DOCSLIB.ORG

Consumer Information: 1998-03-30 the Land Use & Air Quality Linkage Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Consumer Information: 1998-03-30 the Land Use & Air Quality Linkage Report California Environmental Protection Agency AIR RESOURCES BOARD THE LAND USE - AIR QUALITY L I N K A G E How Land Use and Transportation Affect Air Quality 1997 Edition Acknowledgments This report was prepared by the staff of the Air Resources Board's Office of Air Quality and Transportation Planning under the direction and review of Lynn Terry, Assistant Executive Officer, and Anne Geraghty, Manager of the Transportation Strategies Group. The principal author is Ms. Terry Parker, M.A., Associate Air Quality Specialist/Planner. The cover illustration was drawn by Mr. James Lertiz of the San Francisco office of Wallace, Roberts & Todd as part of the “Bay -Park Link Report” for the City of San Diego Planning Department. 1997 EDITION This update of the ARB’s Land Use/Air Quality Linkage Report presents a summary of information on linkages between transportation, land use and air quality. It incorporates new data that has become available since this report was first published in 1994, including results from three major ARB-funded research projects. It also provides several new California examples. THE LAND USE-AIR QUALITY LINKAGE CONTENTS INTRODUCTION The Linkages Vehicle Use and Air Quality......................................................... 1 Land Use and Air Quality ............................................................. 2 Modes of Travel ............................................................................ 3 OPTIMUM LAND USE STRATEGIES FOR AIR QUALITY .................................................................... 4 Community Strategies Enhanced Central Business Districts ................................................ 5 Clustered Activity Centers ................................................................ 6 "Shopping Centers" Study............................................................ 6 Compact Development...................................................................... 6 Density and Transit Ridership....................................................... 7 Employment Concentration ..........................................................10 Neighborhood Strategies Focused Infill and Renewal..............................................................10 Mixed-Use Developments................................................................11 Interconnected Street Patterns..........................................................11 Traffic Calming................................................................................12 Traditional Neighborhood Design ...................................................12 Transit-Oriented Development ........................................................13 COMMUNITY EXAMPLES Within California ...........................................................................14 Outside California ..........................................................................16 QUANTITATIVE RELATIONSHIPS ...................................................18 ARB-Sponsored Research..............................................................19 “Five Neighborhoods” Study .....................................................19 “Transportation-Related Land Use Strategies” Study ...............19 EMISSION REDUCTION BENEFITS ..................................................21 OTHER BENEFITS Fewer Automobile Expenses .........................................................21 Economic Advantages....................................................................21 Lower Infrastructure Costs.............................................................22 Diverse and Affordable Housing ...................................................23 CONCLUSION.......................................................................................23 SOURCES...............................................................................................24 THE LAND USE-AIR QUALITY LINKAGE LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Total Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled in California and Total State Population,1970-1995 ............................................... 1 Figure 2: Emissions Associated with Typical “Indirect” and “Stationary” Sources .................................................................. 2 Figure 3: Portion of Personal Trips Five Miles or Shorter - and Purpose of Trips.......................................................... 2 Figure 4: Modes of Travel in California, 1991.................................................... 3 Figure 5: Travel by Automobile and Transit in Four Metropolitan Areas Worldwide .................................................. 4 Figure 6: Travel Behavior at an Urban and a Suburban Regional Shopping Center ................................................................. 6 Figure 7: Minimum Densities to Support Various Levels and Types of Transit Service .................................................................... 8 Figure 8: Character of Residential Density (diagram). ...................................... 9 Figure 9: Interconnected and Isolated Street Patterns (diagram).......................11 Figure 10: Comparison of Characteristics: "Traditional Neighborhood Development" and Typical Suburban "Planned Unit Development" .............................................................12 Figure 11: LUTRAQ: Projected Transit and Walking Mode Shares in the year 2010; Four Alternative Scenarios ....................................17 Figure 12: Rates of Transit Use for Commuting in the S.F. Bay Area ...........................................................................18 Figure 13: Relationship Between Population Density and Annual Vehicle Miles of Travel per Capita .........................................18 Figure 14: Travel Modes in Five S.F. Bay Area Neighborhoods..........................19 Figure 15: Household Travel Characteristics in Sample California Communities ........................................................20 Figure 16: Infrastructure Costs in Relation to Residential Density .....................22 THE LAND USE-AIR QUALITY LINKAGE INTRODUCTION will continue to greatly improve air quality, large increases in population and driving The form and shape that growing cities take in partially offset the benefits of cleaner motor the next several decades will have an important vehicles. impact on the future air quality of California's major metropolitan areas. A growing body of During the past twenty years, the total number literature and research indicates that land use of "vehicle miles traveled" (VMT) in the state and transportation strategies can reduce vehicle has increased at a much faster rate than popu- trips and vehicle miles traveled, and thus help lation growth. We are driving more often and reduce the air pollution produced by auto- longer distances. mobiles. By creating environments that are more conducive to alternative transportation Between 1970 and 1995, total annual VMT in modes such as walking, biking and transit, we California more than doubled, increasing from can create more "livable" communities -- 103 billion to over 270 billion miles of travel communities with reduced congestion, per year (although the growth rate in VMT increased personal mobility, and cleaner, tapered off somewhat between 1990 and 1995). healthier air. Between 1970 and 1995, the state's population grew by 60 percent, increasing from 20 to 32 This report summarizes data currently available million people.2 on the relationships between land use, trans- portation and air quality. It also highlights strategies that can help to reduce the use of the Total Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled private automobile. And, it briefly summarizes and Population in California, 1970-1995 several research projects funded by the 300 California Air Resources Board (ARB). As Annual VMT new data becomes available, it will be added to 250 (in Billions) updated versions of this report. 200 Total State Population 150 (in Millions) THE LINKAGES 100 50 Vehicle Use and Air Quality 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 While dramatic improvement has been made, most of California's metropolitan areas still Figure 1 2 exceed state and federal air quality standards. This is true despite the reduction of air pollution from both mobile sources (cars, Half of the nation's ten most congested trucks and buses) and stationary sources metropolitan areas are located in California: (utilities and other industries). Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, and San Bernadino/Riverside.3 And Mobile sources produce more than one-half of traffic congestion in the State’s metropolitan all smog precursors and over 90 percent of the areas is expected to continue to worsen, carbon monoxide in the State's major urban especially during peak-hour commute periods. areas. Today's new cars pollute about 90 Delays cost personal time, and translate into percent less than models produced 25 years ago higher costs for businesses and consumers.4 due to California's strict vehicle emissions standards. By 2003, the average new car in California will pollute 75 percent less than 2 Calif. Air Resources Board, BURDEN 7F Emissions 1 1994 models. But, although these standards Inventory, 1994; and Calif. Dept. of Finance, 1996. 3 Urban Land Institute, Land Use In Transition, 1993. 1 Calif. Air Resources Board, Status Report, 1994. 4 U.S. Department of Transportation, 1996. A 1993 report by Governor Wilson’s Growth choose -- car, vanpool, bus, train or trolley, Management Council pointed out: walking, or bicycling. "California cannot support a population For example, vehicles traveling to and from a growing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Integrating Infill Planning in California's General
    Integrating Infill Planning in California’s General Plans: A Policy Roadmap Based on Best-Practice Communities September 2014 Center for Law, Energy & the Environment (CLEE)1 University of California Berkeley School of Law 1 This report was researched and authored by Christopher Williams, Research Fellow at the Center for Law, Energy and the Environment (CLEE) at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. Ethan Elkind, Associate Director of Climate Change and Business Program at CLEE, served as project director. Additional contributions came from Terry Watt, AICP, of Terrell Watt Planning Consultant, and Chris Calfee, Senior Counsel; Seth Litchney, General Plan Guidelines Project Manager; and Holly Roberson, Land Use Council at the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), among other stakeholder reviewers. 1 Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 4 1 Land Use Element ................................................................................................................................. 5 1.1 Find and prioritize infill types most appropriate to your community .......................................... 5 1.2 Make an inclusive list of potential infill parcels, including brownfields ....................................... 9 1.3 Apply simplified mixed-use zoning designations in infill priority areas ...................................... 10 1.4 Influence design choices to
    [Show full text]
  • How Built Environment Affects Travel Behavior
    http://jtlu.org . 5 . 3 [2012] pp. 40–52 doi: 10.5198/jtlu.v5i3.266 How built environment affects travel behavior: A comparative analysis of the con- nections between land use and vehicle miles traveled in US cities Lei Zhang Jinhyun Hong Arefeh Nasri Qing Shen (corresponding author) University of University of Maryland University of University of Marylanda Washington Washington Abstract: Mixed findings have been reported in previous research regarding the impact of built environment on travel behavior—i.e., sta- tistically and practically significant effects found in a number of empirical studies and insignificant correlations shown in many other studies. It is not clear why the estimated impact is stronger or weaker in certain urban areas and how effective a proposed land use change/policy will be in changing certain travel behavior. This knowledge gap has made it difficult for decision makers to evaluate land use plans and policies according to their impact on vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and consequently, their impact on congestion mitigation, energy conservation, and pollution and greenhouse gas emission reduction. This research has several objectives: (1) re-examine the effects of built-environment factors on travel behavior, in particular, VMT in five US metropolitan areas grouped into four case study areas; (2) develop consistent models in all case study areas with the same model specifica- tion and datasets to enable direct comparisons; (3) identify factors such as existing land use characteristics and land use policy decision-making processes that may explain the different impacts of built environment on VMT in different urban areas; and (4) provide a prototype tool for government agencies and decision makers to estimate the impact of proposed land use changes on VMT.
    [Show full text]
  • Infill Development Standards and Policy Guide
    Infill Development Standards and Policy Guide STUDY PREPARED BY CENTER FOR URBAN POLICY RESEARCH EDWARD J. BLOUSTEIN SCHOOL OF PLANNING & PUBLIC POLICY RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW JERSEY NEW BRUNSWICK, NEW JERSEY with the participation of THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR SMART GROWTH RESEARCH AND EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND and SCHOOR DEPALMA MANALAPAN, NEW JERSEY STUDY PREPARED FOR NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS (NJDCA) DIVISION OF CODES AND STANDARDS and NEW JERSEY MEADOWLANDS COMMISSION (NJMC) NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF SMART GROWTH (NJOSG) June, 2006 DRAFT—NOT FOR QUOTATION ii CONTENTS Part One: Introduction and Synthesis of Findings and Recommendations Chapter 1. Smart Growth and Infill: Challenge, Opportunity, and Best Practices……………………………………………………………...…..2 Part Two: Infill Development Standards and Policy Guide Section I. General Provisions…………………….…………………………….....33 II. Definitions and Development and Area Designations ………….....36 III. Land Acquisition………………………………………………….……40 IV. Financing for Infill Development ……………………………..……...43 V. Property Taxes……………………………………………………….....52 VI. Procedure………………………………………………………………..57 VII. Design……………………………………………………………….…..68 VIII. Zoning…………………………………………………………………...79 IX. Subdivision and Site Plan…………………………………………….100 X. Documents to be Submitted……………………………………….…135 XI. Design Details XI-1 Lighting………………………………………………….....145 XI-2 Signs………………………………………………………..156 XI-3 Landscaping…………………………………………….....167 Part Three: Background on Infill Development: Challenges
    [Show full text]
  • Filling in the Spaces: Ten Essentials for Successful Urban Infill Housing
    Filling in the Spaces: Ten Essentials for Successful Urban Infill Housing The Housing Partnership November, 2003 Made possible, in part, through a contribution from the Washington Association of Realtors This publication was prepared by The Housing Partnership, through a contribution from the Washington Association of Realtors. The Housing Partnership is a non-profit organization (officially known as the King County Housing Alliance) is dedicated to increasing the supply of affordable market rate housing in King County. This is achieved, in part, through policies of local government that foster increased housing development while preserving affordability and neighborhood character. The Partnership pursues these goals by: (a) building public awareness of housing affordability issues; (b) promoting design and regulatory solutions; and (c) acting as a convener of public, private and community leaders. Contact: Michael Luis, 425-453-5123, [email protected]. The 17,000-member Washington Association of REALTORS® represents 150,000 homebuyers each year, and the interests of more than 4 million homeowners throughout the state. REALTORS® are committed to improving our quality of life by supporting quality growth that encourages economic vitality, provides a variety of housing opportunities, builds better communities with good schools and safe neighborhoods, preserves the environment for our children, and protects property owners ability to own, use, buy and sell real property. Contact: Bryan Wahl, 1-800-562-6024, [email protected]. Cover photo: Ravenna Cottages. Developed by Threshold Housing. Filling in the Spaces: Ten Essentials for Successful Urban Infill Housing A growth management strategy that relies on extensive urban infill requires major changes from past industry and regulatory practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Growth and Economic Success: Investing in Infill Development
    United States February 2014 Environmental Protection www.epa.gov/smartgrowth Agency SMART GROWTH AND ECONOMIC SUCCESS: INVESTING IN INFILL DEVELOPMENT Office of Sustainable Communities Smart Growth Program Acknowledgments This report was prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Sustainable Communities with the assistance of Renaissance Planning Group and RCLCO under contract number EP-W-11-009/010/11. Christopher Coes (Smart Growth America); Alex Barron (EPA Office of Policy); Dennis Guignet and Robin Jenkins (EPA National Center for Environmental Economics); and Kathleen Bailey, Matt Dalbey, Megan Susman, and John Thomas (EPA Office of Sustainable Communities) provided editorial reviews. EPA Project Leads: Melissa Kramer and Lee Sobel Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation. This paper is part of a series of documents on smart growth and economic success. Other papers in the series can be found at www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/economic_success.htm. Cover photos and credits: La Valentina in Sacramento, California, courtesy of Bruce Damonte; Small-lot infill in Washington, D.C., courtesy of EPA; The Fitzgerald in Baltimore, courtesy of The Bozzuto Group; and The Maltman Bungalows in Los Angeles, courtesy of Civic Enterprise Development. Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ i I. Introduction .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • R117.2019 STOMSA01 Sherritt Moa 43-101 Technical Report Effective Date 31 December 2018 Report Signature Date 6 June 2019 Report Status Final
    kelIts NI 43-101 TECHNICAL REPORT Moa Nickel Project, Cuba CSA Global Report Nº R117.2019 Effective Date: 31 December 2018 Signature Date: 6 June 2019 www.csaglobal.com Qualified Persons Michael Elias , FAusIMM (CSA Global) Paul O’Callaghan , FAusIMM (CSA Global) Adrian Martinez , P.Geo (CSA Global) Kelvin Buban , P. Eng. (Sherritt International Corporation) SHERRITT INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION MOA NICKEL PROJECT – NI 43-101 TECHNICAL REPORT Report prepared for Client Name Sherritt International Corporation Project Name/Job Code STO.MSA.01v1 Contact Name Kelvin Buban Contact Title Director of Operations Support Office Address 8301-113 Street, Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta T8L 4K7 Report issued by CSA Global Pty Ltd Level 2, 3 Ord Street West Perth, WA 6005 AUSTRALIA PO Box 141 CSA Global Office West Perth WA 6872 AUSTRALIA T +61 8 9355 1677 F +61 8 9355 1977 E [email protected] Division Mining Report information Filename R117.2019 STOMSA01 Sherritt Moa 43-101 Technical Report Effective Date 31 December 2018 Report Signature Date 6 June 2019 Report Status Final Author and Qualified Person Signatures Coordinating Michael Elias [“Signed”] Author and BSc (Hons), MAIG, FAusIMM Signature: {Michael Elias} Qualified Person CSA Global Pty Ltd at Perth, Australia Paul O’Callaghan [“Signed”] Co-author and BEng (Mining), FAusIMM Signature: {Paul O’Callaghan} Qualified Person CSA Global Pty Ltd at Perth, Australia Dr. Adrian Martinez Vargas [“Signed & Sealed”] Co-author and PhD., P.Geo. (BC, ON) Signature: {Adrian Martinez Vargas} Qualified Person CSA Global Pty Ltd at Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Kelvin Buban [“Signed & Sealed”] Co-author and BSc. Chem. Eng., P.Eng.
    [Show full text]
  • CREATING an EQUITABLE INFILL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK for KERN COUNTY: Analysis and Community Recommendations to Support the 2019 General Plan Update
    CREATING AN EQUITABLE INFILL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FOR KERN COUNTY: Analysis and community recommendations to support the 2019 General Plan Update POLICY BRIEF APRIL 2019 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AUTHORS Anisha Hingorani, Policy and Research Analyst, Advancement Project California Jacky Guerrero, Senior Policy & Research Analyst, Advancement Project California Adeyinka Glover, Esq., Attorney, Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability Chris Ringewald, Director of Research and Data Analysis, Advancement Project California PHOTO CREDIT: Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability WITH DEEPEST THANKS TO OUR TEAM AND PARTNERS FOR OFFERING YOUR INVALUABLE EXPERTISE THROUGHOUT THIS PROJECT: Michael Russo, Director of Equity in Community Investments, Advancement Project California Daniel Wherley, Senior Policy & Research Analyst, Advancement Project California Katie Smith, Director of Communications, Advancement Project California John Joanino, Senior Communications Associate, Advancement Project California Leslie Poston, Grant and Writing Consultant, Advancement Project California Ebonye Gussine Wilkins, Chief Executive Officer, Inclusive Media Solutions Jasmene Del Aguila, Policy Advocate, Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability Phoebe Seaton, Co-Founder And Co-Director And Legal Director, Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability Veronica Garibay, Co-Founder And Co-Director, Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability Gustavo Aguirre, Director of Organizing, Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment Chelsea Tu,
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Buildings Booklet
    DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT Leavenworth's 45-block downtown was planned in 1854 and in its first two decades commerce boomed. Most of the City's early stores were built in "blocks" with multiple storefronts and common upper areas. Many of these magnificent structures are gone and some that remain are the lower floors left after fire, tornado and neglect took their toll on their upper levels. Infill is evident nearly everywhere and pavement replaced buildings as the demand for off street parking grew, especially after World War II. Examples of block-style development are still evident today are the O'Donnell Block at 100 S. 5th Street, the Masonic Temple at 421 Delaware, the Yum block at 311-321 S. 5th Street and the intact block of commercial stores in the 600 block of Cherokee Street. There are 65 contributing properties in the district, mostly constructed of red brick with cast iron and terra cotta trim features. Their architecture is described as "high style" with Colonial and Classical revival variations reflective of their era. Two were previously placed on the National Register of Historic Places (429 and 500 Delaware Street). Knights of Columbus Block, 331 Delaware Street c. 1882; c. 1945 This three-story building has a corner entrance that is canted at both stories. The façade of this late 19th Century building was significantly altered in the 20th Century. Divisions are created through the use of brick stringcourses and by alternating different colors of brick and large, cast stone tiles. Commercial storefronts occupy the first story and are divided into three bays on the Delaware Street façade.
    [Show full text]
  • Report Layout.Indd
    CHALLENGES {THE ENVIRONMENT} PP Reinventing Megalopolis: THE NORTHEAST MEGAREGION UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL OF DESIGN SPRING 2005 THE NORTHEAST MEGAREGION Introduction his document summarizes the work of Reinventing Megalopolis, a 2005 University of Pennsylvania City and Regional Planning Studio. This studio builds on the findings of last spring’s Penn Plan for America Studio, which concluded that most of America’s Tgrowth in the first half of the 21st century would occur in eight emerging “SuperCity” or “Mega” regions. This year’s studio focuses on one of these eight – the connected urban region stretching from the northern fringe of metropolitan Boston to the southernmost suburbs of Washington DC – first identified by Jean Gottmann in 1961 as “Megalopolis.” This report summarizes the global context of networked cities, the current identity of the region including existing strengths and weaknesses, and concludes with a strategic vision for the MegaRegion. A team of students and faculty at the Georgia Institute of Technology are conducting parallel research in a second emerging region in the Southeast U.S. The Tech team is focused on the Piedmont Atlantic Macropolitan (PAM) region, centered on Atlanta and stretching from North Carolina to Alabama. Both studios had the opportunity to share findings and ideas at a mid- semester charrette on SuperCities held at the Fundación Metrópoli in Madrid, Spain from March 7th to 11th, 2005. The goal of the workshop was to strengthen the Penn and Tech teams’ understanding of the innovative planning occurring in similar large regions in the European Union. The studios also looked to the charette’s distinguished European faculty to aid in translating this international experience to the Northeast and Southeast mega-regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Spatial and Temporal Changes and Expansion Patterns in Mainland Chinese Urban Land Between 1995 and 2015
    remote sensing Article Analysis of Spatial and Temporal Changes and Expansion Patterns in Mainland Chinese Urban Land between 1995 and 2015 Chuanzhou Cheng 1,2, Xiaohuan Yang 1,2,* and Hongyan Cai 1 1 State Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China; [email protected] (C.C.); [email protected] (H.C.) 2 University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-10-6488-8608 Abstract: China has experienced greater and faster urbanization than any other country, and while coordinated regional development has been promoted, urbanization has also introduced various problems, such as an increased scarcity of land resources, uncontrolled demand for urban land, and disorderly development of urban fringes. Based on GIS, remote sensing data, and spatial statistics covering the period 1995–2015, this study identified the patterns, as well as spatial and temporal changes, with respect to urban land expansion in 367 mainland Chinese cities. Over this study period, the area of urban land in mainland China increased from 3.05 to 5.07 million km2, at an average annual growth rate of 2.56%. This urban land expansion typically occurred the fastest in medium-sized cities, followed by large cities, and then small cities, with megacities and megalopolises exhibiting the slowest expansion rates. Nearly 70% of the new urban land came from arable land, 11% from other built land, such as pre-existing rural settlements, and 15% from forests and grasslands.
    [Show full text]
  • IN the FACE of GENTRIFICATION: Case Studies of Local Efforts to Mitigate Displacement
    IN THE FACE OF GENTRIFICATION: Case Studies of Local Efforts to Mitigate Displacement Diane K. Levy Jennifer Comey Sandra Padilla In the Face of Gentrification: Case Studies of Local Efforts to Mitigate Displacement Copyright © 2006 Diane K. Levy Jennifer Comey Sandra Padilla The Urban Institute Metropolitan Housing and Communities Policy Center 2100 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20037 The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute or to its trustees or funders. Acknowledgements Acknowledgements We would like to thank the Fannie Mae Foundation for funding and helping give shape to this study. In particular, Sohini Sarkhar, formerly with the Foundation, helped move the study along from start to completion. Anonymous reviewers provided by the Fannie Mae Foundation offered us excellent comments on the draft report, which we took to heart in our revisions. The study itself, of course, was dependent upon the willingness of people in each of the six study sites to meet with us and share their experiences and expertise on neighborhood change and affordable housing. We extend a special thanks to each of them for making this study possible. Their names and affiliations can be found in the list of resources. We are grateful for the help of Urban Institute colleagues. Jessica Cigna and Kathryn Pettit provided us access to HMDA and Census data specific to our study sites, as well as advice on developing the methodology for site selection. We greatly appreciate the work of Diane Hendricks with production of the report, which would not have happened without Marge Turner’s support for publication.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Infill Development on Travel Behavior
    Research in Transportation Economics 67 (2018) 54e67 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Research in Transportation Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/retrec The influence of infill development on travel behavior Louis A. Merlin Florida Atlantic University, USA article info abstract Article history: While the evidence that the built environment can influence travel behavior to date is fairly robust, the Received 2 February 2017 influence of specific, identifiable policy actions is limited. One policy action that can potentially change Received in revised form travel behavior is increasing infill development, particularly if that development is located near the 22 June 2017 center of a major metropolitan region. This study examines the influence of a large-scale, infill devel- Accepted 27 June 2017 opment, Atlantic Station, which opened in 2005 just west of Midtown Atlanta. The study uses propensity Available online 2 February 2018 scores and differences-in-differences research designs to identify how travel patterns changed for new residents and for existing residents of the area around Atlantic Station, respectively. Atlantic Station JEL classification: R41 reduced vehicle miles traveled and increased alternative mode share for its new residents, but it did not reduce the vehicle miles traveled or increase alternative mode share for the existing residents of the area Keywords: around Atlantic Station. Infill development © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Vehicle miles traveled Travel behavior Difference-in-differences 1. Introduction Station development is a large-scale, mixed-use, infill development that occurred on a former brownfield site close to the center of the The goal of reducing vehicular dependence through a supportive Atlanta metropolitan region.
    [Show full text]