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

GENERAL SESSION

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

Presiding

LAURIE McGINNIS, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota

	Federal Transit Administration and Livable Communities KEITH GATES, Federal Transit Administration
	Sustainable Transportation Performance Measures CHRISTOPHER FORINASH, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
	U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Housing and Sustainable Communities Initiative RICHARD LOPEZ, Department of Housing and Urban Development, San Antonio

---

Federal Transit Administration and Livable Communities

KEITH GATES, Federal Transit Administration

Slides [PDF , 1.4M]

Keith Gates discussed the FTA's activities related to livable communities and the Partnership for Sustainable Communities. He reviewed the roles of HUD, U.S. DOT, and EPA in the partnership and summarized activities underway related to performance measures for transit and livable communities. Keith covered the following topics in his presentation.

• There are a number of trends affecting infrastructure investments, including the growing U.S. population, which is also aging.  Other trends include increasing transportation energy use and plans for reducing carbon emissions.  There is a growing need to repair and maintain the existing infrastructure, and to leverage existing resources.  There is also a desire to protect open spaces and farmland.
• The U.S. population energy consumption from all sectors, including transportation, has increased significantly since 1960.  These increases are projected to continue.  Infrastructure investment decisions affect household budgets.  According to 2004 data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average family spends 19 percent of their household budget on transportation.  Households in auto-dependent neighborhoods spend 25 percent of their household budget on transportation, however.  Households with good access to transit spend just 9 percent of their household budget on transportation.  This savings can be critical for low-income households.
• Infrastructure investments also influence local government budgets.  For example, the population of Cuyahoga, OH remained relatively constant at almost 1.4 million people from 1950 to 2002.  The same population was spread out over a much larger area in 2002, however, costing the taxpayers more for providing infrastructure, police and fire protection, and other services.
• The Partnership for Sustainable Communities with HUD, DOT, and EPA is based on six principles, which were developed jointly by representatives from all three agencies.  The first principle is to provide more transportation choices.  The second principle is to expand location- and energy-efficient housing choices.  Improving the economic competitiveness of neighborhoods by giving people reliable access to employment centers, educational opportunities, and other basic services is the third principle.  Targeting federal funding toward existing communities through transit-oriented development and place-based policies is the fourth principle.  Aligning federal policies and funding to remove barriers to collaboration, leverage funding, and increase the effectiveness of existing programs is the fifth principle.  Enhancing the unique characteristics of rural, suburban, and urban communities is the sixth principle.
• The partnership is leveraging the expertise, capabilities, and programs within the three agencies.  All of the agencies play important roles in the partnership and have numerous activities underway.  For example, HUD has a long history of using community development block grants to fund projects.  Recent programs include $100 million for regional planning grants and a local challenge grant program.  HUD also has expertise and programs in affordable housing.  The EPA has a broad range of programs, including the Smart Growth Office, which provides technical assistance and localized help to communities.  The EPA also has technical assistance programs for Brownfields restoration and over $3 billion in a revolving water infrastructure fund program that is available to states.
• The U.S. DOT has numerous programs that support livable communities.  The TIGER grant program, the FTA programs, and the FHWA flexible funding programs represent just a few examples.  Existing partnerships, such as the United We Ride program, which focuses on human services transportation, are also being leveraged.  The FHWA livability efforts, state and metropolitan activities, and railroad infrastructure programs represent a few other examples of related efforts.  There is also an expanding relationship with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which has significant resources targeted to rural America.  A rural working group to address livability in rural America includes representatives from the USDA.
• The FTA's role focuses on the four areas of infrastructure investment, capacity building, policy and guidance, and research.  FTA provides grants to urban and rural transit systems on an annual basis, including formula-based programs and discretionary programs.  The new Transportation Investment in Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction (TIGGER) program focuses on grants for greenhouse gas (GHG) and energy reduction projects.
• The FTA has a number of capacity-building activities underway, including peer-to-peer exchanges.  The FTA provides technical assistance, supports demonstrations, and develops case studies on livable community initiatives throughout the country.
• The joint development policy provides flexibility in the use of federal funds to purchase real estate for transit projects to also support TODs and joint development projects.  A clarification of the FTA policy regarding the use of local funds in bicycle and pedestrian access to transit projects was announced in 2010.  Information on the use of flexible funding from the FHWA that can be used for transit projects is being provided.  The FTA is encouraging environmental management systems within transit agencies.
• The FTA supports research related to livable communities, including the development of transit livability performance measures.  Research projects examining issues associated with providing affordable housing near transit have been funded by HUD and FTA.  The Center for Transit-Oriented Development (CTOD) is working with FTA on different research projects related to TODs.  Other research efforts focus on examining the impacts of climate change on transit and enhancing access to transit.
• The Region 6 DOT-HUD-EPA partners selected the Austin, TX metropolitan area as one of three showcase communities under the partnership, along with Port Arthur, TX and Little Rock, AR, due to the multitude of ongoing sustainability efforts.  The Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG) was also selected for a $3.7 million 2010 HUD Sustainable Communities Regional Planning grant.
• The more extensive use of performance measures in the public sector began with Peter Drucker’s 1954 book on “management by objectives,” which focused on measuring the performance of an organization at meeting its objectives.  Performance measurement sets targets, motivates staff, and quantifies results.  Performance measurement requires consensus on objectives.
• Performance measurement with livable communities includes the development and use of objectives, goals, strategies, and activities.  There has been an attempt at the federal level to more broadly define the objectives of transportation and community development efforts.  These objectives focus on linking housing and transportation decisions, safety, reduced congestion, and cleaner air.  Examining the role transportation plays in improving the quality of life in communities is also important.  Performance measures also need to allow different answers for different types of communities.
• Selected metrics for transportation and livable communities need to help identify problems, establish baselines, track trends over time, and inform policy decision-making.  Performance measures also need to help evaluate program effectiveness and focus on key issues.
• Performance measures also need to address real social issues, including an increasingly older and more urban society.  Other issues include air and water quality concerns, GHG emissions, and obesity and lack of exercise opportunities.  Additional issues are the loss of community identity and charm, ineffective and underfunded public programs, and economic competition and unemployment.  Still other issues are reliance on imported oil and safety.
• There are a number of key questions to address in developing appropriate performance measures.  Can people get where they need to go safely, quickly, and without using too much energy?  Do older people, persons with disabilities, economically disadvantaged people, and people in dense urban environments have access to public transportation and other transportation options?  What community transportation features promote health and minimize environmental impact and which communities do not have these features?  As an example, the areas around Austin within three-fourths of a mile of a transit stop can be mapped.
• The transit livability performance measure projects are underway.  The urban livability metrics project is headed by Marc Schlossberg at the Oregon Transportation Research and Education Center (OTREC) and the University of Oregon and the rural livability metrics project is headed by Linda Cherrington at TTI.  The livability data collection project is headed by Martin Catala at the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR).  The FTA Office of Budget and Policy staff responsible for the project are Angela Dluger and Keith Gates.

[ Top ]

Sustainable Transportation Performance Measures

CHRISTOPHER FORINASH, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Slides [PDF , 3.7M]

Chris Forinash discussed the EPA’s role in the Partnership for Sustainable Communities.  He also described the EPA’s Office of Sustainable Communities, the partnership and performance measures, and recent EPA work on performance measures for sustainable communities.  Chris covered the following topics in his presentation.

• The EPA has had a focus on sustainable communities since the early 1990s with the Brownfield re-development efforts.  These efforts focused on the private sector.  Gaining support for sustainable communities at that time was not easy.  The smart growth concept helped build coalitions in many areas.
• Sustainable communities provide numerous environmental and social benefits.  Examples of possible benefits included reduced emissions and improved air quality, reduced water demand and water impacts, and reclaimed abandoned and hazardous lands.  Other potential benefits include more walkable and healthier neighborhoods, enhanced quality of life, and strengthened social fabric.
• Sustainable communities also provide numerous economic benefits.  Examples of economic benefits include reduced infrastructure expenses and energy and water cost savings.  Other potential benefits include the increased attractiveness of local economic development opportunities, reduced health care costs, and better connection of workers to education and job opportunities.  Additional benefits are reduced household expenditures and the revitalization of neighborhoods and communities.
• The mission of the EPA Office of Sustainable Communities is to support development that saves money for the public and for households, provides choices in where to live and how to travel, makes people healthier, and protects the environment by conserving land and energy and improving air and water quality.
• Since 1996, the Office of Sustainable Communities has been working to address the mission by changing the conversation, working with the willing, and changing the rules.  Publications, conferences, and awards related to Smart Growth helped change the conversation.  Voluntary standards, voluntary codes, and EPA regulations helped change the rules.  Working with the willing activities include providing technical assistance to communities, the Governor’s Institute for Community Design, and working with states to revise stormwater permit requirements.
• The EPA Office of Sustainable Communities (OSC) provided a wide range of OSC technical assistance and workshops throughout the country between 2005 and 2010.  Examples of these activities include Smart Growth technical assistance, the Greening America’s Capitals program, the Partnership Summit on Rural Development, the Partnership Summit on TOD, the Governor’s Institute Workshops, and state stormwater technical assistance.
• There is public support for sustainable communities.  A national opinion survey in 2011 found that the majority of Americans – regardless of political affiliation – support sustainable communities (79 percent overall); a majority of Americans believe their region needs more sustainable communities (66 percent overall); and most Americans believe that sustainable communities are an important part of rebuilding the national economy (80 percent overall).  The poll also found overwhelming public support for the Partnership’s core principles.
• The Partnership for Sustainable Communities is focusing on a number of activities.  Examples of these activities include aligning HUD, U.S. DOT, and EPA programs, developing livability measures and tools, re-developing underutilized sites, and re-defining housing affordability.  Providing a vision for sustainable growth and enhancing integrated planning and investment represent other activities.
• The six Partnership livability principles are providing more transportation choices, promoting equitable and affordable housing, enhancing economic competitiveness, supporting existing communities, coordinating policies and leveraging investments, and valuing communities and neighborhoods.
• Measuring performance is important for a number of reasons.  Performance measures quantify the consequences of decisions.  Performance measures predict, evaluate, and monitor the accomplishment of public objectives.  Performance measurement information is key to communicating results to decision makers and the public.
• A common structure used with performance measures includes broad outcomes, indicators of progress, and key strategies.  Examples of broad outcomes include lowering household transportation costs, lowering transportation-related emissions, and improving mobility.  Examples of indicators of progress include shorter automobile trips, improved safety, and more walking, biking and transit use.  Key strategies are the range of housing opportunities in major activity centers, more walkable neighborhoods, and re-development in more accessible places.
• This structure can be used with the six Partnership principles.  Principle one is developing more convenient reliable, safe, and economical transportation alternatives.  Broad outcomes associated with this principle are lowering household transportation costs, improving public health, reducing oil dependence, improving air quality, and reducing GHG emissions.  Examples of indicators of progress are more trips made by walking or bicycling, increasing transit ridership, and shorter automobile trips.  Key strategies include expanded transit services, improved transit performance, more homes and jobs near transit, more housing opportunities near major activity centers, and more homes and jobs in walkable places.
• The second Partnership principle is expanding access to energy-efficient housing choices.  Broad outcomes associated with this principle include lowering the combined cost of housing and transportation, improving public health, reducing oil dependence, improving air quality, and reducing GHG emissions.  Possible indicators of progress are more trips made by walking or bicycling, increasing transit ridership, and shorter automobile trips.  Key strategies include more homes in walkable neighborhoods, more housing opportunities near major activity centers, and more affordable housing in major employment centers.
• An early Partnership goal related to performance measures was to have a single set of measures for the Partnership activities for use by grantees, as well as assisting program results.  The current thinking is to develop a pool of measures that can be adapted to specific program requirements.  Solid and available data is needed for use with these measures.  Providing guidelines to build capacity at federal, state, and local agencies is also needed.
• The recently completed EPA Guide to Sustainable Transportation Performance Measures highlights best practices by MPOs and state departments of transportation.  Sustainable transportation goals and performance measures related to safety, the environment, the economy, and equity are presented.  The use of performance measurement in the various decision-making steps is described.  These steps include land use visioning, long-range transportation planning, programming and grant awards, corridor studies, environmental review, and performance monitoring.
• Examples of sustainable transportation performance measures are in use by agencies throughout the country.  A transit accessibility performance measure used by the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) measures the ability of people to reach destinations using transit.  Two metrics – the distance to stops and destinations accessible by transit – are used with the measure.
• The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in the San Francisco Bay area uses vehicle miles of travel (VMT) per capita to measure the amount of vehicle activity, normalized by population.  The metrics used are VMT per capita, light-duty VMT per capita, and VMT per employee.  The MTC uses the cost of transportation relative to income to measure transportation affordability.  The measured costs include transit fares, owning and operating a personal vehicle, and housing costs.
• The City of Portland collects data on bicycle use and crashes involving bicycles.  The data are used in performance measures related to bicycle use.  The average number of cyclists per day is compared to reported bicycle crashes on an annual basis.
• Sustainable transportation performance measures may be applied in long-range planning, corridor level evaluations, and performance monitoring.  Portland Metro used performance measures in the visioning stage of the transportation planning process.  Performance measures were used to explore the impacts of major alternatives in policy and investment direction and to test the ability to achieve regional sustainability goals.
• The Hillsborough County MPO in Tampa uses performance measures for corridor level evaluations.  Examples of performance measures used in the evaluations include transit services, sidewalk availability, and bicycle facility availability.
• The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), the MPO for the Philadelphia metropolitan area, uses a dashboard to track progress on performance measures.  The dashboard uses a colored dial to indicate trends in a positive direction (green), a negative direction (red), and a neutral direction or a baseline measure (yellow).

[ Top ]

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Housing and Sustainable Communities Initiative

RICHARD LOPEZ, Department of Housing and Urban Development, San Antonio

Richard Lopez discussed HUD’s housing and sustainable communities initiatives.  He described elements of the interagency sustainability partnership and activities underway at HUD’s Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities (OSHC).  Richard covered the following topics in his presentation.

• HUD’s Region VI has jurisdiction over Texas, as well as Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, and Oklahoma.  There are a lot of exciting projects going on in the region to help create the types of communities where housing, transportation, and jobs all work together to provide the best living environment for residents.
• In June 2009, President Obama announced the Interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities to help communities across the country improve access to affordable housing, increase transportation options and lower transportation costs, while protecting the environment.  The nation’s ability to compete in a global economy is dependent on quickly and efficiently connecting our workers and families to education and employment opportunities.  Regions that embrace sustainable development—connecting housing to jobs—have a built-in competitive edge in attracting jobs and private investment.
• The partnership for sustainable communities includes HUD, U.S. DOT, and EPA, and is designed to remove traditional federal government silos that exist between departments.  Six guiding livability principles were identified to achieve these goals.  These principles are providing more transportation choices, promoting equitable and affordable housing, increasing economic competiveness, supporting existing communities, leveraging federal investment, and valuing communities and neighborhoods.
• The OSHC is HUD’s arm of the partnership.  The OSHC is administering two new grant programs as part of the Sustainable Communities Initiative.  The Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants have a total of $100 million in available funding.  A total of $68 million is available in Sustainable Communities Challenge Grants in conjunction with the U.S. DOT’s TIGER II grants.
• The Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant program supports metropolitan and multi-jurisdictional planning efforts that integrate housing, land use, economic and workforce development, transportation, and infrastructure investments.  Of the $100 million appropriated for this grant program, $98 million is for competitive grants to support regional planning for sustainable development.  A total of $2 million is reserved for capacity support grants to ensure that the grantees have access to the best available data, tools, and techniques for regional planning.  Of the $98 million, approximately one quarter, or $25.6 million, of the awards were designated for small regions, with populations between 200,000 and 500,000, and rural places with populations below 200,000.  The remaining $74.4 million was allocated though 19 grants to regions with populations over 500,000.  The grants ranged from $220,000 up to the full amount of $5 million. 
• There are three regional planning grants in Region VI.  CAPCOG in Austin was awarded a $3.7 million planning grant to help implement elements of the Capital Area MPO (CAMPO) 2035 long-range transportation plan.  That plan envisions future regional growth being accommodated in a network of 37 mixed-use, mixed-income, walkable, connected, and transit-supportive activity centers that provide a balanced mix of jobs, housing, and services.
• The Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) was awarded a $3.7 million planning grant covering the 13 counties in the Houston and Galveston area.  The funding will support a new initiative to address the interaction of land use, transportation, housing, economic development, infrastructure, the environment, and social equity.  There are more than 25 core partners in the project, who will provide an additional $3.7 million to the effort.
• HUD partnered with the U.S. DOT to combine the $40 million Community Challenge Planning Grant program with $28 million in U.S. DOT TIGER II planning grants.  The grants are supporting local planning and pre-development costs associated with sustainable projects within communities.  HUD and U.S. DOT received more than 850 applications for the Community Challenge/TIGER II Planning Grant program from across the country.
• There were five grant awards in Region VI.  New Orleans received a $2 million Challenge Planning Grant for the Claiborne Corridor Plan that will focus on the re-integration of the city’s neighborhoods across the physical boundary of the Claiborne/elevated I-10 expressway.  Bernalillo County, NM, received a $500,000 Challenge Planning Grant for Albuquerque’s Bridge Boulevard corridor redevelopment plan to guide development on a very congested corridor.  Oklahoma City, OK received a $500,000 Challenge Grant for PLANOKC, which is a comprehensive plan to address the unsustainable development pattern of the past 30 years.  It will look at future workforce, housing, and land use needs.  The City of Dallas, TX received a $2.2 million Challenge Grant to fund land acquisition and planning for four sites in Dallas for TOD workforce housing project sites, which are expected to have 193 housing units.  North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), the MPO for the Dallas-Fort Worth area, was awarded $640,000 for planning for the livable military communities project.  This project will provide improved transportation and housing conditions while providing military families a more traditional neighborhood and home town feel in residential areas near the naval air station located in Fort Worth.
• The HUD Choice Neighborhoods Grant program does not involve the U.S. DOT and EPA, but it does involve the transformation of communities into sustainable, livable communities.  Choice Neighborhoods is built on a foundation of 17 successful years of the Hope VI program, which has revitalized deteriorating public housing developments across the country.  Choice Neighborhoods expands on Hope VI to allow for the re-development of private and federally-assisted properties surrounding public housing.  Private or other housing that fosters crime and blight can now be included in comprehensive neighborhood revitalization efforts.  The bottom line is that the projects are not just re-developing public housing; they are re-developing neighborhoods surrounding the public housing as well, with local partners.  These partners include schools and retail developments.
• To date, HUD has awarded Choice Neighborhood Planning Grants and one very sizable Choice Neighborhood Grant.  Three Choice Neighborhood Planning Grants were awarded in Region VI.  The Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments was selected for a project with their partners, including the City of Shreveport, to help transform the Allendale and Ledbetter Heights areas of Shreveport.  The San Antonio Housing Authority received a Choice Neighborhood Planning grant to revitalize the Wheatley Courts public housing complex and surrounding neighborhood.  The Community Action Project for Tulsa County (OK), Inc. was awarded a Choice Neighborhood Challenge Planning Grant to transform the Eugene Field neighborhood of the city.
• HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Public Housing, Sandra Henriquez, held a press conference at the Iberville Public Housing Development in New Orleans last week to announce that the Housing Authority of New Orleans, LA has received a Choice Neighborhood Implementation Grant of $30.5 million.  It was only one of five Choice Neighborhood Implementation Grants in the nation and the only one in HUD’s southwest region.  The grant will be used, along with other funding, to rebuild the 821-unit distressed Iberville public housing project, under sustainability principles.   It will transform this entire neighborhood near the French Quarter.  Preservation plans call for 24 of the existing buildings to be renovated while the remaining 50 buildings will be replaced.  The new development will consist of 830 units, of which 300 will be public housing available to current residents of the Iberville development.  The remaining 530 units will be split evenly between market rate and low-income housing tax credit units.  An additional 1,632 rental units will be created within the neighborhood.  As part of the effort, the school district and its partners will build and renovate Iberville/Treme school facilities.  A partnership with the newly expanded Tulane Community Health Clinic will provide a detailed assessment of resident health programs to address critical health outcomes.   There will be new residential properties, a grocery store, and a farmer’s market along the eastern edge of the Iberville site.  These implementation efforts involve a full range of private and public partners and will create jobs and other private housing development.
• There are similar Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants, Challenge Grants, and Choice Neighborhood Grants across the nation.  These grant programs are being integrated with U.S. DOT and EPA efforts.  These coordinated activities have great potential for improving how people live and work in communities across the country, and for job creation and environmental improvements.  HUD is very proud to be a partner in these efforts.
• In terms of process, HUD grants are structured as cooperative agreements, so the agency is involved in ongoing conversations with the grantees.  Agencies and groups receiving grants are constructing logic models for HUD to gauge performance and progress.  Grantees are also required to submit semi-annual performance reports.  HUD will be conducting an independent evaluation of the grantees via a contract with a third party.
• There are ongoing conversations among HUD, U.S. DOT, and EPA, as well as local partnership agencies with regard to performance measures.  At this point, the HUD planning grants focus on only one measure or one deliverable, which is completion of the plan.  These grants are all individualized, with each being tailored to the community and the nature of the plan.
• There are a number of basic factors taken into account in evaluating HUD grant applications.  Many of these factors will be used to judge the effectiveness and performance of projects.  Examples of these evaluation factors include access to transportation and housing costs; environmental quality, along with economic opportunity; and healthy communities, fresh food access, and addressing socioeconomic inequity.
• Benchmarks are included in the HUD Implementation Grants as well.  For example, the New Orleans grant allows for physical transformation of the project and the pace, and results of that transformation will be key components of any evaluation process.
• The HUD regional office in Fort Worth maintains a high level of involvement with the partnership agencies in the region.  HUD staff participates in a working committee with U.S. DOT and the EPA staff.  The Regional Sustainability Coordinator is Nic Ramon.  The work of the committee is to actively pursue outreach and education relating to the initiative.  Revitalizing our communities is a long-term process, but the results can, and will change lives.  More information on the OSHC programs and HUD grant programs is available at www.hud.gov.

[ 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