urban planning guide || urban transportation planning

38
CHAPTER 6 URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 3 The environment in which transportation professionals operate has changed dramatically during the past 10 years. Throughout the 1960s, the urban transportation "problem" was perceived almost exclusively as one of highway congestion. In response, most transportation planners and engineers considered as their first priority the accommodation of this rising traffic demand by planning new or expanded expressways. This problem definition has changed, however, and so too have the types of solution strategies that transportation planners and designers must consider. The "new" urban transportation problems include at the very least the relationship between transportation and: (1) Energy con- sumption; (2) air quality; (3) equity; (4) safety; (5) congestion; (6) land-use impact; (7) noise; and (8) more efficient utilization of fiscal resources (1). The different planning methodologies used to address each of these areas, the need to interact with professionals in other disciplines, the requirement to include public input throughout the planning process, and the desire to put transportation planning in the context of the over-all planning process for a metropolitan area make transportation planning an extremely complex process. The planning process has been made even more complex by a recent shift in the focus of such planning from large-scale, capital- intensive projects to smaller scale, operational improvements which seek the more efficient use of the existing transportation network. The traditional analysis methodologies and the institutional environment for urban transportation planning have thus changed significantly. Now, more than ever, there is a need to have those who do the planning interact with those who design and implement, so that each understands the contraints under which the other operates. This chapter is organized to address many of the new characteris- tics of transportation planning. The introductory section will examine the role of transportation in an urban setting, some of the important characteristics of transportation that affect planning efforts, and the types of issues that transportation planners and designers can expect to face during an analysis. The second section will review the major components of a short-range planning process and the types of projects that are typically the product of such a process. Specific attention will be given to the role of the planner, designer, and policy maker in this type of planning activity. The third section will address issues similar to those a Prepared by Michael D. Meyer, Massachussetts Dept. of Public Works, Boston, MA. 116 Urban Planning Guide Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Maryland on 10/16/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Upload: ruth

Post on 10-Feb-2017

222 views

Category:

Documents


4 download

TRANSCRIPT

CHAPTER 6

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING3

The environment in which transportation professionals operate haschanged dramatically during the past 10 years. Throughout the 1960s,the urban transportation "problem" was perceived almost exclusively asone of highway congestion. In response, most transportation plannersand engineers considered as their first priority the accommodation ofthis rising traffic demand by planning new or expanded expressways.This problem definition has changed, however, and so too have thetypes of solution strategies that transportation planners and designersmust consider. The "new" urban transportation problems include at thevery least the relationship between transportation and: (1) Energy con-sumption; (2) air quality; (3) equity; (4) safety; (5) congestion; (6) land-useimpact; (7) noise; and (8) more efficient utilization of fiscal resources (1).The different planning methodologies used to address each of theseareas, the need to interact with professionals in other disciplines, therequirement to include public input throughout the planning process,and the desire to put transportation planning in the context of theover-all planning process for a metropolitan area make transportationplanning an extremely complex process.

The planning process has been made even more complex by arecent shift in the focus of such planning from large-scale, capital-intensive projects to smaller scale, operational improvements whichseek the more efficient use of the existing transportation network. Thetraditional analysis methodologies and the institutional environment forurban transportation planning have thus changed significantly. Now,more than ever, there is a need to have those who do the planninginteract with those who design and implement, so that each understandsthe contraints under which the other operates.

This chapter is organized to address many of the new characteris-tics of transportation planning. The introductory section will examinethe role of transportation in an urban setting, some of the importantcharacteristics of transportation that affect planning efforts, and thetypes of issues that transportation planners and designers can expect toface during an analysis. The second section will review the majorcomponents of a short-range planning process and the types of projectsthat are typically the product of such a process. Specific attention will begiven to the role of the planner, designer, and policy maker in this typeof planning activity. The third section will address issues similar to those

aPrepared by Michael D. Meyer, Massachussetts Dept. of Public Works, Boston,MA.

116

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 117

in Section 6.2 except that the focus will be on long-range planning, i.e.,what types of transportation actions should we be considering now thatwill have an impact in 20-25 years? Section 6.5 will look at how projectsare programmed for implementation, some of the schemes that are usedfor prioritizing, and the relationship between programming and thepolitical environment. The typical process for project development, i.e.,how projects are identified, the procedures that must be followed forfurthering the project, project design considerations, and project plan-ning implementation procedures will be described in Section 6.6. Thepurpose of this section is to integrate much of the material presented inthe preceding sections within the context of a single project.

6.1 TRANSPORTATION IN AN URBAN SETTING

Basic to an understanding of transportation are the characteristicsof urban travel that in many ways define the scope of urban transpor-tation problems. Five such characteristics that will be considered in thissection include:

1. Temporal distribution of urban travel.2. Type of trips made.3. Modal distribution of urban trips.4. Environmental impact of transportation facilities.5. Relationship between land use and transportation.

Where appropriate, examples will be given of the types of trans-portation strategies that are now being considered to address some ofthe problems associated with each characteristic.

6.1.1 Temporal Distribution

Congestion has often been identified as the major transportationproblem in today's cities. Put simply, congestion denotes a condition ofany transportation facility in which service demand exceeds capacity,resulting in increased delays for the users of that facility. This problembecomes apparent if one looks at the hourly variation of urban persontrips by mode during the day (see Fig. 6-1). The demand for transpor-tation service during the morning and afternoon peak periods in manycases causes the transportation system to reach high levels of conges-tion. The solution to this problem during the early 1960s was to expandthe capacity of the highway network so that the increased vehiculardemand could be accommodated. In most areas, however, such solu-tions are no longer feasible because of the disruption such expansionwould cause neighboring areas, the large cost associated with construc-tion, and the increasing demands on transportation funds for othertypes of projects.

Other strategies that are currently being considered to handle the

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

118 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

Fig. 6-1. Hourly variation in travel (16)

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 119

peaking problem include: (1) To "spread" the peak by arranging workhours such that large groups of employees arrive at different times(variable work hours and flexi-time), and (2) to increase the averageoccupancy level of vehicles entering a downtown area (ridesharingprograms, preferential treatment for buses and carpools, and auto dis-incentive projects). These types of solutions may be more cost effectivethan permanent capacity expansion.

6.1.2 Trip Purpose

Trip purpose is also an important characteristic of urban travelbehavior. The largest percentage of trip purposes to the Central BusinessDistrict (CBD) is the home-to-work trips which because of their time oftravel usually contribute most to transportation congestion. The secondlargest category of trips are those taken for social and recreationalpurposes, which taken in conjunction with shopping trips, account foras many home-based trips as the work trip. The home or dwelling unitis the primary origin of most trips, with more than three-fourths of allurban trips originating from or destined for the home (3). Unique travelpatterns are also associated with special purpose activities such ashospitals, universities, and high density business districts (13).

6.1.3 Modal Distribution

One of the most visible characteristics of the transportation systemin this country is the dominance of the automobile. From 1950 to 1975,the proportion of American households owning at least one car rosefrom 52% to 83% (16). Meanwhile, vehicle miles of transit servicenationally declined by 37% (25). However, in some cities the percentageof trips to downtown areas served by transit is quite large. Further, giventhe existing policy trend toward discouraging auto use in metropolitanareas, and the likelihood of fuel shortages in the future, the role of transitand other high occupancy vehicles is likely to become more important.

In the transit field, there has been increased public pressure onproviding service distribution according to need, focusing specifically onthe mobility deficits of the physically handicapped, the elderly, and thepoor. In general, the elderly and poor rely more heavily on transit andtaxi travel than the general population does (see Tables 6-1 and 6-2).Effective methods for enhancing the mobility of these groups include: (1)Direct payment of subsidies in the form of vouchers or transit farediscounts; (2) increased demand responsive transportation services; (3)redesign of fixed route service to serve the needs of low-income travel-ers; and (4) a restructure of transit fares (1).

6.1.4 Environmental Impact

The characteristic of transportation that has gained the most publicattention during recent years has been the impact of transportation

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

120 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

TABLE 6-1 Trips Per Capita and by Mode, 1970 (1)

Mode0)

Auto driverAuto passengerMotorcycleTruck (driver or passenger)Subtotal: private vehicleTransit busRapid transitCommuter railSchool busTaxiSubtotal: public transportationOther (airplanes, etc.)Total

Percentageof All Trips

Persons65 andover(2)

53.435.9

4.293.54.30.50.10.60.66.10.4

100.0

Allpersons16 andover(3)

62.625.70.26.0

94.52.80.90.21.20.35.40.1

100.0

TripsPer Capita

Persons65 andover(4)

201135

16352

162

22

221

375

Allpersons16 andover(5)

531218

251

8022482

102

461

849

TABLE 6-2 Transit Accessibility by Income, 1970 (1)

Annualhousehold

income group(1)

Under $5,000$5,000-9,999$10,000-14,999Over $15,000All households

Distance to NearestPublic Transportation (in Blocks)

Lessthan 1,in per-

centage(2)

30.320.915.513.321.3

1-2,in per-

centage(3)

34.533.229.323.730.8

3-6,in per-

centage(4)

17.418.318.320.618.6

Over6,

in per-centage

(5)

9.215.520.625.516.6

Noneavail-able,

in per-centage

(6)

8.411.716.315.912.4

facilities and travel on the natural environment. The transportationimpact on air quality, for example, emerged during the late 1960s as asignificant political issue and has resulted in several federal regulationsthat guide transportation and air quality planning at the local level.Automobiles account for at least 80% of carbon monoxide (CO) and lead

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 121

emissions in most metropolitan areas; about 70% of hydrocarbon emis-sions (HC); and about 50% of the nitrous oxide emissions (NOX). Manyof the severe problems with these primary pollutants result when theychemically combine under favorable meteorological conditions to formsecondary pollutants. For example, nitrous oxide emissions react withhydrocarbons in sunlight to form photochemical oxidants (smog) thatare not only dangerous to health but seriously affect visibility and theesthetics of a metropolitan area. The automobile is the primary source forboth pollutants necessary for this reaction. The types of transportationactions that can be implemented in a metropolitan area, however, canhave varied effects on pollutant emissions. As shown in Fig. 6-2, forexample, as average speed increases, HC and CO emissions decreasewhile NOV emissions increase.

Fig. 6-2. Air pollutant emissions as function of speed

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

122 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

Transportation's impact on energy consumption has also receivedclose scrutiny during the past several years. Gasoline accounts for nearly40% of all oil used in the United States, and as the availability of oilbecomes increasingly scarce, the style of personal transportation couldchange significantly. Studies have shown that public transit andvanpools are the most energy efficient when compared to all othermodes (30). However, most analysts believe that transit alone cannotcontribute substantially to a national reduction of petroleum importsbecause of the low base from which it currently operates, which is at lessthen 3% of urban passenger travel (7). To truly have an impact, atransportation and energy plan would have to combine automobiledisincentives with incentives to use transit service. The planner musttherefore view effective transportation strategies as the integration ofseveral transport actions, each affecting one component of the system,but which in total achieve the desired objective (6,14).

6.1.5 Land Use and Urban Development

Transportation and urban development are closely related in amultitude of ways. First, transportation is a critical factor in makingparcels of land available for development. A central characteristic ofmost urban networks is that they serve major activity centers which area focus for transportation services and are junctions or terminal pointsfor the congested high traffic volume corridors. This relationship pro-duces the high densities of land use in metropolitan areas, and, in turn,the high values of land observed in these centers. Although transpor-tation was clearly a dominant factor in the rapid suburbanization thathas occurred during the past 25 years, the highway network in mosturban areas is now so ubiquitous that it is doubtful if transportationmeasures alone can significantly impact metropolitan patterns of landdevelopment. Only through such measures as managing the access tothe highway network or using local zoning controls related to transpor-tation actions could a significant impact on regional land use be made.Where considerable potential for high-density development exists, how-ever, and other governmental levers such as zoning and tax incentivesare utilized, transit and traffic investment could play an importantsupporting role.

A second factor in the transportation and land use relationship isthat transportation facilities occupy land. Between 25% and 45% of theland in central cities (approximately 3% nationwide) is devoted tohighways, streets, and parking lots. It was indeed this requirement forlarge areas of land in densely populated areas and the necessity ofdisplacing large numbers of people that caused some of the reactionagainst large-scale highway construction during the late 1960s.

The land use and transportation relationship thus becomes animportant component in the transportation planning process. This proc-ess must include at the least an inventory of land usage and an evalu-ation of its effect on the performance of the transportation system.

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 123

Indeed, most transportation studies use data on land development bytraffic analysis zones to predict the number of trips moving between thezones. More will be said about this in the following two subsections.

6.1.6 Institutional Framework for Transportation Planning

Ever since the urban transportation problem first emerged as apublic issue in the 1950s, the number of organizations that have beenestablished at all levels of government to deal with it has greatlyincreased. The proliferation of these organizations, along with a growingawareness that "the" problem was in fact a complex set of problems,created the need for an institutional structure at the regional and locallevel conducive to coordinated transportation planning. The focus oftransportation planning on an integrated transportation system, i.e.,where all modes for all trip purposes are coordinated on a geographicbasis to improve the movement of goods and passengers, created theneed for dialogue between the many agencies responsible for transpor-tation in an urban area. The fragmentation of jurisdictional responsibilityand the fact that those agencies responsible for project implementationare often not those undertaking the planning activities has created acomplex institutional structure to which every planner and designershould be sensitive (11).

There are many organizations with transportation interests in ametropolitan area, each having its own mandate, constituency, andsolution to the transportation problem as defined by its own staff. Themetropolitan planning organization (MPO), for example, is an agency ineach metropolitan area of over 50,000 population responsible for coor-dinating the regional transportation planning process. The MPO mustdeal with transit and highway agencies, parking authorities, planningdepartments, and local elected officials. The ability of the MPO to carryout this function, however, is hampered by its inability to implementtransportation and land use development plans, and its lack of influencein requiring the cooperation of the different actors important to trans-portation planning.

Because federal agencies such as the Federal Highway Adminis-tration (FHWA), the Urban Mass Transportation Administration(UMTA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provide asubstantial amount of the financial support for planning and projectimplementation, they also have some say over how the planning processshould be structured. For example, the U.S. Department of Transpor-tation has regularly issued planning regulations that require each met-ropolitan area to have a transportation plan that guides investmentdecision-making in that area. According to these regulations, the planshall consist of a long-range element which explores alternative systemconfigurations and policies, and a short-range element which providesfor the near-term (1-5 years) transportation needs of persons and goodsin the urbanized area (31). Transportation projects are also subject to theNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires compliance

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

124 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

with environmental regulations and preparation of environmental doc-uments for major federal actions.

In general, then, transportation planners or designers often findthemselves undertaking activities that have been specified by otheragencies, such as UMTA and FHWA, or the state department of trans-portation. The activities often include using specific techniques in theplanning process, complying with the required level of participation ofselected groups, and developing documentation necessary to satisfyguidelines. A transportation planner, to be effective, must understandthe institutional context of the work. In transportation, this meansunderstanding the roles, responsibilities, and relationships among thefederal agencies involved with transportation, the state departments oftransportation, the regional planning and implementing agencies, andthe local transit operator and traffic engineer.

6.1.7 Urban Transportation Planning Process

A metropolitan transportation planning process should integratethe many different planning activities that occur in a region which affectthe transportation system. Within different transportation agencies, forexample, the following types of analyses occur (3):

1. Studies of individual traffic generators: industrial plants, shop-ping centers, universities, and hospitals.

2. Major land use projects: subdivisions, planned unit develop-ments, multiple-use transportation development, urban revitalizationprojects and transportation centers.

3. Subarea studies: small community planning studies, urbangoods movement, and terminal areas.

4. Corridor studies: performance of transit, rail, and highwaysystems in specific corridors.

5. Transportation plan: metropolitan-wide, multimodal plan fortransportation service.

6. Special studies: elderly and handicapped, fare structures, mar-keting studies, and parking.

7. Programming documents: management plan, unified planningwork program, and program for project implementation.

Clearly, the most appropriate and effective planning approach willvary in different cities in both methodology and time frame, dependingon the nature of local problems, issues, and characteristics of the area.For this reason, the programming documents mentioned previously areextremely important for managing the planning process and determin-ing the appropriate technical level of effort. Factors such as anticipatedpopulation and economic growth rate, existing and anticipated trans-portation problems and system performance, consideration of environ-mental and energy concerns, available financial and technical resources,prevailing political and public attitudes, and current status of planning

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 125

and plans, must be considered for determining the amount of effort thatis needed (8). At a minimum, federal regulations require that the fol-lowing technical activities be included in the transportation planningprocess in accordance with the size of an area and the complexity of itstransportation problems (28):

1. Analysis of existing conditions of travel, transportation facili-ties, and systems management.

2. Evaluation of alternative short-range transportation improve-ments.

3. Projection of economic, demographic, and land use activities,and transportation demands based on these activities.

4. Examination of the distribution of costs and impacts of trans-portation plans and programs.

5. Analysis of area wide new transportation investment alterna-tives.

6. Refinement of the transportation plan by corridor.7. Monitoring of urban development and transportation indica-

tors, and regularly reappraising the plan.8. Development of a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP),

a document which lists those projects that are to be implemented in ametropolitan area.

9. Analysis of goods and services movement problem areas.

This list of requirements implies that the planning process shouldintegrate long-range and short-range planning activities into one com-prehensive approach. One of the ways integration of these two ap-proaches can be accomplished is by making the long-range plan moresensitive to the actions that are being implemented in the short term. Anintergral part of this long-range and short-range balance is the use ofcorridor or subarea studies which can be used to analyze impacts andtradeoffs among proposed solutions, while specifically taking into ac-count their short-term versus long-term consequences. The corridorstudy thus becomes a major methodological approach for short-rangeplanning.

6.1.8 Summary

The transportation system is an integral part of any metropolitanarea. It provides the major means of movement for persons and goodswhile also providing the necessary framework for expansion of the city.Urban transportation planning is a comprehensive and continuing proc-ess which relates transportation investment decisions to communitygoals and objectives. Because of the rapid change in problem definition,the role of the transportation planner has changed dramatically duringthe past 10 years. The planner must interact with those who design thefacilities and implement the operational strategies so that technicallyfeasible plans result from the planning process. Given the controversial

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

126 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

nature of many transportation projects (especially those which constrainthe use of the automobile), the planner and designer must also besensitive to the political impact of the project. Who is likely to beadversely affected by the project? Who is likely to gain? What are thelikely reactions of key elected officials? The integration of project-levelconcerns with a systemic perspective should also provide a forum forinput from citizens. In general then, urban transportation planning hasevolved into a complex technical and political process, but one whichresponds to the needs and desires of a metropolitan area.

6.2 SHORT-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

One of the most significant changes in the field of transportationhas been the pronounced shift toward planning that is service oriented(rather than facility oriented), that involves relatively inexpensive ac-tions, and that seeks the most efficient use of existing facilities. Inessence, the focus of many transportation planning efforts is now onmanaging and maintaining the existing system. One consequence of thistype of planning is that it requires the participation of transportationagencies that never previously thought of themselves as being related totransportation planning because of the previous long-range focus ofsuch efforts. This group especially includes operations-oriented agenciessuch as local traffic and public works departments, transit operators,port authorities, and so forth (9). Thus, not only does the emphasis onshort-range planning and the resulting new types of solutions causeproblems of methodology, but it also creates a need for greater coordi-nation and cooperation among the many agencies that now have asignificant role to play in the transportation planning process.

6.2.1 Short-Range Transportation Planning Process

One of the interesting characteristics of the short-range planningprocess as it has been evolving is the introduction of technical simplifi-cation and institutional flexibility. Each agency has its own planningapproach and preferred solutions, which many times hinders attemptsto develop a short-range plan that truly reflects the potential tradeoffsbetween highway and transit projects. Because the range of problemsthat short-range actions are supposed to solve is so broad, tradeoffs willbe implicit in any strategy. There will be tradeoffs among different typesof impacts, between users and nonusers, and among geographic areas orgroups of persons affected. A regional approach to short-range planningbased on local agency programs is an important component of theregional planning process because it is only through coordinated effortsthat effective transportation strategies (those having a significant impacton regional travel) can be developed. In general, a short-range planningprocess consists of the following elements: (1) The collection of per-

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 127

formance data (system monitoring); (2) identification of system deficien-cies; (3) formulation of process goals and objectives; (4) identification ofpotential strategies; (5) development of performance criteria; (6) evalu-ation of strategies; and (7) ranking of strategies using a cost effectivenessapproach. The end product of this process is a list of recommendedprojects or programs.

In 1975, the United States Department of Transportation (DOT)issued planning regulations which elevated short-range planning toequal partnership with the long-range planning process (26). The trans-portation plan for each metropolitan area had to include a transportationsystem management element which was to "provide for the short-rangetransportation needs of the urbanized area by making efficient use ofexisting transportation resources and providing for the movement ofpeople and goods in an efficient manner. . . . " Specifically, the TSMelements were to identify traffic engineering, public transportation,regulatory, pricing, management, and operational-type improvementsto the transportation system. Subsequent federal regulations removedthe term 'TSM" from the short-range element of the plan, but reaffirmedthe policy goals that it represented. The concept of TSM was now to beincorporated into both the long-range and short-range elements of thetransportation plan.

The types of transportation actions that are included under theTSM rubric are shown in Table 6-3. Several characteristics of theseactions merit special attention. First, any action by itself is not likely tosolve a major transportation problem in a metropolitan area. The plannershould thus seriously consider what actions in combination could havea significant impact on the performance of the transportation system (seeFig. 6-3). Second, in some cases, this "packaging" of TSM actionsrequires the participation of planners from different agencies. For ex-ample, the implementation of an exclusive bus lane on a radial freewaywith preferential access given at the on- and off-ramps would requirecoordinated planning efforts between the transit operations managerand the highway engineer, although in all likelihood, many more peoplewould also be involved. Third, TSM actions span a wide range ofadministrative complexity, including (10):

1. Routine Internal Administrative or Operational Actions. These areactions falling within the scope of authority of the traffic engineer orthe transit operator, with known consequences, which can be im-plemented immediately at little or no cost.

2. Management or Jurisdictional-Level Actions. These actions are withinthe area of responsibility of the traffic engineer or the transit oper-ator, but require management or jurisdictional- level budget ap-proval and some degree of project analysis and justification.

3. Local Multi-Modal Actions. Included are actions within a singlejurisdiction, but which must be coordinated among the traffic engi-neer, transit operator, and others; require budget approval, andproject analysis and justification.

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

128 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

TABLE 6-3 Examples of TSM Actions

Improved Vehicular FlowImprovements in signalized intersectionsFreeway ramp meteringOne-way streetsRemoval of on-street parkingReversible lanesTraffic channelizationOff-street loadingTransit stop relocation

Preferential Treatment of High-Occupancy VehiclesFreeway bus and carpool lanes and access rampsBus and carpool lanes on city streets and urban arterialsBus preemption of traffic signalsToll policies

Reduced Peak-Period TravelWork reschedulingCongestion pricingPeak-period truck restrictions

Parking ManagementParking regulationsPark-and-ride facilities

Promotion of High-Occupancy and Nonvehicular Travel ModesRidesharingHuman-powered travel modesAuto-restricted zones

Transit and Paratransit Service ImprovementsTransit marketingSecurity measuresTransit sheltersTransit terminalsTransit fare policies and fare collection techniquesExtension of transit with paratransit servicesIntegration of transportation services

Transit Management Efficiency MeasuresRoute evaluationVehicle communication and monitoring techniquesMaintenance policiesEvaluation of system performance

4. Interjurisdictional Actions. Actions affecting one mode but areregional or interjurisdictional in nature, require coordinated budget-ing, and require area wide analysis and justification.

5. Regional Multi-Modal Actions. These require regional coordinationamong jurisdictions and modes, areawide project analysis and jus-tification, and coordinated budgeting.

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 129

Fig. 6-3. Compatibility of TSM actions (22)

The types of transportation projects that are considered in short-range planning thus range from those that can be handled indepen-dently by a traffic engineer or transit operator to those which requirehigher levels of coordination.

A regional TSM process, as can be seen, requires a great deal ofinstitutional flexibility and cooperation. One way of avoiding many ofthe problems that are found in the regional approach is to bring the scaleof analysis down to the subregional level. In this way, different agencypersonnel can work together in solving problems that are better definedand are limited in scope. In addition, citizen involvement is often easier

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

130 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

to obtain, and more meaningful at this stage. One such approach isbased on the major corridors of travel in a metropolitan area.

6.2.2 Corridor Studies

Traditional techniques in urban transportation planning based onlarge-scale modeling are expensive and require large amounts of time toget final results. Typically, their data requirements are so large, theyoften severely limit the number of alternative proposals that can beconsidered. To overcome these problems, planners have adopted aplanning approach called sketch planning which reduces the scale ofanalysis, and permits the use of simpler analysis tools. This analysis,which is usually conducted at the corridor level, includes the followingsteps: (1) Identify corridors; (2) establish priorities for selecting corridorsto be examined; (3) establish the over-all policy direction for the corridorstudy; (4) use socioeconomic and travel trend information to identifyexisting or potential problem areas; (5) analyze potential strategies; and(6) recommend actions that can be programmed for implementation.Each of these steps is outlined below.

Corridor identification The first step in a regional corridor planningprogram is to divide the region into travel corridors according to theuniformity of land use and dominant travel desires. Although mostcorridors would most likely be oriented to the center city, there could becases where routes of major transportation systems, either existing orproposed, lie between outlying activity centers. In general, the followingfactors are used for identifying corridors in a metropolitan area (24):

1. Existence of perceived problem(s).2. Barriers, e.g., rivers, rail lines, and airports.3. Existing transportation facilities.4. Concentration of economic activities.5. Concentration of population.6. Jurisdictional boundaries.7. Availability of data.

Because some estimate of travel demand in the corridor is usuallyneeded for the analysis, some scheme must be developed for dividingthe corridor into uniform analysis units. For most urban areas, a set ofanalysis units called traffic analysis zones will have already been devel-oped in previous studies and can thus be used (see Fig. 6-4).

Establish corridor selection criteria Several factors should be consid-ered in selecting the initial corridor to be analyzed, including congestion,safety, the ratio of traffic volume to roadway capacity (V/C), transitservice, handicapped and elderly needs, and social, environmental, andeconomic impacts. Usually though, one or two factors such as conges-tion, cost, or environmental impact are used to select the corridor, with

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 131

Fig. 6-4. Analysis zones in urban area (30)

the other factors being considered in greater detail during the analysisitself. It is important that a corridor public hearing be held to determinethose issues perceived as most important by the public.

Policy direction Each corridor study should articulate the policies thatare directing the planning tasks. These policies should be compatiblewith and expand upon those in the regional transportation plan andother regional planning documents. In the context of short-range plan-ning, these policies should concentrate on the consideration of low-coststrategies to increase the efficiency and person-carrying capacity of theexisting corridor transportation system. Examples of such policy state-ments include (19):

Stage short-range transportation improvements to facilitate transi-tion to longer range improvements.

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

132 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

Improve the overall operation of the system within the corridor byincreasing the accessibility to the system, by reducing the travel timedifferential between auto and transit trips, and by providing morefrequent and reliable service.

Maximize the person-carrying capacity of the roadway systemthrough the development of high occupancy vehicle projects. TheseHOV projects should be initially designed to include carpools,vanpools, and buses.

These policies should be formulated through a process in whichagencies and other interested parties such as elected officials and rep-resentatives of the public participate. Every effort should be made toassure that the set of policies are internally consistent, i.e., that the likelyactions resulting from one policy are compatible with the actions result-ing from another.

Problem identification Socioeconomic and travel trend information isused to point out the basic relationships and conditions within thecorridor that must be considered in the analysis. The socioeconomicdata, which include population, employment, and housing unit trendsand forecasts, as well as a variety of population and land use character-istics, are collected based on traffic analysis zones or census tracts. Thetravel trend information describes past trends and future projections fortravel demand, travel patterns, and trip types. The major types ofinformation from both categories include those listed in Table 6-4.

TABLE 6-4 Types of Data Collected for Problem Identification

Socioeconomic Data(D

PopulationEmploymentHousing unitsMean incomeAuto availabilityMinority and elderly

concentrationsMajor activity centersResidential densitiesLand use typesSpecial land/water areas

Travel Data

Auto(2)

volumesaccidentsV/Cspeed and travel timeenergy consumptionair pollutant emissionsnoise levels

Transit(3)

passengerspass/milepass/hour% transfersaverage farerevenue/milerevenue/hournet cost/pass% ridership growthspeed and travel timeenergy consumptionair pollutant emissionsroute location

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 133

There are several schemes that can be used to identify problemareas in the corridor. For example, specific segments of the highwaycould be ranked by number of accidents, V/C ratios, air pollutantemissions, and speed. Transit routes could be evaluated by comparingtheir performance along several service dimensions, i.e., those routeswhich fall below or above a certain level of performance (a standard) arecandidates for analysis (see Fig. 6-5). Even though data would be

Fig. 6-5. Performance evaluation of transit routes

Net cost per revenue passenger(net cost in dollars)

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

134 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

collected by many different agencies, every effort should be made toinclude all interested groups in the problem identification task andsubsequent analysis activities.

Analyze strategies The techniques chosen to analyze the different TSMstrategies depend on where in the planning process the analysis isoccurring. Early in the process, sketch planning models are used toanalyze general transportation strategies and to help in identifyingwhich corridors would receive further attention. More complex simula-tion along with demand and network assignment models can be used inthe detailed evaluation procedures. Some of these models, however,require large amounts of input data and are applicable only for a specificrange of network size.

The basis for evaluating any transportation action is the set ofcriteria or performance measures which are used to determine if theaction has indeed been successful. The performance measures must(10):

Be defined as to target.Be responsive to the incidence and magnitude of impact.Be characterized by geographic area of application and influence—which may differ.Be oriented to specific time periods.Be formulated at a proper level of detail for type of analysis beingformed.

• Be directly or indirectly related to TSM objectives and priorities.

Examples of such performance measures include: (1) Passenger pervehicle-mile; (2) passengers per vehicle-hour; (3) volume to capacityratios; and (4) accidents per million vehicle miles.

Even though most measures are focused on the direct impacts ofservice improvements, careful attention must also be given to secondaryimpacts such as changes in land use and the impact on economicactivity. The relationship of project impact to long-term goals andobjectives should also be explicitly evaluated.

The number of performance measures used in the analysis de-pends on the level of sophistication of the analysis and the characteristicsof service being analyzed. Evaluation of system performance on aregional basis would most likely use a small number of criteria, e.g.,vehicle-miles or vehicle-hours of travel. Assessing the performance of atransit system, however, would require a relatively large number ofperformance measures.

TSM action recommendation Once all of the TSM actions underconsideration have been evaluated, the planner must attempt to identifythe relative merits of each action or package of actions. The evaluation ofmost candidate actions usually results in the same output, e.g., volume,vehicle- and passenger-miles of travel, speed, etc.; therefore comparisonamong several alternatives can be made along similar dimensions. How-

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 135

ever, ranking the alternatives in terms of preference is a difficult task.One alternative does not usually "dominate" all others, i.e., trade-offsbetween important impacts must be made; the preference for selectedalternatives varies dramatically between different agencies, amongelected officials, and through all levels of government; and there are alsomany nonquantifiable factors such as political commitments, projectinterdependence, project readiness, and political feasibility that heavilyinfluence the scheduling of project implementation. This topic will becovered in more detail in the sections of this chapter titled Programmingand Project Development.

6.3 LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

Long-range planning has long been the cornerstone of transporta-tion planning in metropolitan areas. The long lead time necessary to planand construct major transportation facilities requires planners to lookahead and anticipate future problems so that the transportation infra-structure is in place to alleviate these problems when they occur. Fur-thermore, the planner must also make sure that projects proposed bydifferent planning agencies are compatible with each other, with othercomponents in the existing transportation system, and with communitygoals and objectives. A long-range transportation plan, which is essen-tially a statement of future intent, is designed to serve this purpose. Dueto changes in policy direction, technology, financial constraints, land usepatterns and other factors affecting transportation, long-range plansshould be continually monitored and updated so that they can effec-tively serve as a guide to near-term investments.

Many of the transportation policy trends that have significantlyinfluenced short-range planning have also had a major impact on long-range planning. In any corridor, for example, where major urban trans-portation investments are contemplated, an analysis of alternatives mustbe made in which costs and benefits of each alternative are considered.Short-range actions, such as bus and carpool lanes, ramp metering, andtransit route modifications, should be included in this analysis. Theimplementation of fixed guideway systems should also be done incre-mentally, i.e., corridors which cannot justify major investment in thenear term should be provided with levels and types of service appro-priate to their needs, with the level of service being progressivelyupgraded as demand develops. Because major transportation projectsusually have a significant impact on the surrounding area, there shouldalso be full opportunity for the involvement in the process of publicofficials, agency representatives, and citizen groups.

Although the problem-solving approaches for both the long- andshort-range planning processes, i.e., problem identification, generationand evaluation of alternatives, and alternatives selection, are similar, thelong-range planning process depends on forecasting future transportdemand and thus tends to be more complex. This demand forecast is

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

136 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

based on an analysis and extrapolation of current travel, and an inves-tigation of its relationship to the patterns of population, employment,and socioeconomic activity (21). The accuracy of these forecasts, how-ever, depends to a large extent on the models and methodologies usedto analyze travel demand behavior. There are six major steps in thisanalysis: (1) Inventory; (2) land-use forecast; (3) trip generation; (4) tripdistribution; (5) modal split; and (6) traffic assignment. These six stepsconstitute what is conventionally known as the transportation planningprocess (5). Each of these will be briefly examined.

6.3.1 Inventory

The inventory comprises the development of a data base for eval-uating existing travel demand and future system requirements. This taskis often the most time consuming, expensive, and difficult element of thelong-range planning process. In some urban transportation planningstudies, for example, up to one-half of the budget is spent on datacollection and the development of parameters for various models (15).

There are three major types of data that must be included in a gooddata base: (1) Inventories of travel; (2) inventories of land use; and (3)data on the transportation system. Because the amount of informationgathered in these tasks is so large, conventional transportation studiesutilize some sort of spatial aggregation over the metropolitan area. Thisaggregation usually takes the form of geographical units, i.e., sectors,zones, blocks, in which boundaries are chosen to maintain as muchzonal homogeneity as possible in the population's socioeconomic char-acteristics (see Fig. 6-4). This is necessary for those modeling cases wherezonal means are employed as representative of the entire zonal popu-lation. (Note: A new approach to demand modeling—individual choicemodels—does not utilize zonal averages, although the type of informa-tion needed is similar to the aggregate approach. Individual choicemodels will be reviewed in a following section.)

In addition to a zonal system for the analysis area, the transporta-tion network must be coded as a series of links, each of which beginsand ends at nodes. Separate networks are coded for highway, bus,rapid rail transit, and commuter rail. Because the coded network issupposed to be a realistic simulation of the real network, the networklinks are given spatial and locational properties such as length, direc-tion, and capacity. The network coding also includes "load nodes"which are the origins and termini of all trips in the network (see Fig.6-6). These nodes are usually located in the centroid of population fora specific zone.

There are many types of techniques for obtaining the informationneeded to complete an inventory. A land use survey based on localzoning maps and field inspections is used to identify types and inten-sities of land uses in the study area and relating them to trip-generatingor trip-attracting characteristics. Surveys are also used to obtain infor-mation on the types of trips made in an urban area and the socioeco-

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 137

Fig. 6-6. Network coding

Node from

315315316316317317318319

Node to

316318315317316320319318

Distance(miles)

0.70.60.70.50.50.60.70.7

Speed(mph)

2025202015202020

Computerdescription

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

138 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

nomic characteristics of the travelers. Alternative methods for collectingthis information include:

1. Home interview survey. Teams of trained interviewers inter-view household members using predesigned survey forms and ques-tioning procedures. Information is collected on the number and type oftrips made by each member as well as the socioeconomic characteristicsof the household. Households should be selected in such a manner as tobe representative of the characteristics of the area.

2. Roadside and transit rider ship survey. Motorists are stopped atinterview stations (which are located at strategic points on the surveyboundary line) and questioned as to their origin, destination, and trippurpose. Similarly survey teams ride bus routes or question commutersat transit stations to obtain the same type of information.

3. Mail surveys. Questionnaires are mailed to auto drivers ran-domly identified through the vehicle registry listings or, if a specificcorridor is the subject of analysis, license plates are noted by datacollectors and forms are sent to the drivers, again after they have beenidentified through the vehicle registry information.

4. Telephone survey. This is similar to the home interviewmethod in terms of information received, only it is done through tele-phone contact.

Because the amount of effort needed to survey every traveler andhousehold in a metropolitan area is prohibitively large, only a fraction ofthe total number is used. For example, the sample size for homeinterviews is typically 1% in larger cities and can range as high as 10%in smaller urban areas. The value, of course, of the information collectedin this fashion depends upon the procedures used for selecting thesample (29).

The 1980 census has provided the Urban Transportation PlanningPackage (UTPP), which provides detailed information on origin, desti-nation, and mode for work trips. This is a significant improvement overscanty previous census travel information, and is being used success-fully to validate travel data and so to eliminate the need for the costlysurvey process.

6.3.2 Land Use Forecast

The effectiveness of the transportation system is significantly in-fluenced by the land use patterns in a metropolitan area. Thus, land useforecasts are important inputs to the transportation modeling process.Indeed, the accuracy of travel forecasting is only as great as the accuracyof the input data from the land use forecast.

Specific outputs of land use forecasting include items such aspopulation or households, stratified by income or other measures, andemployment stratified by an industrial class. Forecasts are made foranalysis zones which range in size from that of a traffic analysis zone to

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 139

that somewhat larger than a census tract (12). This information is thenused to estimate by land-use type the number of trips generatedthroughout the urban area (see Fig. 6-7). These forecasts should then besubjected to validity checks to assure that they realistically reflect thecharacteristics of the areas.

6.3.3 Trip Generation

Trip generation provides the linkage between land use and travelpatterns. Land use is described in terms of intensity (e.g., square feet ofretail space), character of the land use activities, and location within anurban area. Existing land use and travel are linked utilizing techniquessuch as cross classification, trip rates, or regression analysis (27). Theserelationships are then applied to estimate future travel based on theforecasted change in land use (this assumes that the relationship be-tween land use and travel is constant over time).

While there are several methods for specifying trip generationmodels, cross-classification analysis has become most widely accepted

Fig. 6-7. Steps in forecasting future land use (19)

Estimatetwenty-yearpopulation

growth

Estimateeconomic

growth

Existingland uses

Official plansfor controlled

land uses

Forecastland use

Land useproportions

by type

Tabular andmapped outputs

DensitiesEstimate

changes inexisting

land uses

Penalize"undevelopable"

land

Allocationmodel

Population andtravel data byanalysis zone

Transportationnetworks

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

140 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

and will be the only one considered in this section. The forecasting oftrips produced by zone is based on relating trip-making to varioushousehold characteristics such as income, auto availability, or house-hold size. Additionally, total trip productions are categorized by trippurpose. For this task, three categories of trip purpose are usuallyused: home-based work (HBW), home-based other (HBO), andnonhome-based (NHB). Based on this information, curves which relateexpected split of trips to socioeconomic characteristics can be formu-lated by trip purpose [see Fig. 6-8 (a and b)]. In order to estimate the

Fig. 6-8. Cross-classification analysis for trip distribution

Home-based work

Home-based other

Non-home-based

Attraction activity

Household Non-retailemployment

CBD retailemployment

Other retailemployment

(trip attractions per unit of activity)

(c)

Hou

seho

ldin

com

e l

evel

1

2

3

4

5

Auto availability

0 1 2 +

(trip productions per household)

(a)

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 141

number of trips attractedto certain activities, a similar analysis procedureis undertaken which relates trip ends by purpose to the amount andcharacter of the activities [see Fig. 8 (c)]. After calculating the totalnumber of trips produced and attracted in an area, the planner mustcheck to see that both totals are the same. In most cases, they will not bein balance; therefore the trip attractions by zone are multiplied by theratio of total productions to total attractions so that the totals will beequal. The data developed are used in the next phase of travel demandforecasting.

6.3.4 Trip Distribution

Trip distribution is the process of distributing the trips generated ineach zone to all the possible destination zones available. As in tripgeneration, there are several types of models for accomplishing this: (1)Growth factor models; (2) intervening-opportunity models; and (3) grav-ity models. The most widely used model—the gravity model—will bereviewed in this subsection.

In the gravity model, the number of trips between two zones isdirectly proportional to the product of the number of trips produced inone zone and attracted in the other, and inversely proportional to thedegree of separation between the two zones represented as a functionof travel time. Put in mathematical terms, the model formula is

(6.1)

in which 7^ = number of trips produced in zone / and attracted tozone ;'; Pz = number of trips produced in zone /; Aj = number of tripsattracted to zone /; F(t)fj = friction factor (usually travel time raised tosome power between zones / and ; ); and n = number of zones instudy area.

Simply stated, this equation says that areas with large amounts ofactivity, or separated by short distances, or both, will tend to exchangemore trips than areas with small amounts of activity, or separated bylong distances, or both.

Before a trip distribution model can be used in the planningprocess, its results must be compared with travel information obtainedfrom surveys to determine model reliability. If this comparison showsstatistically significant differences, adjustments must be made to themodel.

6.3.5 Modal Split

Modal split analysis is the process of^assigning person-trips toavailable modes of transportation. There are three major factors that

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

142 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

need to be considered in this analysis: (1) Characteristics of the traveler;(2) characteristics of the trip; and (3) characteristics of the transportationsystem. Although there are many characteristics that can be consideredin this analysis, those most commonly used are income and auto avail-ability for the tripmaker, trip purpose for trip characteristics, and traveltime and cost for characteristics of the transportation system.

The types of techniques that have been used in the development ofmode-split models include regression analysis, diversion curves, andcross-classification. Recent research, however, has examined a differentmodeling approach called individual choice models which is based onthe following relationship: "The probability that an individual willchoose a particular alternative is a function of the characteristics of theindividual and of the over-all desirability of the chosen alternativerelative to all other alternatives" (2). These models have certain proper-ties which make them desirable for use in the urban transportationplanning process. First, the amount of data needed to calibrate individ-ual choice models is considerably less than that for aggregate models(which need large numbers or observations to obtain a stable value forzonal means). Second, individual choice models are less likely to bebiased by correlations among aggregate units and can themselves beused at any level of aggregation. Third, policy sensitive variables areeasily included in the modeling framework. Finally, calibrated individ-ual choice models may be transferable to other urban areas.

Individual choice models use

(6.2)

in which Pz = the probability of choosing alternative i; Ui = the linearutility expression for alternative z; and n = the set of feasible modes.

The utility expressions are assumed to be a linear combination ofvariables that reflect socioeconomic characteristics (household size, in-come, and automobile ownership), mode-specific variables (automobilebias and availability of transit), and generalized travel cost (moneyand time). For example, a typical expression for a utility function wouldbe

(6.3)

in which Cm = mode-specific parameter; C2 2,3, = mode-independentparameters; tm = in-vehicle time; Xm = out-of-vehicle time; d = dis-tance; C = out-of-pocket cost; y = income; and m = auto, transit.

Individual choice models such as Eq. 6.2 have become an importanttransportation planning tool, and will most likely become more im-portant in the future. Not only does the smaller expense associated with

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 143

these techniques make them more attractive, but their formulation isbased on behavioral and economic theory which provides a firm foun-dation for analysis.

6.3.6 Traffic Assignment

Traffic assignment constitutes assigning the distributed volumesof trips, by mode, to individual network links. The basis for this as-signment procedure is that choice of route is basically a decision tominimize total travel time through a transportation network. The sev-eral techniques that can be used in the assignment procedure—mini-mum path, minimum path with capacity restraint, and multirouteprobabilistic assignment—all have this basis for their operation. Theminimum path algorithm determines a minimum route from any nodeby considering successive closest nodes and building up a "tree"which represents the minimum path from that node to all other nodes(23). The capacity restraint algorithm considers the relationship be-tween speed and volume in the assignment procedure, i.e., as volumeincreases, speed decreases. Thus, as links in the network become con-gested, the time needed to travel that link increases, which could po-tentially make another route the minimum path, thus diverting traffic.The multiroute probabilistic assignment procedure recognizes that sev-eral routes between two nodes might have equal impedances andshould therefore receive equal use.

Similar procedures are used to assign passengers to a transitnetwork. The required input data include: (1) Vehicle headways; (2)vehicle capacities; (3) travel speed; and (4) estimates of walk and waittime. The minimum path through the network is approximated by the"minimum weighted time path" where different weights are given tocategories of time (walking, waiting, and riding).

6.4 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS EVALUATION

The evaluation process for transportation plans is a process forjudging the worth of alternative investment, policies, or courses ofaction in a manner responsive to public needs and welfare (20). Centralto this evaluation process is the identification and measurement ofimpacts due to changes in the transportation system. As has beenmentioned previously, however, the measurement of impacts has longcreated a problem in those cases where the impacts were nonquantifi-able. The basis for this problem is the ability or inability of measurementtechniques to deal with the concepts of efficiency and effectiveness.Traditional evaluation techniques such as net present worth, benefit andcost ratios, and rate of return are more concerned with measuring theefficiency of alternatives, i.e., obtaining a good monetary return for theinvestment. Such an analysis methodology requires that the unit ofmeasurement for costs and benefits be the same, in this case monetaryunits. Effectiveness, on the other hand, relates the performance of each

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

144 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

alternative to the goals and objectives of the study, i.e., the alternativewhich most helps achieve goal attainment is the most effective one. Thecost-effectiveness framework for evaluating transportation alternativesthus relies on the structuring of information to articulate the relation-ships between the alternatives and the trade-offs or compromises thatmust be made to choose one alternative over the others (22).

The cost-effectiveness evaluation framework includes as muchinformation as is necessary to reach an informed decision. In this regard,careful attention must be given to the selection of factors that will beconsidered in alternatives selection, because the quality of the finaldecisions depends on the comprehensiveness and comprehension ofthis information. Presenting too much information is liable to burden thedecision-makers with too many facts and figures, while not enoughinformation runs the risk of missing important factors that could becomeextremely controversial during project implementation (32). In general,the decision-maker is most interested in the consequences of implement-ing (or not implementing) a particular alternative, because this is wherepolitical considerations are most important (see Table 6-5).

As mentioned previously, one manner of making the evaluationprocess more meaningful to public officials and citizen representatives isto reduce the scale of analysis. A system-wide evaluation framework canthus consist of prioritizing subareas within a region for investment intransportation improvements. One of the most important aspects of thisplanning effort is data management, i.e., the structuring of availabledata so that it can be readily accessed throughout the process. Theplanner usually finds all too soon that the major stumbling block in moststudies is the poor quality or lack of data. In a regional study based onsubarea analyses, the effective management of the data resources be-comes even more critical.

Costs of alternative plans are also an important consideration in anevaluation framework, although dollar costs associated with alternativeplans do not always give a good indication of the true social costs of theresource expenditures. There are several types of cost models that areused to estimate the monetary costs of implementation. For example,one could categorize costs associated with planning, designing, con-structing, and operating a facility or system. A more frequently usedframework separates costs according to the types of components that arepurchased (20):

Centralized Costs User Costs

1. Right-of-way 1. Vehicle depreciation2. Traveled-way structural 2. Fuel and oil3. Terminal facility construction 3. Tires4. Initial mobile components 4. General maintenance5. Materials and equipment for 5. Insurance fees

operation and maintenance 6. Net accident6. Labor for operations 7. Time7. Management and other 8. Other

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 145

TABLE 6-5 Consequences of Transportation Actions

Consequences of InputsOpportunities lost due to resource commitmentsChanges in employmentChanges in real incomeScarcities of material resourcesPromotion of previously unused resourcesSocial disruption due to purchase of right-of-wayModifications of human activity patterns and resource allocations due to the

taking of land pacelsOthers

Consequences of Performance OutputsChanges in community growth patternsChanges in market areas and competitive positions of various activitiesSocial unification due to increased accessibilityExpanded social, economic, and cultural realms of people due to increased

accessibilityModifications of human activity patterns and resource allocations due to

changes in accessibilityChanges in the prices of public and private goods due to changes in

accessibilityChanges in employment patterns due to changes in accessibilityLives and resources saved or lost due to changes in transportation

safetyOthers

Consequences of Concomitant OutputsSocial and psychological effects of creation or destruction of physical barriers by

transportation facilitiesEsthetic impacts of facilitiesChanges in crime rate created by transportation structuresPhysiological effects of air pollution due to transportationPsychological and physiological impacts of sound and light emitted by transpor-

tation vehicles and facilitiesEffects of changes in the safety properties of the interface between transporta-

tion facilities and their environmentsModifications of human activity patterns and resource allocations because of

changes in site characteristics due to concomitant outputsOthers

The costing structure is not only of interest from the point of viewof government fiscal policy, but also helps to identify the types of skillsnecessary to construct a project, and serves to identify the time sequenc-ing of expenditures. The combination of this cost information with adescription of the consequences of plan implementation can thus serveas a firm basis for the decision-making process.

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

146 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

6.5 PROGRAMMING

Rather than viewing the product of short- and long-range planningas the choice of a target system, transportation planning should identifythe implications of near-term choices in terms of potential long-termimpacts, and the future options left open or foreclosed. The best mech-anism for shifting the focus of transportation planning toward concernfor short-range decisions is the programming process. Programming hasbeen defined as "the matching of available projects with available fundsto accomplish the goals of a given period" (17). In the context of Sections6.2 and 6.3, programming also involves the development of an imple-mentation schedule that accounts for both short-range choices andlonger range system options. Thus, while funding is the most importantparameter, programming should consider several factors.

Federal planning regulations, which have placed great significanceon program and budget review at the metropolitan level, reflect thefailure of the comprehensive plans of the 1950s and 1960s to bridge thegap between long-range plans and short-range decisions. Specifically,these regulations require that each metropolitan area develop a pro-gramming document—the Transportation Improvement Program(TIP)—which specifies the projects that will be going from the transpor-tation plan into preliminary engineering, design, right-of-way acquisi-tion, and construction. More importantly, however, the projects pro-grammed in the TIP must be drawn from the short-range element of thetransportation plan, which is in turn based on the long-range plan, thusmaking explicit the link between planning and programming.

The programming document is a staged, multiyear program oftransportation improvement projects, some of which are proposed forpartial funding by federal and state sources, and some projects which areproposed for funding solely from local resources. Those highway, tran-sit, and airport projects which are to receive highest implementationpriority should be clearly indicated in the document. However, there areseveral points to keep in mind in understanding the complexities facinga programmer (17):

• The program is rarely new; it usually contains commitments fromprevious years and to other agencies or groups.

• The projects are in all stages of development from basic planningstudies to final design. At any point and for any number ofreasons, a project may be stopped temporarily and thrown offschedule.

• The funds available may be restricted to certain categories of use,although there may be some flexibility with regard to transferringfunds between categories or reassigning projects to different cat-egories.

• Priorities may be constantly changing because of changing phi-losophies, transportation needs, economic conditions, energyavailability, political conditions, and other factors affecting indi-vidual or collective priorities.

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 147

The environment in which the programmer operates is constantlychanging, so to produce an acceptable program of transportation im-provements means that the programmer must be aware not only of thetechnical justification for a specific project, but also where that project isplaced on the agenda of key officials.

A transportation program usually consists of several elements: (1)A description of the project; (2) delineation of agency responsibility; (3)an estimate of project cost by program year; (4) the identification of thefunding source for these costs; and (5) often a sense of what priority isassigned to the project. Each of these elements is susceptible to theturbulent environment just described.

Project prioritization Assigning project priorities based on quantifiablevariables can have an important influence on project selection. Such ascheme reduces the complexity inherent in selecting those projects to beimplemented among the many projects that need to be considered.However, as mentioned previously, there are other nonquantifiableelements that influence a project's selection, including multiple andconflicting objectives, geographical constraints, special-purpose alloca-tions, network and project interrelationships, and, perhaps most impor-tantly, budget constraints. Thus, the role of project prioritization isunclear, although it could certainly contribute to decision-making ifsome of these elements are held constant, e.g., if projects within onefunding program were compared separately from those in other pro-grams. It is important to realize, however, that technical priorities can beoutweighed by other factors in the process of project selection (see Table6-6).

Early attempts at technical prioritizing focused on those variablesthat could be easily quantified, e.g., volume and capacity, vehicle milestraveled, accident reduction. Recent efforts, however, have attempted toidentify and assess transportation improvement impacts affecting bothtransportation users and the community at large. One method, based ona linear programming analysis, provides an estimate of the staging ofprojects given yearly budget constraints (4). The three major areas ofinputs in this method include:

1. Benefits and disbenefits. An estimate of the project impact onregional development, users, operators, social structure, environment,and right-of-way is the major element in this category. Typical variablesinclude travel-time savings, operating cost reductions, noise reduction,and improved air quality.

2. Costs. Costs include expenditures for capital construction andmaintenance.

3. Budget. The programmer must estimate available budgets foreach planning year. More will be said about this process in Section 6.6.

Although most planners do not use the methods described previ-ously, the general approach they represent does occur in all transpor-

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

148 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

TABLE 6-6 Factors Involved in Priority Ratings (26)

Quantifiable FactorsPhysical condition (deterioration): road surface, pavement structure, foundation,

shoulders, drainageGeometries: pavement width, shoulder widthAlignment: horizontal, verticalBridges: condition rating, operating ratingSafety rating: accident totals or rates, or bothCapacity rating: volume/capacityBenefit/cost ratingCost-effectiveness indexRecreational useSocial: families displacedEconomic: businesses displaced, direct routings, jobs during construction, use

of air rightsEnvironmental: air, noise, and water pollution

Nonquantifiable FactorsSocial: neighborhood cohesion, minority-elderly-handicapped impacts, disrup-

tion, proximityEconomic: build vs. no-build, economic base, mobility, accessibility, employ-

ment after constructionEnvironmental: effect on natural resources, esthetics, water pollution, vibration,

noiseLand use impacts: future development, community standardsTransportation needUncertainty: public support, court cases

InterrelationshipsImpacts on connecting facilitiesImpacts on competing facilitiesStage constructionSystem continuityAgreements and commitments (other agency plans)

tation agencies. This approach, however, suffers from the same problemthat previous efforts have often ignored, i.e., whereas quantifying vari-ables such as travel time and cost savings is conceptually straightfor-ward, the same is not true for social and economic impacts. In mostcases, an index of some sort is put into the equation so that the outputsare at least minimally sensitive to such impacts. The budgeting processis often recognized as the key parameter, and other considerations areeither ignored or minimally addressed. At the very least, a sensitivityanalysis should be conducted to determine the degree of sensitivity ofthe output to different magnitudes of input parameters.

Another approach for ranking projects assigns points to projectsalong certain service dimensions. For example, a rating system couldassign points to highway projects based on the current condition of road

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 149

service, improvement to safety, socioenvironmental factors and energysavings. The problem with this approach is that the subjective assign-ment of points to projects is highly dependent upon the person respon-sible for the task. Because each individual is sensitive to different factorsin the project selection, it is doubtful that a listing of projects using thismethod would yield consistent results if different evaluators were used.A standard system for evaluation must be defined.

One of the most important uncertainties in programming trans-portation improvements is the weight that political considerations havein the process. Because each metropolitan area has its own institutionalstructure and groups of political actors, it is difficult to generalize aboutthe role that such considerations have in programming. Political consid-erations are not the only important concerns in this regard. Items suchas commitments to other agencies, project interdependencies, and theposition of a project in the implementation schedule become criticalconstraints in the programming process as well. This last factor, positionin the schedule, becomes especially important when one considers thatprojects take several years to advance through planning, design, andconstruction. Given this time frame, it is difficult to alter programs whenchanges in officials and policies require their alteration.

Financial planning One of the most important tasks of the program-mer is estimating the level of funding that can be expected for transpor-tation improvements during future years. This is not a particularly easytask because it requires a sense of the trends in priorities and funding onthe part of Congress, state legislatures, city councils, and agency offi-cials. In most cases transportation improvements can be funded fromthree general sources: (1) Federal aid; (2) state and local taxes; and (3)property owners. By far the most important source of funds is the federalgovernment which, through allocated and discretionary funds, providessignificant support for all modes of transportation. Planners, however,must estimate not only federal sources of revenue, but also local sourcesand user revenues. For example, transit officials must estimate not onlythe federal contribution to transit operations, but also revenues fromfares and local subsidies.

6.6 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT

As the preceding sections have shown, urban transportation plan-ning and programming are extremely complex processes. Not only arethe analysis procedures different for various types of projects, but theamount of intergovernmental participation in the development of aproject makes the planner both a liaison with other agencies as well asa technical analyst. One way of demonstrating the complexities ofproject planning is to follow the development of a transportation projectfrom project initiation to construction.

Projects are identified from a variety of sources. Technical sources

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

150 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

include such things as planning studies, special studies, informationobtained from periodic review of facility performance, or observationsmade from maintenance or safety inspection staff. Projects identifiedthrough these means usually end up in a normal administrative proce-dure for handling them. Nontechnical sources of project initiation arerelatively few in number—local public officials, citizen groups, andindividual citizens—but they often demand immediate and serious re-sponse.

Once the project has been identified it is placed on the agenda ofa transportation agency. The priority of the project depends uponseveral factors, including the backlog of projects in the agency, the needfor fast turnaround to qualify for specific funding programs, the degreeto which the project complements existing agency programs, and theindividual or group of individuals who initiated the project. Assumingthat the project warrants further investigation, preliminary planningprocedures are begun.

6.6.1 Preliminary Planning

Preliminary planning consists of such items as determining endpoints of the route, approximate locations of critical intersections orterminals, the alternative types of projects that could solve the problem,and the level of effort that would be necessary for a detailed analysis.Information such as traffic and passenger counts, accident records, levelof service, and approximate cost figures are collected and used in a briefdescription of the project. This initial planning effort amounts to nothingmore than a feasibility study, i.e., does the project make sense? Can it beimplemented? Several actions can then be taken depending on thestandard operating procedures of the agency and the size of the project.If the project is large in a sense that it will require significant resources,or that it will have a major impact on the surrounding area, a publicmeeting might be held. In another case, a preliminary planning projectreport would be sent to a policy committee or any other overseeing bodywhich would recommend further action. In most cases, however, theproject is reviewed within the sponsoring agency and the decision ismade there on whether further design efforts are desired.

6.6.2 Project Programming

The programming decision, i.e., when the project should be listedin the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) occurs at differenttimes in the project development process in different metropolitan areas.Programming a project in the TIP is dependent on the type of fundingto be used on the project. Federally funded projects should be includedin the TIP at all stages of the project for which program action isproposed. In some areas, if a project has been assigned a preliminarycost estimate and a tentative construction date, it is included in the TIPat this stage of development. The TIP may also reflect locally funded

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 151

projects at the discretion of the agency which approves the TIP at thelocal level.

Engineering design is most often thought of as a routine process,consisting primarily of using standard methods to meet the needs of thespecific problem. Although some design problems do fit into this cate-gory, most do not. Almost all design problems are subject to regulationsand standards such as the allowable level of noise and air pollution,minimum design speeds and lane widths, and warrants for trafficcontrol devices. A planner must therefore be conscious of the trade-offsinvolved in satisfying design objectives within the constraints imposedby available resources and regulations.

From initiation to construction, project development is a complexand demanding process. Not only are there a large number of agencieswhich can influence the way in which a project evolves, there are alsoseveral planning and design considerations which must be addressed aswell.

6.7 CONCLUSIONS

The transportation planning process is currently in a period oftransition. Fiscal constraints, a possible reorientation of federal trans-portation policies, and an increasing reliance on local commitment anddecision-making are all likely to influence the future of transportation inurban areas. Even with these pressures, however, local governmentswill still need to examine options that will maintain or improve theexisting operation of the transportation system. This need is based onthe fact that the efficient operation of the transportation system is anecessary prerequisite for healthy economic development in the metro-politan area and for attaining social objectives related to the mobility ofdifferent groups.

The transportation planning process described in this chapter isparticularly well suited to the demands of the 1980s. This process notonly provides different scales of analysis, but also relates planning to theprogramming process. In the latter case, it seems likely that, with limitedresources available for improvements to the transportation network,much of the interest of decision-makers will be focused on the program-ming and budgeting process. The type of planning process describedhere is also one sensitive to alternative viewpoints on problem defini-tions and solutions, and one which recognizes that valuable informationcan be obtained from individuals or groups not directly involved withthe process.

6.8 REFERENCES

1. Altshuler, A., The Urban Transportation System: Politics and Policy Innovation,1st ed., The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge, Mass.,1979.

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

152 URBAN PLANNING GUIDE

2. Applications of New Travel Demand Forecasting Techniques to TransportationPlanning, Urban Planning Division, Washington, D.C., Mar., 1977.

3. Baerwald, J., ed., Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook, Institute ofTransportation Engineers, 4th ed., Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs,N.J., 1976.

4. Bellomo, S., Mehra, J., Stowers, J., Cohen, H., Petersilia, M., and Reno, A.,''Evaluating Options in Statewide Transportation Planning/Programming/7

National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 179, TransportationResearch Board, Washington, D.C., 1977.

5. Creighton, R., Urban Transportation Planning, 1st ed., Univ. of Illinois Press,Urbana, 111., 1970.

6. Davis, C.F., "A Framework for the Assessment of Progress in AchievingAir-Quality Goals/7 Traffic Quarterly, Vol. 33, No. 2, Apr., 1979, pp. 263-274.

7. ''Energy Conservation Potential of Urban Mass Transit/7 Conservation Paper34, Federal Energy Administration, Washington, D.C., 1976.

8. Fleet, C, Kane, A., and Schoener, G., "Achieving A Long-Range/Short-Range Planning Balance with an Appropriate Level of Effort/7 U.S. Depart-ment of Transportation, Washington, D.C., June, 1978.

9. Gakenheimer, R., and Meyer, M., "Urban Transportation Planning in Tran-sition: The Sources and Prospects of Transportation System Management,:Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 45, No. 1, Jan., 1979, pp.28-35.

10. "Handbook for Transportation System Management Planning/7 Vol. 1,North Central Texas Council of Governments, Dallas, Tex., March, 1978.

11. "Institutional Framework for Integrated Transportation Planning/7 PublicTechnology, Inc., Washington, D.C., 1978.

12. An Introduction to Urban Development Models and Guidelines for Their Use inUrban Transportation Planning, Office of Planning, Urban Planning Division,Washington, D.C., Oct., 1975.

13. Keefer, L., and Witheford, D., "Urban Travel Patterns for Hospitals, Uni-versities, Office Buildings, and Capitols/7 National Cooperative Highway Re-search Program Report 62, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1969.

14. Manheim, M. L., Suhrbier, J., Bennett, E., Neumann, L., Colcord, F., andReno, A., "Transportation Decision-Making: A Guide to Social and Envi-ronmental Considerations/7 National Cooperative Highway Research ProgramReport 156, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1975.

15. Morlok, E., Introduction to Transportation Engineering and Planning, 1st ed.,McGraw-Hill Publishing Co, Inc., New York, N.Y., 1978.

16. "Motor Vehicle Facts and Figures, 1978/7 Vehicle Manufacturer's Associa-tion, Detroit, Mich., 1978.

17. "Priority Programming and Project Selection/7 National Cooperative HighwayResearch Program Synthesis of Highway Practice #48, Transportation ResearchBoard, Washington, D.C., 1978.

18. Remak, R., and Rosenbloom, S., "Implementing Packages of Congestion-Reducing Techniques/7 National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report205, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., June, 1979.

19. Route 8 Transportation System Management Corridor Study, ComprehensivePlanning Organization, San Diego, Calif., 1978.

20. Stopher, P., and Meyburg, A., Transportation Systems Evaluation, 1st ed.,D.C. Heath and Co., Lexington, Mass., 1976.

21. Stopher, P., and Meyburg, A., Urban Transportation Modeling and Planning,1st ed., D.C. Heath and Co., Lexington, Mass., 1975.

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.

URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 153

22. Thomas, E., and Schofer, J., "Strategies for the Evaluation of AlternativeTransportation Plans/' National Cooperative Highway Research Program ReportNo. 96, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1970.

23. Traffic Assignment, Urban Planning Division, Office of Highway Planning,Washington, D.C., Aug., 1973.

24. Transit Corridor Analysis, A Manual Sketch Planning Technique, Urban MassTransportation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Wash-ington, D.C., May, 1976.

25. Transit Fact Book, 1976-77 ed., American Public Transit Assoc., Washington,D.C., 1977.

26. 'Transportation Improvement Program/' Federal Register, U.S. Departmentof Transportation, Washington, D.C., Sept. 17, 1975, pp. 42976-42984.

27. Trip Generation Analysis, Urban Planning Division, Washington, D.C., Aug.,1975.

28. United States Code, Title 23: Highways, U.S. Congress, by the Committeeon Public Works and Transportation, U.S. House of Representatives, Print95-2, March, 1977.

29. "Urban Origin-Destination Surveys/' Highway Planning Program Manual,Transmittal 143, Federal Highway Administration, Vol. 20, Appendix 34,U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 1973.

30. "Urban Transportation and Energy," by the Congressional Budget Office,Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate, 95th Congress,1st session, Serial No. 95-8, Sept., 1977.

31. U.S. Department of Transportation, "Urban Transportation Planning," Fed-eral Register, Aug. 6, 1981, pp. 40170-40179.

32. Wilson, D., and Schofer, J., "Decision-Maker-Defined Cost-EffectivenessFramework for Highway Programming," Transportation Research Record 677,Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1978.

Urban Planning Guide

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Uni

vers

ity O

f M

aryl

and

on 1

0/16

/14.

Cop

yrig

ht A

SCE

. For

per

sona

l use

onl

y; a

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d.