Showing Results Will Win More Funding for Transit Projects
Who will you meet?
Cities are innovating, companies are pivoting, and start-ups are growing. Like you, every urban practitioner has a remarkable story of insight and challenge from the past year.
Meet these peers and discuss the future of cities in the new Meeting of the Minds Executive Cohort Program. Replace boring virtual summits with facilitated, online, small-group discussions where you can make real connections with extraordinary, like-minded people.
If planned and promoted well, buses, trains, and bikes can be tremendous resources for how we’ll get around in the future. For now, the U.S. has invested in an almost entirely car-dependent country.
To bridge the gap, there’s a far under-used sub-sector of the transportation industry that can help these under-rated and under-used travel modes – which also promote better health, happiness, and efficiency – catch up.
Starting in the wake of the OPEC oil embargo, government agencies tried to reduce the number of cars on America’s highways by incentivizing people to carpool and take fewer trips driving alone. This was a practice known by urban planners and traffic engineers as transportation demand management (TDM). This is often lost in conversations about infrastructure, which are about build, build, build. TDM is about understanding the paths people are taking and wanting to take and creating a system based off of that.
TDM, when employed, works. TDM agencies around the country use a treasure’s trove of strategies to get people out of cars and onto trains, buses, and bikes, which is something that has to happen if we don’t want our roads to become unusable due to traffic and environmental congestion.
But one major problem with the practice of TDM is that it has had a hard time making the case that it is a cost-effective alternative or at least add-on to big infrastructure projects. It seems pretty obvious that teaching people, educating them, about how to use our systems will make those systems run more smoothly. But there has never been a great way to back up that assumption with hard numbers.
Arlington County, Va., which operates Mobility Lab, helped secure funding from the Federal Highways Administration to build a way to calculate these benefits. We now have a couple of calculators that cities, regions, or even properties can use to calculate TDM’s economic return on investment, thanks to our work in partnership with LDA Consulting and the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the University of South Florida.
By answering a handful of questions upon entering the online Transportation Cost Savings Calculator – we are presented with information such as, for example: TDM programs in Arlington County – the jurisdiction with the most robust transportation management program in the country – yield an astonishing $5 to $9 in benefits for every $1 spent.
No highway expansion project has that kind of return on investment. In fact, highway expansion projects rarely yield an ROI higher than the cost of construction itself, nonetheless the countless maintenance projects required down the road. So why don’t we invest more heavily in TDM, and the infrastructure needed – like trains, buses, and bike lanes – to make TDM thrive?
One reason: measuring the results of TDM – and how they directly improve people’s quality of life and economic outcomes – used to be really hard.
Unlike highway expansions, TDM strategies are very diverse. High-occupancy vehicle lanes, employee transit benefits, real-time transit arrival information, and showers for bike commuters at the workplace are all examples of TDM programs. Transportation management helps people use the infrastructure that already exists more efficiently, and highway expansion projects – while much easier to measure – will just build more infrastructure that likely won’t do much to fix societal problems.
Mobility Lab has been researching TDM for a while. We’re a think tank focused solely on understanding transportation habits and preferences, and figuring out what incentives might influence people to live more sustainable transportation lifestyles. What we’ve learned from talking to transportation management associations around the country is that one of their biggest needs is a tool that quantifies the results from their programs. In a massively car-dependent country like the U.S., any public money that’s not spent on widening roads needs to prove that it’s worth your tax dollars.
The Calculator measures the return on investment from TDM programs in seven ways:
- Amount of air pollution reduced
- Levels of climate change mitigated
- Reduction in hours of traffic delays due to congestion
- New road construction deferred by lane miles
- Amount of fuel saved
- Number of vehicle crashes avoided
- Reduction in vehicle noise pollution
All of these measurable results have a huge impact on people’s quality of life. And, admittedly, there are a lot of factors the Calculators currently don’t measure. For instance, health calculations are not included yet. Imagine how much higher the ROI for TDM – which has a huge component focused on getting people into active forms of travel, such as bicycling and walking – could be once those are more accurately measured within the calculator. We hope to begin incorporating even more meaningful measures soon.
We released the calculator – it’s free to download and use – at the end of last summer. Since then, representatives from nearly 500 government agencies, universities, planning organizations, and private companies from all around the world have already downloaded it. We hope these organizations use the Calculator to show policymakers and those who fund our transportation systems that TDM programs pay themselves off, and are beginning to show a real potential for making all our lives better.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
This article was originally published on September 8, 2020.
Update for April 20, 2021:
After the murder of George Floyd we wrote this article as a kind of blueprint, a beginning to a new way of working with equitable resilience in our cities and beyond. Now, as the trial of Derek Chauvin comes to a guilty verdict in Minneapolis and the whole country reflects on the legacy of that verdict, we have to remember another senseless murder – another young Black man, Daunte Wright, at the hands of law enforcement, just miles from the courthouse. Again, Minneapolis is all of us. We have protested, we have voted. We stood up, we spoke out, we have raged about the anti-Black racism. We have seen people come together, we can feel a shift in this country. But there is so much more to do. No equity, no resilience.
-Ron & Stewart
Housing that is affordable to low-income residents is often substandard and suffering from deferred maintenance, exposing residents to poor air quality and high energy bills. This situation can exacerbate asthma and other respiratory health issues, and siphon scarce dollars from higher value items like more nutritious food, health care, or education. Providing safe, decent, affordable, and healthy housing is one way to address historic inequities in community investment. Engaging with affordable housing and other types of community benefit projects is an important first step toward fully integrating equity into the green building process. In creating a framework for going deeper on equity, our new book, the Blueprint for Affordable Housing (Island Press 2020), starts with the Convention on Human Rights and the fundamental right to housing.
Since the Great Recession of 2008, the housing wealth gap has expanded to include not just Black and Brown Americans, but younger White Americans as well. Millennials and Generation Z Whites are now joining their Black and Brown peers in facing untenable housing precarity and blocked access to wealth. With wages stuck at 1980 levels and housing prices at least double (in inflation adjusted terms) what they were 40 years ago, many younger Americans, most with college degrees, are giving up on buying a home and even struggle to rent apartments suitable for raising a family.
What makes it hard for policy people and citizens to accept this truth is that we have not seen this problem in a very long time. Back in the 1920s of course, but not really since then. But this is actually an old problem that has come back to haunt us; a problem first articulated by Adam Smith in the 1700s.