Wyoming, and Mississippi to 3 percent in Delaware, Connecticut, and Massachusetts.
• The overall scores for the economic components of the TISP were combined.  States with the best scores included Washington, California, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Delaware, and Maryland.
• Sustainability does not mean "no growth."  In this study, the higher scoring states generally exhibit lower VMT growth and greater GDP growth.  For example, Oregon experienced an 8 percent growth in VMT from 1997 to 2007 and a 51 percent growth in GDP.  Mississippi experienced a 37 percent growth in VMT and a 14 percent growth in GDP.
• Urbanization and mode share were also examined.  Urbanization was assessed by density and by the percentage of the state’s population living in central cities, small towns, suburbs, and rural areas.  States were rated in the four categories of low density rural-suburban, low density mixed, medium density suburban, and high density suburban-urban.
• In conclusion, the performance of the transportation system goes beyond just the measurement of automobility.  Urbanization is a factor in measuring the performance of the transportation system.  Both rural states and urban states can be sustainable.  In general, the analysis indicted that the most affordable, efficient, equitable, and resilient states are those that tend to be more urban and have more diverse transportation options.

[ Top ]

On Modeling the Travel Behavior – GHG Emissions Linkage

CHANDRA BHAT, University of Texas at Austin

Slides [PDF , 9.6M]

Chandra Bhat discussed GHG emissions and modeling travel behavior.  He described the sources of transportation generated GHG emissions, possible mitigation strategies, and the use of advanced modeling techniques to estimate the impacts of different alternatives.  He recognized the assistance of other researchers and colleagues in various projects.  Chandra covered the following topics in his presentation.

• Energy-related activities account for about three-quarters of human-generated GHG emissions, mostly in the form of CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels.  If measures are not taken to reduce carbon emissions, it has been estimated that the 5.9 million metric tons in generated in 2006 will increase to 7.4 million metric tons by 2030.
• The transportation sector is one of the most rapidly increasing sources of GHG emissions.  Overall, the transportation sector accounts for about one-third of all human generated GHG emissions.  Transportation-sector related sources of GHG emissions include vehicular travel sources, life cycle transportation sources, non-road transportation mobile sources, and mobile air conditioning and refrigerated transport sources.  On-road and non-road vehicles account for a substantial portion of GHG emissions.  Household automobile dependency is an important contributor.
• There are a number of possible reduction and mitigation measures for GHG emissions.  Examples of transportation-related GHG reduction measures include improved fuel economy, decreased carbon content of fuel, reduced growth in travel demand or vehicle travel, and reduced emissions from infrastructure.
• A number of factors are influencing improved fuel economy.  These factors include enhanced vehicle technology for both operating systems and fuels, increased transportation system efficiency, improved traffic operations, and changes in vehicle purchasing and retirement decisions.
• A number of approaches are needed to help reduce the carbon content of fuel.  Research, development, and commercialization on alternative fuel infrastructure and distribution is needed.  Research examining trade-offs in cost, size, power, mileage, and other factors between alternative fuel vehicle types would be beneficial.  Evaluating the impact of fueling station availability and other infrastructure needs would also be of benefit.  Forecasting the temporal rate of adoption and assessing the potential of government initiatives and policies represent other research needs.  The use of tax incentives and adopting regional low carbon fuel standards would also help reduce carbon emissions.  Conducting life cycle analyses to ensure sustainability of resources would also be of benefit.
• A number of strategies can be considered to reduce growth in travel demand.  Examples of these strategies include changes in land-use patterns and provisions for alternative modes.  Other strategies focus on changes in the availability and price of parking, employer initiatives to reduce commuting, and pricing strategies.  Additionally, enhanced freight strategies including modal alternatives addressing freight bottlenecks, especially on intermodal connectors, reduced truck idling, and reduce empty backhauls may also be considered to reduce growth in GHG emissions.
• Activity-based models (ABM) can be used to help evaluate travel demand strategies and other options.  Five pillars of ABM design have been identified.  The first pillar is sensitivity to policy issues and planning applications of interest. Second, ABM design is based on sound behavioral theory.  Third, ABM design is computationally feasible and tractable, both in terms of model estimation and model implementation.  Fourth, it optimizes the use of available data now and in the future.  Finally, ABM should be both an activity-based model and an agent-based model.
• ABM focuses on activities and travel distributed in a time-space continuum, recognizing time-space constraints affecting mode choice, destination choice, and activity-type choice.  The role of time-space accessibility is critical to modeling activity generation processes and the ability to explicitly represent induced or suppressed demand.  ABM addresses time-space interactions and agent or family member interactions.
• The activity purpose definition challenges the traditional notion of mandatory and discretionary activities and trip activities, such as movies, ball games, and children’s tennis lessons or soccer games often have spatial and/or temporal fixity.  Activities and trips are characterized by the level of spatial and temporal fixity/constraints, besides purpose.  Activity attributes can be incorporated using concepts of time-space geography.  There are automated methods to add attributes describing degrees of freedom according to a set of spatial/temporal fixity criteria to activity records in data set.
• The notion of time is central to ABM.  There is an explicit modeling of activity durations (daily activity time allocation and individual episode duration).  Time is treated as "continuous" and not as "discrete choice" blocks.  There is evidence of increased availability of leisure time and increasing travel time expenditures.  There appears to be a loosening of time, space, and monetary constraints and productivity efficiencies brought about by technology and specialized services.  The models also reconcile activity durations with network travel durations.
• In summary, ABM should capture the central role of time and space in a continuum, explicitly recognizing constraints and interactions, and representing simultaneity in behavioral choice processes.  ABM should also account for heterogeneity in behavioral decision hierarchies and incorporate feedback processes to facilitate integration with land use and network models.
• The Comprehensive Econometric Microsimulator for Urban Systems (CEMUS) provides one example of ABM.  A graphical illustration can be developed of a non-worker multiple stop tour.  A graphical illustration of travel density for the region over a 24-hour period can also be created.  These maps illustrate the flow of people throughout the day.
• In conclusion, understanding the effects of GHG emissions to develop successful reduction and mitigation measures requires extensive data and advanced data analysis techniques.  For example, models integrating household vehicle ownership, vehicle type, and vehicle usage decisions are needed.  These models would help to understand the decision makers’ behaviors regarding the shift from small automobiles to larger vehicles and to develop reliable policy initiatives to reduce GHG emissions by encouraging fuel-efficient vehicle usage.

[ Top ]

The State of TexasTexas Homeland Security Statewide Search (TRAIL)Statutorily Required ReportsTTI Rules and Procedures

Copyright Statement and Legal Notices

Please send comments, suggestions, and queries about this web site to the UTCM Webmaster.

University Transportation Center for Mobility™
Texas Transportation Institute · Texas A&M University System · 3135 TAMU · College Station, Texas 77843-3135
ph. (979) 845-2538 · fax (979) 845-9761