Defining%20the%20Economic%20Benefits%20of%20Mass%20Transit - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Defining%20the%20Economic%20Benefits%20of%20Mass%20Transit

Description:

Defining the Economic Benefits of Mass Transit – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:133
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 129
Provided by: Sco297
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Defining%20the%20Economic%20Benefits%20of%20Mass%20Transit


1
Defining the Economic Benefits of Mass Transit
  • Scott Bernstein to the
  • Wisconsin State Legislature
  • Special Committee on Regional Transportation
    Authority
  • October 9, 2008
  • scott_at_cnt.org
  • http//htaindex.cnt.org

2
Purpose of Presentation
  • To define an objective and achievable set of
    economic benefits for increasing transportation
    choice in Wisconsin communities
  • Review whats known already and illustrate with
    examples from within the State

3
Economic Benefits
  • What determines the need to travel
  • A measure you can take to the bank location
    efficiency and the housing transportation
    affordability index
  • Value creation and value capture associated with
    different scales of development
  • The value of time savings
  • Job creation
  • Environmental improvement

4
Wisconsin Statewide Income Distribution 1999-2007
  • Median grew 43791 to 50578
  • Mean grew 53064 to 63726
  • Median needed to grow to 54,550 to pace
    inflation
  • Fell behind 331 per HH per month

5
Distribution of Income in Five Wisconsin Metro
Areas 1999-2007
Gap between yellow and red is Amount income fell
short of inflation
  • Inflation reduced buying power 24.5
  • La Crosse increased 21.45
  • Milwaukee increased 12.72
  • Green Bay increased 10.77
  • Appleton increased 19.83
  • Madison increased 21.30
  • None really kept up

6
While General Inflation was 24.5, the Price of
Gasoline Tripled from 1.45 to 4.25/gallon
7
In Wisconsin from 2000 to Present, Housing Costs
Rose Twice as Fast as Income, While Gasoline
Costs Rose 12 Times as Fast as Income and 6 Times
Faster than Housing
193
25
34
16
8
Percentage of Daily VMT Traveling in Each
Wisconsin Urbanized Area in 2006
9
Bypassing the Local EconomyPortion of Daily
Traffic Traveling Freeways
San Diego
Columbus
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Milwaukee
Portland
10
Daily VMT Per Capita in Each Wisconsin Urbanized
Area in 2006
Note 20 VMT/Capita/Day 18,250 per HH per Year
11
Who Sprawled Most? Land Use vs. Population Change
1982-1997
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
ExposedMoodys Economy.com July 2008
15
Trends Shaping Demand for Business Locations
  • Population
  • Workforce
  • Cost of living
  • Quality of local and regional transportation
  • Quality of inter-city transportation
  • Exposure to energy prices
  • Access to knowledge institutions and workers

16
Trends Shaping Demand for Residential Locations
  • Aging and demographics
  • Climate
  • Quality of local and regional transportation
  • Quality of inter-city transportation
  • Cost of livinge.g. energy expenditures
  • Perceived coolnesscultural amenities, adaptive
    character, proximity to colleges, etc.

17
Significant Trends We Cannot Avoid
  • Energy pricespeak oil within 5 and possibly 2
    years todays 100 oil will rise to between 177
    and 504/barrel as early as 2012
  • Climate changeincreased electricity demand, crop
    cycle disruption, limits on water supplies and
    shipping season, possible limits on aviation
  • Demographicsaging population, smaller
    households, immigration
  • Technologycontinued automation, information
    system integration
  • WorkforceDemand for trained and skilled growing
    in excess of capacity
  • Globalizationcompetition increasingly Bangalore
    and Shanghai not just Los Angeles, Phoenix and
    New York

18
Wisconsins Metro and Micropolitan Areas and
Cities Core Assets
  • 15-20 regions with core cities
  • Most have an institution of higher education
  • Most are regional health care centers
  • Most have designated historic districts
  • Most have newer industrial districts
  • Each originally served by streetcars, inter-urban
    electric railways and steam railways
  • Location efficiency still reflected in basic
    street patterns and land uses and statewide ROW
  • All have significant plans to improve local
    transportation choices and are looking for
    investment partners

19
How the Market Views Milwaukee MSAMoodys 2008
  • Strengths
  • Clean balance sheets growing incomes
  • Low living costs
  • Weaknesses
  • Rising health costs
  • Weak migration trends
  • Weakening housing market
  • Sub-prime mortgage exposure
  • Exposure to gas prices
  • Upside Forecast
  • Emerging downtown developments
  • Improved infrastructure for transportation
  • High speed rail links to neighboring economies
  • Downside Risks
  • State cannot reel in health care costs
  • State and local budget deficits
  • Foreclosures get out of control
  • Long term recession

20
Need to Increase Income AND Reduce Cost of Living
  • WI 2000-2008 Gas Prices Grew 12 Times Faster than
    Income
  • 2000-2008 Gas Price Increase Bled Extra 5.1
    Billion Annually from WI
  • Total Statewide Passenger Tab gtgt35B
  • WisDOT Annual Budget _at_2B
  • Total Government Transportation Resources ltlt7B

21
Demographic Price Trends Promote Urbanism and
Demand Reduction
  • Continuous drop in household size since 1790
  • Aging in place
  • Married w/kids only 23 of total
  • Rising energy and gas prices
  • Limited public funds to keep sprawling

22
Trends that Are Transforming Government
  • Changing the Rules
  • Using Performance Measurement
  • Providing Choice and Incentives
  • Performing in Real Time
  • Engaging Citizens
  • Using Networks and Partnerships
  • Overall, Steering rather than Rowing

23
Trends that Are Particularly Affecting
Traditional State Transportation Roles
  • Traditional revenues declining, victims of
    vehicle efficiency, alternative fuels, earmarking
  • Agencies set up for one set of purposes (getting
    nation out of the mud, farm-market) face new
    realities (population mostly urban and
    metropolitan, globalizing economy)
  • Energy and climate constraints
  • No new taxes pledges limiting solutions

24
What States Are Attempting (NGA, National
Commission, FHWA)
  • Tax-based strategies to increase revenue (gas
    taxes, truck-weight fees, vehicle fees, or shifts
    to local sales and property taxes)
  • Tolls and road-pricing strategiesexisting v new
    capacity, price congestion, charge mileage
  • Debt financingfederal state credit enhancement
  • Asset leasesP3 and concessions
  • Shifting responsibilities to other levels of
    governmentcities, MPOs, special service,
    charging impact fees, marginal prices, and TIFs,
    SSAs, BIDs
  • Reducing the level of travel demand
  • Managing assets more efficientlylife extension,
    right-sizing, reducing dependence on most
    expensive system elements

25
What States Are TryingTravel Demand Reduction
  • Coordination between land use and infrastructure
    planningNJ ties to city planning to preserve
    capacity, CA increased sub-allocation to MPOs who
    tie investment to housing, PA right-sizing cuts
    road costs in half, use CSS to build faster,
    better cheaper
  • Use transit to reduce VMTmake use of federal tax
    credits (100/month), MD adds state tax credit,
    MTC and NJ provide housing incentives near transit

26
What States Are Trying
  • MA, CA, NJ using bond proceeds to support transit
    oriented development
  • Most states are experimenting with flexibility to
    directly support streetcar, LRT or BRT
  • Partnerships with both passenger and freight rail
    companies
  • Leverage federal highway and transit block grants
    GARVEEs, etc.

27
What Wisconsin Could be Leveraging
  • Experiment with flexibilityincrease
    sub-allocation in exchange for new local revenue
  • Encourage local ballot initiatives other forms
    of participation
  • Build better capacity at regional level
  • Use 100 percent CMAQ shares to jump-start local
    transit
  • Examine purchase of service agreements, finance
    against pledged revenues in new transit corridors
  • New partnerships with local governments and
    airport operators
  • New partnerships with cities and electric
    utilities

28
How the Market Views Wisconsin Price Waterhouse
Coopers/ULI Emerging Trends 2008, Surveys Fund
Managers Investing 717 Billion in Equity,
Leveraging 3.3 Trillion in Debt
  • Top Picks for Development
  • Build TOD almost cant miss
  • Think Green
  • Focus on Mixed Use and Infill
  • Top Picks for Property Sectors
  • Buy multifamily
  • Buy or hold industrial
  • Buy residential building lots
  • Exercise caution in office and hotels
  • Chill on retail

29
How the Market Views WIPWC/ULI 2008
Commercial/MF Development Prospects Ratings
1 Abysmal 5 Fair 9 Excellent
Chicago, San Antonio
Milwaukee MSA
30
Demand for Housing Near Fixed Guideway
TransitWill Grow by 9 Million Households
2005-2030
Wisconsin Cities Not on This Chart Market
Believes Cant Have TOD without the T
31
Declining Importance of Journey to Work Most
Trips are Short Trips for Non-Work Purposes
18 Work-Related
32
Legacy Transit Features Helped Shape Land Use
405 Miles of Street Railway 57 Daily Rail Round
Trips Between Chicago and Milwaukee Higher
population densities Much lower vehicle
ownership Transportation expenditures were 5
percent of HH budgets
33
(No Transcript)
34
1910
35
Historical changes
  • 1920, Food was 41 percent of HH expenditures,
    housing 27, transportation 3 percent
  • Today food 16, housing 25-35, transportation
    15-35 percent respectively

36
Columbus, Ohio Broad High Peak-Value at
Streetcar Intersection
1902
  • Note
  • Increasing Density,
  • Mixed-Use Development,
  • and
  • Human Traffic Control Umbrella

1879
Map shows that peak Land values were along street
car lines and their Intersectionsmaps like
these were available for all US citiessee next
slide
1912
37
Transparency Drove the Market Through 1930, Note
Peak-Value at Peachtree, Marietta Decatur
  • Economically Legible Atlanta
  • Transit-Oriented Atlanta

38
Street Benefit Districts Helped Cities Pay the
Tab A Machine to Mine the Land
Electric miles in paved streets
of total municipal revenue
39
There Was Competition for Public Space
40
Most Places Abandoned Their Transit Systems
41
Americas Inter-City System Was Largely Abandoned
42
And Public Policy Favored a Different Vision
43
Historical Precedent for Rapid Change From 1885
to 1902
1920
  • America went from 1 electric street railway to 1
    in every city of 5,000
  • Rate of growth to the Internet
  • Demand boosted by important social movementse.g.
    home economics
  • Wisconsin had good electric street railway
    coverage
  • Madison Railways had 18 miles of services of
    which 6 miles were in paved streets, Green Bay
    had 43.2 miles
  • Appleton, Ashland, Beloit, Cedarburg, Eau Clair,
    Janesville, Kenosha, La Crosse, Milwaukee,
    Oshkosh, Walworth, Waupaca, Wausau, Wisconsin
    Rapids
  • 788 miles of service, 1179 cars, 129 buses and 53
    freight cars in 1924
  • 236 million passengers and 180 million in
    revenue

Getting to scale through network economieswhen
a large number of connected small investments are
worth more than a few big ones
44
Buy Cars or Build Wealth?
  • Car sales and savings move in opposite directions
  • Will RogersWell be the first generation in the
    history of the planet that drove to the poorhouse
    in an automobile (1931)

No-cost car loans after 9/11 Made it worse
45
How to Get There
46
What Influences Travel Demand CO2 From
Passenger Transportation
  • Net Residential Density
  • Transit Level of Service
  • Pedestrian Environment
  • Income
  • HH Size
  • Gasoline Price
  • Journey to Work
  • Access to Amenities
  • Urban Form

VMT
CO2
47
The Big Drop
  • 25 years of measured VMT
  • Moving 12- month totals
  • All roads
  • Note leveling or dropping 2005-present

48
Sample Asset Accessibility
  • Density, Transit Access (Proximity, Frequency,
    Connectivity), and Amenities Determine
    Transportation Demand
  • Statistics Used to Estimate Likely Travel Demand
  • Demand is Verified by Measuring Vehicle Ownership
    and Extent of Use
  • Demand is Then Valued in Dollars and Cents

49
Explain Using Regression?
50
Curve has been shown to work for 52 US Regions,
London, Paris, and 37 Japanese Cities
51
Different parts of Chicago region more exposed
than others
  • Varies from under 1000-1900 in Cook County to
    4000-6000 in collar counties annually
  • Function of available transportation choice
  • Calculated using 4/gallon and
  • 20.3 MPG

52
Mapping the Benefit
  • Good transit access yields one less car per HH
  • Lowers cost of living by 300-600/month
  • Equivalent of increasing income 10-20 percent tax
    free

53
Showing the Benefits of Capturing the Value
54
Where Has it Been Tried
  • LEMs in Seattle, Chicago, San Francisco, and Los
    Angeles (Fannie Mae and local lenders)
  • Take the T Home Mortgage in Boston (Fannie Mae
    and state housing finance)
  • Smart Commute Mortgages in several dozen cities
    (Fannie Mae plus local lenders)Columbus

55
Another Approach Indexing Truer Affordability
and Relating it to Climate Change
https//htaindex.cnt.org
How Housing Affordability is Usually
CalculatedThen and Now
  • Historically Traced to 19th Century idealA
    Weeks Pay for a Months Rent
  • Today benchmark affordability is defined as
    housing costs/Income less than or equal to 30
    Percent of target population AMI

56
Where We Build Matters Poor Locations Drive Up
Emissions and Costs
57
What All Households in 28 Metro Areas Earning
Between 20 and 50,000 Spend on Housing and
Transportation as a Percentage of Income
Milwaukee MSA 30 for Housing And 25 for
Transportation 5 for HT
Average 30 for Housing And 27 for
Transportation 57 for HT
58
Percent of Income Spent by Households Earning
Less than 20,000 on Housing Transportation in
28 Metro Areas
Milwaukee MSA 109 for HT
59
Percent of Income Spent by Households Earning
20,000 to 35,000 on Housing Transportation in
28 Metro Areas
Milwaukee MSA 62 for HT
60
Percent of Income Spent by Households Earning
35,000 to 50,000 in 28 Metro Areas
Milwaukee MSA 46 for H T
61
Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha MSA Mirror Images
Density and Vehicle Ownership
0.02 to 32.19 HH per Residential Acre
1.13 to 3.52 Vehicles Per HH
62
Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha MSA Vehicles per HH and
VMT/HH/Year
1.13 to 3.52 Vehicles Per HH
8376 to 38175 VMT per HH per Year
63
Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha MSA Transit Ridership
and Connectivity
0 to 32.45 Scheduled Rides per Hour
0.03 to 17.76 Percent of Workers
64
Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha MSA Spatial
Mismatch Housing Growth Distant from Job Centers
2762 to 109222 Jobs per Sq. Mile
0.02 to 32.19 HH per Res. Acre
65
Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha MSA Two Views of
Affordability Housing _at_30 vs HT_at_45 of Median
Income
Large number of homes No longer affordable
12.18 to 35.24 of Median HH Income
30.19 to 66.45 of Median HH Income
66
Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha MSA Two Views of
Affordability for HHs Earning AMI
462,349 Affordable Housing Units, _at_ Hlt30
313,486 Affordable Housing Units, HT lt45
An Estimated 148,863 Affordable Housing Units
Lost When Transportation Costs Are Included
Note Affordable units based on the number of
households paying lt30 for housing lt 45 for
housing transportation. The assumption is made
that each HH will occupy 1 housing unit.
67
Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha MSA As Gas Prices Soared
from 1.68 to 4.02 per Gallon June 30 2000 vs
June 30 2008
1757 to 7519 per HH per Year
692 to 3551 per HH per Year
68
Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha MSA Total Monthly HH
Transportation Costs June 30 2000 vs June 30 2008
590 to 1762 per HH per Month
747 to 2093 per HH per Month
69
Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha MSA Percentage of Income
Spent on Transportation June 30 2000 vs. June 30
2008
15.6 to 41.65 of Income
19.42 to 42.2 of Income
70
Impact of Rising Gas Prices and Increased Travel
Choices on Oregon HH Costs
  • June 30 2000, 1.59 per gallon, Median Income
    40,916/hh
  • 0 car family, 150 mass transit 125
    car-sharing 50 taxis 25 deliveries
    350/month 4200 per year 10.3 percent of
    income
  • 1 car family, 5000 VMT 5574 13.6 percent of
    income
  • 1 car family, 10000 VMT 6069 14.8 of
    income
  • 1 car family, 15000 VMT 6565 16 of income
  • 2 car family, 20000 VMT 12134, 29.7 of
    income
  • 2 car family, 25000 VMT 12630 30.9 of income
  • June 30 2008, 4.18 per gallon, Median Income
    46,090/hh
  • 0 car family, per above, 9.1 percent of income
  • 1 car family, 5000 VMT, 6183 13.4 of income
  • 1 car family, 10000 VMT, 7289 15.8 of
    income
  • 1 car family, 15000 VMT, 8429 18.3 of
    income
  • 2 car family, 20000 VMT, 14572 31.6 of
    income
  • 2 car family, 25000 VMT, 16677 36.2 of
    income

71
Sample Metropolitan Area
  • 60,000 households earning 50,000 or 4166/month
  • 3 Billion in disposable income
  • Median monthly housing cost 1422
  • Assume 2 cars/HH, 20,000 VMT 1388 per month
  • Housing and transportation each account for 33
    percent of disposable income, 66 percent total
    HT
  • 1 Billion for Transportation spent out of pocket

72
A Closer Look in 2000Again, Block Group
Resolution Shows Working Family Migration to
Exurbs
73
The Effect of Drive til You Qualify High T
Costs with Distance
74
Its Not Over Yet -Gas Costs Keep Climbing, -12
months foreclosures Up 5 in Cook County Il -Up
70 in surrounding collar counties -Worst where
income is low VMT exposure is high
75
Foreclosures April 2008Wisconsin Moderately
High August 19Warning Issued on Alt-A Mortgages
Starting in November
76
Impact of Transportation Choice on Local
Affordability
  • Market promotes Drive til you qualify
  • Keeps Housing cost deceptively low, savings wiped
    out by high travel demand, up to 28,000 extra
    vehicle-miles per year
  • Providing sufficient transport choice results in
    1 less car
  • Locating in smaller homes, lower operating costs
  • Lowers 55 percent to 40-45 percent and
    significant emissions reductions

77
Some Examples of Transportation Choices
78
TOD Is
  • Location efficiency Dense, transit-accessible,
    pedestrian-friendly
  • Rich Mix of Choices Wide range of mobility,
    housing and shopping options
  • Value Capture Good service connections, local
    amenities support place-making, scorekeeping
    attention to financial returns
  • Place-Making places for people, enriches
    existing qualities, provides new connections,
    works with landscape, builds reputation
  • Resolution of Tension between TODs as Nodes and
    Places Works to support travel networks and
    communities

79
TOD is not
  • Just for commuters Work-related trips just 18
    percent of total travel
  • Auto-oriented transit Way too much land in
    Chicago devoted to park-and-ride lots
  • Just a place to sleep at night People need to
    shop, eat, visit without getting in a car
  • Only the transit property All successful TODs
    are joint developments between cities, transit
    operators, private investor/owners, and
    communities

80
Filling In Missing Links by Adding Streetcar
Circulation Reduced Portland VMT Transport
Carbon 67 Part of Portland Climate Plan (From
Street Smart, CTOD 2006)
81
TOD Opportunities in City of Chicago 198 Total
CTA and Metra Rail Stations in City, 401 Stations
in full 6-county area, more in SE Wisconsin and
NW Indiana
82
51 CTA Station Areas with Low Density Need to
Improve--60 of City HHs Live Within ½ Mile of
CTA Rail Stop, 15 emit 4-11 Tons/Year CO2, 39
emit 2.4-4.4 Tons, 6 emit 0-2.4 for
transportExcluding Loop
83
TOD Opportunities Red Line and Green Line South
  • CHA Transformation Plan
  • Near South Side redevelopment well under way
  • Blues District, Olympics dependent on good
    transit
  • Olympics USX need for improved circulation
    suggest bringing streetcars back
  • Large post-industrial tracts could be served by
    Red Line extensions and streetcarssee case study
    below
  • Densities 7-20 HH/RA, 4-10 Tons/HH/Year
  • Significant infill opportunity

Garfield Station
Proposed Olympic Village
84
60 of City HHs Live Within ½ Mile of Rail Stop,
15 emit 4-11 Tons/Year CO2, 39 emit 2.4-4.4
Tons, 6 emit 0-2.4 for transport
Garfield Station
Using TOD to Provide Better Choices-Up to 95
Reduction
  • Location efficiency
  • Mixed Use
  • Value Capture
  • Place-making
  • Regional network access
  • NOT just a place for commuters

Carbon Neutral Olympics
Garfield Station
Proposed Olympic Village
85
Some Initial Results for 2020 Preliminary Subject
to Revision
  • Sample TOD strategy
  • Support priority for Chicago development at 105
    TODs
  • Assume increase of CAFÉ from 20 to 35, 10
    reduction in fuel carbon
  • Density increases of 5 to 50 by TOD type
  • Reduces total CO2 by 42
  • Each 1 million additional local spending
    supports 9 retail and 9 service jobs
  • Supports 1,000 or more jobs per TOD
  • 1.1 MMTso far
  • More possible

86
Range of Energy Intensities for Local/Regional
Transport Options
87
Carrying Capacities for Local/Regional Transport
Options Hourly Passengers/Lane-Direction
88
Calgary CA500 passengers, 5-25 miles, 15-40
minute trips, no oil, zero GHGs1st 100 Wind
Powered Transit System
89
Electric Traction CorridorsMulti-modal
transportation, electric reliability and economic
development strategy
90
DresdenRevived old US practice of using transit
assets to solve local freight challenge
91
Avenue B Trolley from River North
CharretteLow-Rise, High Density, Mixed-Use
Character
92
Works in Small Areas Freiburg GermanyModest
Density Good Coverage Ease of Use Low Car
Use Affordability
93
Electric Trolley Buses
  • Can operate on trolley lines or independently
  • Same cost as hybrid diesels
  • More fuel efficient
  • Operating in Seattle, Boston, Philly, SF,
    Vancouver
  • 10-15 more revenue/bus

94
Why Not Just Add Better Buses? We Will, But We
Also Need Transit That Can
  • Generate private financing
  • Organize development
  • Deeply reduce emissions fuel cost exposure
  • Attract tourists and occasional riders
  • Offer legibility
  • Operate better in pedestrian environments.

95
Smart Grid could change market for electric
transportation
  • Illinois Smart Grid Consensus ForumMayor Daley
    is co-chair, CNT staffs
  • PHEVs in 2009
  • Micro-grids soon
  • Wind-electric now
  • New shared infrastructure arrangements with
    utilities
  • Customers and communities paid for demand
    shaping-now
  • Federal interest declared in supporting

96
Most TOD is Neighborhood Scale Sample Larger
Scale Mission Bay SF
  • Note 3d Street F Line Streetcar runs down the
    center
  • Grid-connected, mixed use
  • Allows 1 car or less zoning
  • Minimizes unnecessary parking

97
South Lake UnionLarge Scale Redevelopment Linked
to Downtown Regional Rail by Streetcar
  • Plan is for all homes, jobs to come with pre-paid
    passes
  • Streetcar opened in December 2007
  • 1 car zoning
  • LRT opens 2009

98
Rethinking the Limited Access HighwayMilwaukee
County Post-War Plan
99
Resulted in Lakefront Elevated Highway for
Short-Distance Travel
100
Measured Effect of De-Elevating Park East Freeway
in Milwaukee
  • Looked at 2000 and 2006 valuation
  • Citywide
  • Downtown
  • ¼ mile from new McKinley Blvd.
  • At the new boulevard

101
Reconnecting Accelerated Value in Milwaukee
  • 133 Citywide
  • 144 TID
  • 147 at ¼ mile PEF
  • 288 at intersect footprint

102
Reconnecting Accelerated Value in Portland
  • 41 ½ Mile I-5 Buffer
  • 213 ½ Mile I-405
  • 397 Downtown Waterfront URA
  • 460 ½ Mile Buffer TMWP

103
Case Study Car Sharing
104
Application of Characteristics Car Sharing
(cont.)
  • 200 cars serve 10000 members in 32 neighborhoods
    and 2 suburbs
  • Each car shared by 37 households
  • Pay as you go pricing
  • Low overhead
  • 46 percent sell or delay purchasing
  • All increase use of scheduled mass transit
    services
  • Takes 17 cars off the road for each car in
    service
  • On the way to breaking even

105
Impact of 1 Shared Car per Block
  • 112 cars per square mile, 25000 blocks total
  • 37 users per car
  • 4144 users per square mile, 915,824 users
    citywide
  • Savings per user 5,064 VMT/year
  • Savings per user 1.764 Metric Tons of CO2
    equivalent per year
  • Total annual savings 1.62 Million MT
  • Removes 400,000 vehicles from the road

106
Car-Sharing Poses an Interesting Choice
  • Further parking development will likely be
    structured at 20,000 to 60,000 per space
  • At the low end, each 1 million only gets you 50
    spaces
  • Each shared car takes 17 cars off the road
  • If making room is the object, providing 3 shared
    cars and the spaces to put them provides the same
    effect as 1 Million worth of parking, at
    virtually no cost

107
(No Transcript)
108
  • Streetcar links several distinct districts
  • Fares interchangeable with TriMet LRT and bus and
    with South Waterfront Tram
  • 1.75 or 100 annual
  • Operated by Portland Streetcar Inc.
  • Runs every 13 minutes

109
(No Transcript)
110
Portland South Waterfront Opening 2007
  • Serves residential, recreational, business,
    institutional uses
  • Links to LRT, bus and aerial tram
  • Mixed income, mixed use TOD

111
Filling In Missing Links by Adding Streetcar
CirculationMixed Use/Mixed Income Reduced
Portland VMT Transport Carbon 67 Part of
Portland Climate Plan (From Street Smart, CTOD
2006)
Kenosha WI State DOT Paying for Expansion
Oregon Governor Kulongonski At Recent Streetcar Op
ening
112
(No Transcript)
113
Using the New Index
  • Current
  • SFMTC set goal to reduce HT by 10 in 2035,
    FHLB uses in AHP screen
  • AtlantaMixed Income Communities Initiative
    reframed affordability goals
  • ILBusiness Location Efficiency Act screens tax
    credits and CMAP using to help suburbs meet goals
  • Oakland ChicagoExperimental counseling program
    uses data to help lower cost of living
  • Chicago and nationallyused to support climate
    mitigation plans
  • Proposed
  • Adopt new HT affordability index and get HUD and
    DOT to use it
  • Support enhanced counseling and information tools
  • Disclose household transportation and energy
    costslink to MLS, Google, etc.
  • Underwrite location efficient and possibly
    carbon-neutral mortgages

114
Use Recurring Events to Get to Scale
  • Codes--Up to 25,000 permits/year in Bexar County,
    Offer Quick Green Permits
  • It takes 5 to 7 years for ½ of all properties to
    change ownership
  • Use due-on-sale strategy to require carbon
    performance through efficiency and offsets
  • Make EEM and LEMs features of all mortgages as
    opposed to a productbetween 75 and 100 homes per
    day
  • Don Shoup-UCLA
  • Chart showed opportunity of requiring 2 trees to
    be planted at re-sale time

115
Two Savings Paths to Homeownership (Avg. HH
Expenditures for 35,536 Annual Income)
Save 31/month from reduction in Other
expenditures
Current Savings
IDA Programs
Time to home with 21 match 11 yrs
Time to home with 21 match 20 to Community
2 yrs
Equity Express Savings
The Community benefits by increased local
ownership, a cleaner environment, and additional
capital.
IDAs plus Resource Efficiency Programs for
Transportation, Energy, Infrastructure, etc.
Community Benefits
Save 212/month from reduced HH expenditures
116
Capital Stock Emissions of Homes and Vehicles
  • Homes
  • 126 Million total units, 5.5 Million sold/year,
    10/minute
  • Net value of 17.3 Trillion
  • Adding 1.8 million homes worth 800 Billion per
    year
  • Losing 250 Billion/year to depreciation
  • Emit 8.1 Tons/HH CO2e for electricity, 5.5 for
    natural gas per HH, 1.51 Billion Tons annually
  • Doesnt include HH waste
  • Vehicles
  • 216 Million total, 55 million sold/year,
    100/minute
  • Net value of 1.4 Trillion
  • Adding 58 million vehicles worth 774 Billion per
    year
  • Losing 323 Billion/year to depreciation
  • Emit 10.1 Tons/HH CO2e for gasoline or 1.12
    Billion Tons annually
  • Doesnt include trips by aviation, bus, or train

117
(No Transcript)
118
Seattle South Lake Union Streetcar
  • Large waterfront development at north end of
    downtown
  • Developer wanted link to main rail station
  • Started December 2007
  • City holding hearings on four more routes

119
Portland Aerial TramCitys new icon
  • Links South Waterfront to Oregon Health Sciences
    Campus
  • Private operating company
  • 3,500 riders/day
  • Links to streetcar, bus, LRT

120
Tandem Economic Benefits
  • Reduced household cost of living, 10 to 20
    percent of income tax-free
  • Increased savings rate and wealth creation
  • Increased property values and reliable improved
    tax base
  • Reduced travel delays
  • Improved use of scarce public capital

121
What the City and CTA Can Do
  • Push where to build AND what to build--City
  • Expedite permits PUD near transitCity CPC
  • Market transit areas for employmentCity, CTA,
    RTA
  • Market transit benefitRTA, CTA, Metra
  • Use new zoning to reduce minimum parking--City
  • Fill gaps with car-sharingProviders, City, CTA
  • Improve pedestrian environmentCity and CTA
  • Use Joint Development creativelyCTA, Metra, RTA
  • Increase convenience shops at transit CTA City
  • Enhance transit level of service (frequency,
    connectivity, and hours)CTA, RTA, Legislature

122
Mobility Management Bringing Jobs to People
  • Jobs to People
  • AtlantaBell South relocates 11,000 jobs from 72
    sites to 3 TODs
  • DallasPolicy of assisting, documenting and
    sharing similar success stories
  • ChicagoEach 1 Million in increased HH
    expenditures supporting 9 retail and 9.3 service
    jobs
  • One-stop Services
  • Rides for the Bay Area and Transit Center
    NYprovide dedicated professional passenger
    logistics services
  • Silicon Valley Manufacturers Groupprovide
    transit services bulk purchase for business
    members
  • Alternative transit servicePortland Streetcar
    Inc., I-Go Car Sharing, etc. fill missing links
    and boost scheduled service

123
Big Opportunities to Get this Right Regionally
  • Highway re-build choices
  • Inter-city Market sharing between Milwaukee and
    Chicago
  • Expand Amtrak frequency
  • Build KRM corridor and run both local and
    express, plan for electrification
  • Build out streetcar and electric trolley bus
    systems
  • Provide creative local choicescar-sharing,
    incent better local shopping choices
  • Link all this to household information systems
    for real time feedback

124
Observations
  • Transportation costs families about as much as
    housing
  • This cost is excluded from everyday decisions and
    public policies
  • Compounds financial stress
  • Current proposals to mitigate mortgage crisis
    dont take transportation costs into account
  • Crisis isnt over yet, gas prices are rising, and
    drive til you qualify seems part of the landscape

125
Key Findings and Messages Flying Blind, Exposed
and Slipping
  • Ohios transportation policy priorities need to
    better serve the needs of the states people,
    communities and regions
  • Rising energy prices are draining billions from
    each regions economy
  • The state can no longer afford just accommodate
    growth in traffic
  • Transportation now costs working families more
    than shelter
  • The state can partner with local governments and
    private sector to leverage its scarce resources
  • Increased travel efficiency can boost disposable
    income by 10 to 20 percent tax free
  • The marketplace will reward this with increased
    investment and
  • These solutions also get Ohio on track to address
    climate change

126
Inter-City Travel is Both Long Distance and Short
Distance Between Metro Areas
127
A Ladder of Opportunity
Lead the Chorus Reconnected, Vital, Cool and a
Framework that the Market Is Seeking
Manage the Course Build Capacity to React To
Changing Market
Stay the Course Disconnected, More of the Same
128
Thank You!
  • scott_at_cnt.org
  • www.cnt.org
  • http//htaindex.cnt.org
About PowerShow.com