California Policy Environmental Justice Federal Policy NewsFlash

Policy in Motion Receives Underutilized DBE & Small Business Certification with New USDOT Rule to Expand Program

Policy in Motion is certified as an Underutilized Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE). The firm’s UDBE Certification is linked here — and can be found in the DBE Database under Firm Identification Number 39354

WASHINGTON – U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced in January a final rulemaking that will help economically and socially disadvantaged businesses take advantage of opportunities to participate in federally funded highway, transit and airport projects. The final rule, issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), will also hold states and local agencies more accountable for including disadvantaged businesses in their transportation plans.

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program helps small businesses owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals compete for government contracts. The Department also requires state and local transportation agencies to establish goals for DBE participation.

The Department of Transportation’s new rulemaking will require greater accountability from state and local transportation agencies for including disadvantaged businesses in their spending plans. Those that fail to meet established goals for DBE participation will be required to evaluate why the goals were not met and offer a plan to help meet the goal in the future.

In addition, the final rule will adjust the personal net worth limit for DBE owners for inflation from the present $750,000 to $1.32 million. The current limit was set in 1989 and has not been adjusted since.

The Department of Transportation’s rulemaking will also add provisions to ensure that prime contractors fulfill commitments to use DBE subcontractors. State and local agencies will be required to monitor each contract to make sure prime contractors are fulfilling their obligations and do not dismiss DBE subcontractors without good cause. The rule also requires state and local agencies to create a plan for improving the use of small businesses, including DBEs.

Another major change under the rulemaking will reduce burdens on small businesses seeking DBE certification in more than one state. As a result of today’s rulemaking, all states will be required to accept DBE certifications obtained in other states, unless the state finds good cause not to accept it. The rule establishes a process for resolving issues with respect to eligibility raised by states concerning out-of-state firms.

The Department anticipates issuing a proposed rulemaking to make changes in its regulation for airport concession DBEs paralleling those in today’s final regulation.

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s final rule to improve the DBE Program appeared on the Federal Register’s Electronic Public Inspection Desk today. For the full Federal Register notice please click here.


Environmental Justice Federal Policy GHG Reduction Metropolitan Planning NewsFlash Public Health Public Transit SB 375 Transportation Funding US DOT US HUD

Sacramento Region Launches $1.5 Million Grant for Sustainable Community Plans

Last week the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) held its first “Sacramento Regional Consortium” funded by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program. In partnership with other federal agencies including the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Transportation (DOT), the joint “Partnership for Sustainable Communities” includes the following six objectives which SACOG’s application reflected strongly:

• Providing more transportation choices.
• Promoting equitable, affordable housing.
• Enhancing economic competitiveness.
• Supporting existing communities.
• Coordinating policies and leverage investment.
• Valuing the uniqueness of communities and neighborhoods.

Lauren Michele highlights key points from the event below.

Federal Presence

Cynthia Abbott, Director of HUD’s District 9 Field Office, opened the event praising SACOG’s grant application as being nearly the highest ranked in the country in an extremely competitive process. She pointed to their plan, vision and partnerships as the key elements on why they received a $1.5 million Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant. Other California-based representatives of the Partnership for Sustainable Communities were present, including those from EPA-Region 9, DOT Federal Highway Administration’s California Division, and DOT Federal Transit Administration’s Region IX. In speaking with all four of the federal representatives after the event, it is clear that SACOG’s leadership is being used as a model across the county. While the impacts of the federal budget situation is highly uncertain, the Partnership is hopeful there will be additional Livability grant in the next fiscal year for applicants who did not receive funding during this year’s cycle.

SACOG’s New Planning Process

Joe Concannon from SACOG spoke on SACOG’s bottom-up and input-first approach to the development of their Senate Bill 375 required Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS). With an extensive partnership and steering committee including the Urban Land Institute, Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency, Regional Water Authority, Valley Vision, and the UC Davis Center for Regional Change, SACOG will be using the $1.5 million federal grant to collaboratively develop performance measures for placing the region’s Transit Priority Areas to work toward their regional per capita greenhouse gas reduction target of 7% by 2020 and 16% by 2035. Transit Priority Areas are defined in SB 375 as 20 dwelling units per acre of residential density within a half mile of transit, and SACOG will be leading a new planning process to engage stakeholders in the initial creation of performance measures for equity, health and economic development. They will be utilizing a “Return on Investment Tool” as well as an “Infrastructure Cost Model” to help guide the process of creating a plan which provides access to opportunities as a priority. As part of the federal grant, SACOG will also integrate their SCS with the Draft Council on Environmental Quality Principles/Guidelines at the federal level.

Integration with MTP Update

The Project Manager for SACOG’s Metropolitan Transportation Plan, Kacey Lizon, highlighted that 2/3 of the audience participants has not previously attended a SACOG’s MTP update event. She reviewed the three MTP growth scenarios under review at SACOG, which goals of per capita reductions in vehicle miles traveled between -13 and -15 percent by 2035, and increased transit ridership of up to 82 percent by 2035. While the most aggressive greenhouse gas reduction scenario was selected as the preferred growth option at nearly every MTP outreach workshop, SACOG’s recommended scenario will be a modified version between Scenario #2 and #3 as presented to the public. SACOG’s effort to expand the regional transportation planning process to other sustainability indicators including housing affordability, environmental justice, and economic development is being recognized by the federal government as a well-deserved model on how transportation policy impacts regional health and happiness. In fact, Chris Benner from the UC Davis Center for Regional Change even pointed to relevance of the “Gross National Happiness Index” as used in the country of Butan.

*The next Regional Consortium will be March 23th to gather input on “Health, Access, and Equity” performance measures*

Register Here

Environmental Justice NewsFlash Public Health Research

Forbes: “World’s Happiest Countries” Determined After Five Year Research Project

Similar to the “Quality of Life” metrics used in Growing Wealthier’s economic analysis of smart growth, Policy in Motion believes that we need to start framing transportation and land use planning and project priorities around factors that do not only consider environmental impacts and funding feasibility — rather we need to assess the full spectrum of social impacts from community design decisions  to include measures for our health and happiness.

Christopher Helman from Forbes highlights which countries are the “happiest” and why in the article below….


Think about it for a minute: What does happiness mean to you?

For most, being happy starts with having enough money to do what you want and buy what you want. A nice home, food, clothes, car, leisure. All within reason.

But happiness is much more than money. It’s being healthy, free from pain, being able to take care of yourself. It’s having good times with friends and family.

Furthermore, happiness means being able to speak what’s on your mind without fear, to worship the God of your choosing, and to feel safe and secure in your own home.

Happiness means having opportunity — to get an education, to be an entrepreneur. What’s more satisfying than having a big idea and turning it into a thriving business, knowing all the way that the harder you work, the more reward you can expect?

With this in mind, five years ago researchers at the Legatum Institute, a London-based nonpartisan think tank, set out to rank the happiest countries in the world. But because “happy” carries too much of a touchy-feely connotation, they call it “prosperity.”

Legatum recently completed its 2010 Prosperity Index, which ranks 110 countries, covering 90 per cent of the world’s population.

To build its index Legatum gathers upward of a dozen international surveys done by the likes of the Gallup polling group, the Heritage Foundation and the World Economic Forum. Each country is ranked on 89 variables sorted into eight subsections: economy, entrepreneurship, governance, education, health, safety, personal freedom and social capital.

The core conceit: Prosperity is complex; achieving it relies on a confluence of factors that build on each other in a virtuous circle.

“To use economic measurements alone to gauge the success of a nation would be equivalent to assessing the entire condition of a man simply by looking at his bank balance,” writes Peter Mandelson, former U.K. economic minister.

To that end, the inputs used to create the index are both objective and subjective: that’s because it’s not enough to know hard data like a country’s unemployment or inflation rates. It also matters how hard people think it is to find jobs, how convinced they are that hard work can bring success.

This can get complicated. In Nepal, for example, inflation is 11 per cent, unemployment 46 per cent. Yet a surprisingly high 50 per cent of the people say they are satisfied with their standard of living and 81 per cent have confidence in their banks. Could be they’re scared of voicing their true opinion in a shaky democracy, or maybe the Nepalese are just endemically happier people. Legatum adjusts for this, adding a variable called “ability to express political opinion without fear.”

What’s the most prosperous country in the world? Norway. What’s it got that the rest of the world doesn’t? The biggest bump comes from having the world’s highest per capita GDP of $53,000 a year. Norwegians have the second-highest level of satisfaction with their standards of living: 95 per cent say they are satisfied with the freedom to choose the direction of their lives; an unparalleled 74 per cent say other people can be trusted.

Cynics (particularly those leaving comments on Legatum’s excellent website) say Norway’s ranking is a fluke, that it’s a boring, godless (just 13 per cent go to church) homogeneous place to live with a massive welfare state bankrolled by high taxes. Without massive offshore reserves of oil and gas that it exports to the world through state-controlled Statoil, Norway’s GDP would be far smaller.

And yet joining Norway in the top 10 prosperous countries are its Scandinavian sisters Denmark, Finland and Sweden, with equally small and civilized Switzerland and the Netherlands also in the club. None of these countries are blessed with great hoards of oil and gas.

So what gives? What do these prosperous European nations have in common that can somehow explain their prosperity? Being an electoral democracy is almost a given — of the top 25 most prosperous countries, only Singapore and Hong Kong aren’t.

Being small helps too. Big countries have so many disparate groups (ethnic, geographic, civic) vying against each other that it’s hard for true social cohesion and trust to emerge, and harder to maintain high levels of safety. Among countries with populations of more than 150 million, the United States ranks highest, at No. 10.

What else? They are all borderline socialist states, with generous welfare benefits and lots of redistribution of wealth. Yet they don’t let that socialism cross the line into autocracy. Civil liberties are abundant (consider decriminalized drugs and prostitution in the Netherlands). There are few restrictions on the flow of capital or of labor. Legatum’s scholars point out that Denmark, for example, has little job protection, but generous unemployment benefits. So business owners can keep the right number of workers, while workers can have a safety net while they muck around looking for that fulfilling job.

The importance of entrepreneurship

Of perhaps utmost importance, nearly all the nations in the top 10 are adept at fostering entrepreneurship and opportunity. Legatum’s researchers concluded that a country’s ranking in this area is the clearest proxy of its overall ranking in the index.

‘Entrepreneurial societies raise levels of expectation and produce a culture in which human potential is released.’—Alan McCormick, Legatum

This means low business startup costs, lots of cellphones, plenty of secure Internet servers, a history of high R&D spending and the perception that working hard gets you ahead.

That last bit — the perception that working hard pays off — is especially vital. Consider that Denmark and Sweden rank first and second in entrepreneurship and opportunity, but only 77 per cent of Swedes and 84 per cent of Danes think that working hard will get them ahead. Compare that with the U.S., the No. 3 country for entrepreneurship and opportunity. Fully 9 of 10 Americans think that hard work will pay off.

Perception matters. Alan McCormick, a managing director at Legatum, points out that the U.S. remains the envy of the world when it comes to entrepreneurialism, pointing out that during the recession year of 2009, Americans created 558,000 new businesses each month. That’s 27,000 more per month than in 2008 and 60,000 more per month than in 2007.

For countries that want to move up in the prosperity rankings, that care about improving the happiness of their people, one of the best ways may be to cultivate an entrepreneurial culture.

“Over the last three decades, new startups have accounted for nearly all of the increased employment in the American private sector,” says McCormick. “Entrepreneurial societies raise levels of expectation and produce a culture in which human potential is released, healthy risk-taking is encouraged, and where the fledgling business ideas of today become the global-selling products of tomorrow.”

Entrepreneurialism also gives a society a mechanism by which it can address and improve other aspects of the prosperity ecosystem. Want better education, health care or safety? Someone’s ready to sell it to you.

So what else does the U.S. have going for it? High levels of governance, education and freedom. But most surprising, Legatum gives the U.S. the top ranking in the world when it comes to health.

Huh? Didn’t the U.S. spend last year decrying the sorry state of an American health care system that had left 40 million uninsured? This doesn’t mean the U.S. has the best health care system, says McCormick, but $5,500 a year in per-capita health spending has resulted in excellent vaccination rates, water quality and sanitation.

Lacking: the U.S. scored just 62nd in feeling “well rested.” Compare that with China, which ranked 12th in being well rested.

That takes us back to our original question: What does happiness mean to you? Does being well rested fit into the equation? Maybe. But not if all that shuteye is because you don’t have a job to go to. Or if you have no choice but to rest because you don’t have access to real medical care. China ranks 66th in health, spending just $350 per capita per year.

Safety, security drag down China

Overall China is the 58th most prosperous nation in the world. Despite scoring well in economic measures, it’s dragged down by a rank of 92nd in safety and security and 102nd in personal freedom (just edging out Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe).

And the worst? Zimbabwe is the least prosperous country on Earth, followed by Pakistan, according to the study, with most of the rest of sub-Saharan Africa not much better. To be fair, some countries, like North Korea, are so far off the deep end that they don’t publish any data or let in pollsters to quiz their people.

How to improve their plight? Economic growth at all costs. Roger Bate, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, points out that if you live in one of the poorest nations, a doubling of income from $3,000 to $6,000 per year will generate a lot more additional happiness than would a pay raise of the same amount, from $33,000 to $36,000, for a citizen of a prosperous country.

Ultimately how happy you are depends on how happy you’ve been. If you’re already rich, like Scandinavia, then more freedom, security and health would add the most to happiness. For the likes of China and India (ranked 88th), it’s more a case of “show me the money.” What they want most of all? The opportunity to prove to themselves that money doesn’t buy happiness.

Read more:

California Policy Complete Streets Education/Webinars Environmental Justice GHG Reduction Local Government Metropolitan Planning NewsFlash Public Transit SB 375 Transportation Funding

Sacramento Regional Coalitions Support “Safe Routes for All” MTP Scenario

At tonight’s public workshop for SACOG’s 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP 2035) 93% of individuals and 100% of group tables voted for the Scenario 3 option — which places the greatest investment in existing communities and would result in a 17% reduction in per capita greenhouse gas emissions (greater than the 16% SB 375 regional target assigned by CARB). After speaking with SACOG’s Executive Director after the workshop today, it was clear that the support for Scenario 3 was also well represented during this month’s  previous workshops across the region.

With overwhelming support for a more cost-effective, equitable, and environmentally sustainable MTP Scenario, could the SACOG region have public support to create a plan that achieves these objectives to an even greater extent? Policy in Motion founder, and researcher on SB 375 Implementation believes the answer is a resounding YES.

Safe Routes for All is a concept that embodies achieving the sustainability “3-E” agenda which supports federal, state, regional, and local goals for healthy and thriving communities.  Approving a Sustainable Community Strategy within the SACOG MTP 2035 process that emphasizes financial investments in existing communities with a focus around active transportation access to schools would be a way to not only serve as an example of how a Metropolitan Planning Organization can exceed SB 375 greenhouse gas reduction targets, but also support many other co-benefits such as healthier communities and neighborhood quality of life.

A coalition of organizations and individuals is forming to advocate for Safe Routes for All in walkable and bikeable communities throughout the six-county SACOG region. They believe that all people – including children, seniors, mobility disabled, transit dependent, and walkers and bicyclists – deserve access to a safe and reliable transportation network. They are asking SACOG to create and analyze a 4th Scenario, or make moderate funding shifts within Scenario 3  to support this concept of Safe Routes for All.

The key component to achieve this sustainability objectives that are more cost-effective and equitable is to shift funding priorities from regional transportation mobility projects that move people between communities to local transportation projects/programs that connect people within communities — focusing on access to goods, services, transportation options and employment opportunities.

In order to achieve this funding would shift toward “Fix it First” policies which support roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian maintenance and operation — followed secondly by investments in “active transportation” infrastructure and programs. A Safe Routes for All plan would also prioritize housing investments to support existing community needs, such as access to goods, services, transit and employment opportunities.
Policy in Motion will be partnering with the Sacramento Complete Street Coalition to demonstrate how shifting investments toward existing community needs supports the region’s vision for long-term economic vitality, healthier and safer neighborhoods, and efforts to lead California in what SB 375 implementation can truly achieve.
Other organizations involved in this effort include:
  • WALKSacramento
  • Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates
  • Breathe California of Sacramento- Emigrant Trails
  • Sacramento Walking Sticks
  • Coalition On Regional Equity
  • Ubuntu Green
  • Environmental Council of Sacramento
  • Safe Kids Greater Sacramento
  • Gray Panthers of Sacramento
  • Mothers’ Support Network
  • Bicycle Advocates of Rancho Cordova
  • Folsom Area Bicycle Advocates
  • Design Sacramento 4 Health
  • Davis Bicycles!
  • Sacramento ACHIEVE
Complete Streets Environmental Justice Local Government Metropolitan Planning

Organization of the Month: WALK Sacramento

Last month highlighted the work of the Institute for Local Government.  This month Policy in Motion honors the work of a local organization which has been instrumental in bringing health, environmental and transportation issues to the table in the Sacramento region.  WALK Sacramento is a nonprofit community organization working to improve the walking environment in the Sacramento metropolitan region.  WALK Sacramento works with transportation and land use planners, elected officials and community groups to create safe, walkable environments for all citizens and particularly for children, seniors, the disabled and low-income individuals.

Below is a list of WALK Sacramento’s accomplishments, grants, and awards over the past year.  Lauren Michele is a Board member for WALK Sacramento, committee member for the Sacramento Complete Streets Coalition, and an avid walker/car-free resident in Sacramento’s midtown.  WALK Sacramento plans to build upon its successful efforts in the next year, and is in need of volunteer and financial resources to continue to do their great work.

Please click here to make a donation to WALK Sacramento of any amount!


Complete Streets: WALK Sacramento has lead the charge on Complete Streets

  • Complete Streets Coalition – formed by the Partnership for Active Communities in 2007, directed by WALKSacramento – includes Sacramento Regional Transit District, AARP, Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates (SABA), Breathe California, California Department of Transportation, Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS), Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, California Highway Patrol, Policy in Motion and others.
  • Influential on Representative Matsui’s introduction of federal Complete Streets legislation
  • Complete Streets policies are now included in Sacramento Transit Master Plan, County Circulation Plan, City General Plan, and regional SACOG funding programs
  • WALK Sacramento & SABA awarded SACOG’s Blueprint Excellence Award
  • Advocated to include Complete Streets in SACOG’s Stimulus Package grants

Land Use Review:  WALK Sacramento works regularly with Sacramento city, county and regional planning staff and elected officials

  • Design Review Committee meets monthly
  • Complete 20-40 reviews of proposed land developments and planning policies each year – leading to small and large improvements for pedestrian and bicycle access
  • Major advocacy of pedestrian accessibility issues in update of Sacramento County’s General Plan both the land use and circulation elements.

Safe Routes to School:  WALK Sacramento is a leader in the Safe Routes to School Program

  • Safe Routes “5E” grant underway – 6 schools in the unincorporated area of the County have had initial audits, 4 more are underway.
  • Second Sacramento Safe Routes to School Conference – November 2010
  • Safe Routes grant for all schools in Citrus Heights to begin 2010

Los Rios Transportation Connections Plan (April 2008) – this plan, drafted by WALK Sacramento, argues for safe, convenient pedestrian, bicycle and transit access to all Los Rios campuses

  • Four campuses — Involvement of faculty & staff & administrators
  • Sac County awarded grants to implement two projects at American River College based on the plan – sidewalks on Orange Grove Avenue and a plan for a bicycle-pedestrian bridge access across Arcade Creek


  • Partnership for Active Communities –Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.  Final report completed after five year (2003-08) grant.
  • Complete Streets Sustainability Grant – a one year extension grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation – ended Nov 09.
  • Los Rios Transportation Connections – funded by Caltrans Community Planning Grant – Partnership of County of Sacramento DOT, Los Rios Community College District, and WALKSacramento.  Completed April 2008.
  • Safe Routes to School “5E’s” Grant – a 2 ½ year partnership of County of Sacramento DOT and WALKSacramento with a Caltrans Safe Routes to School.  To fund 15 school walk/bike audits & plans and 3 annual Safe Routes to School conferences.  Expect extension through 2011.
  • Safe Routes to School Citrus Heights – a 2 year partnership between City of Citrus Heights, San Juan School District and WALKSacramento to fund 12-13 school walk/bike audits and plans.  Getting underway 2010.
  • Clean Air Grant –Funded by Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District — supports involvement in land use review and public outreach.  Extended for two years to June, 2012.
  • California Endowment – Walkable Neighborhoods completed 2003.


  • ECOS Environmental Organization of Year 2010
  • American Planning Association Visionary Award 2009
  • SACOG Salutes Blueprint Excellence Award 2007 – for collaboration with community on Complete Streets
  • Active Living by Design Innovation Award – for development review   2006
  • Anne Seeley Memorial Award, 2004
  • American Lung Association Clean Air Award 2003

Please click here to make a donation to WALK Sacramento of any amount!

Environmental Justice GHG Reduction Metropolitan Planning Modeling/Tools NewsFlash Publications Research

Victoria Transport Policy Institute: Summer 2010 Research Updates

Victoria Transport Policy Institute
“Efficiency – Equity – Clarity”
Summer 2010    Vol. 13, No. 3
The Victoria Transport Policy Institute is an independent research organization dedicated to developing innovative solutions to transportation problems. The VTPI website ( ) has many resources addressing a wide range of transport planning and policy issues. VTPI also provides consulting services.


Changing Vehicle Travel Price Sensitivities: The Rebounding Rebound Effect” ( )
This paper, submitted for presentation at the Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, summarizes recent findings concerning transportation price sensitivities. Some studies found that fuel and vehicle travel price elasticities declined significantly between 1960 and 2000, but recent research suggests that price sensitivities have returned to more normal levels, indicating that the rebound effect is rebounding. This suggests that mobility management strategies provide greater benefits than many current energy conservation evaluation models indicate.

Sustainability and Livability: Summary of Definitions, Goals, Objectives and Performance Indicators” ( )
This short report summarizes basic definitions and concepts for sustainable and livable transportation planning.
*     *     *     *     *


Evaluating Rail Transit Criticism” ( )
This report evaluates criticism of rail transit systems, including a recent paper by Wendell Cox, ‘Washington’s War on Cars and the Suburbs.’ It examines claims that rail transit is ineffective at increasing public transit ridership,that rail transit investments are not cost effective, and that transit is an outdated mode of transportation. It finds that critics often misrepresent issues and use biased and inaccurate analysis.

*     *     *     *     *


Evaluating Public Transportation Health Benefits” ( ), written by VTPI for the American Public Transportation Association.
This report investigates ways that public transportation affects human health, and practical methods for considering these impacts in policy and planning decisions. This research indicates that public transit improvements and more transit oriented development can provide large but often overlooked health benefits. People who live or work in communities with high quality transit tend to drive significantly less and rely more on alternative modes (walking, cycling and public transit) than they otherwise would, which reduces per capita traffic crash and pollution emission rates, increases physical fitness, and improves access to medical care and healthy food. These impacts are significant in magnitude compared with other planning objectives but are often overlooked or undervalued in conventional planning.

Recent Planetizen Blogs ( ):
*     *     *     *     *


Benefit/Cost Analysis for Transportation Infrastructure: A Practitioner’s Workshop,” sponsored by the U.S. Department of Transportation, held 17 May 2010 in Washington DC. Presentation slides are available at

Changing Course for the Transport Sector” ADB Transport Forum, Manila, 25-27 May 2010 ( ). Ministers, industry decision-makers, researchers and representatives of civil society from more than 30 countries participated in this event.

Environment and Energy Research Conference” ( ) Transportation Research Board Conference, 6-10 June 2010, Raleigh, North Carolina.
*     *     *     *     *


Indicators for Sustainable Transport Policy Making and Performance Evaluation,” keynote presentation at ‘A New Decade in Sustainable Transport: Fifth Regional EST Forum in Asia’ United Nations Center for Regional Development ( ), 24 August 2010, Bangkok.

Economic Impacts of Transportation Enhancements,” at the  National Transportation Enhancements Clearinghouse Workshop ( ), 16-17 September 2010, Chattanooga, held in conjunction with ProBike/ProWalk ( )

Win-Win Emission Reductions” at the Vancouver Island Air & Waste Management Association ( )
Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 11:30 – 13:10, Cedar Hill Golf Course Victoria, B.C.

Livable Communities, Housing and Health – Toolbox Session” at ‘Railvolution 2010’ ( ).
This workshop will identify ways that transit oriented development and more affordable-accessible housing can help achieve public health and social equity objectives.
*     *     *     *     *


Transit Score” ( ) measures how well a location is served by public transit based on the distance to the nearest transit stop and the quality of transit service. This is used to calculate a score between 0 – 100, similar to Walk Score ( )

Framework for Measuring Sustainable Regional Development for the Twin Cities Region “( ).
This major study by the University of Minnesota developed a framework for evaluating sustainable development in the Twin Cities metropolitan region. The proposed framework includes a set of six sustainability principles, and 38 indicators, each with specific definitions of how it can be measured and suitable data sources. This is one of the best framework of its kind.

Time Lost by Driving Fast in the United States” ( )
This study by Professors Donald A. Redelmeier and Ahmed M. Bayoumi indicates that that in the U.S., one hour spent driving was associated with approximately 20 minutes reduction in life expectancy due to crash risk. For the average driver, each one kilometer per hour (0.6-mph) increase in driving speed yielded a 26-second increase in total expected lost time because the savings from reduced travel time were more than offset by time lost to increased crashes.

P-A-Y-D: As easy to support as 1 – 2 – 3” ( ) . This website and video by Cliff Caprani of Sha-na-key films introduces the concept of Pay-As-You-Drive vehicle insurance and advocates its implementation in British Columbia.

Relative Costs And Benefits Of Modal Transport Solutions” ( )
This report provides guidance to local authorities about the costs and benefits of transport modes. It provides estimates of vehicle costs, infrastructure, travel time, accidents, health impacts, and pollution costs. It also discusses related urban transport planning issues, including travel demand, relationships between land use and transport, and road space and traffic management. A selection of case studies provides specific illustrations of these issues.

Shared Path Widths” ( ). This poster provides practical guidance on the design and management of non-motorized facilities.

A wonderful 1906 film of a trolley trip along Market Street in San Francisco ( and a 1908 film of a trolley trip through Barcelona, Spain ( show the use of urban streets a century ago.

Data & Capacity Needs for Transportation NAMAs: Report 1, Data Availability” ( ).
This is the first in a series of research reports by Cambridge Systematics and the Center for Clean Air Policy, assessing data and capacity needs for developing, implementing and evaluating successful transportation Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs).

Reducing Carbon Emissions from Transport Projects” ( )
This report identifies ways the Asian Development Bank can assistance developing member countries in creating more sustainable transport systems. It describes models for evaluating how specific transport policy decisions affect energy consumption and pollution emissions. This analysis considers the generated traffic impacts, the cobenefits of demand management and other indirect impacts.

Choosing Where We Live: Attracting Residents to Transit-Oriented Neighborhoods; A Briefing Book for City Planners and Managers” ( )
This report identifies various housing market segments and describes ways to make transit oriented development more attractive in response to their specific needs and preferences. It includes recommendations for improving walking and cycling condition, transit service quality, neighborhood livability (quiet, cleanliness and safety), school quality and accessibility, parking management, and urban housing affordability.

Promoting Livable Communities: Examining The Internal Revenue Code And Reforming Its Influence On The Built Environment” ( ).
This report by Smart Growth America and the American Institute of Architects reviews federal tax code features that affect community development patterns. It recommends specific policy reforms to better support livable community development, including clearer definitions regarding livable community features, changes to federal tax codes, legal provisions to develop livable community tax districts, and federal policies that encourage development of more affordable housing.

The Hidden Health Costs of Transportation: Backgrounder” ( )
This report by the American Public Health Association identifies various ways that transportation systems affect public health, including physical activity, safety, air quality, affordability and equity. It describes methods for quantifying and monetizing these impacts and recommends specific policy and planning reforms to create more balanced transportation systems that support health objectives.

Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach, Recommended Practice” ( )
This free new report by the Institute of Transportation Engineers provides practical guidance on the application of Context Sensitive Solutions to create roadways that better integrate diverse planning objectives and meet community needs.

Growing GreenLITES” ( )
Greenlites (Green Leadership In Transportation Environmental Sustainability) by the New York State Department of Transportation promotes more sustainable and livable transport planning. It uses a detailed spreadsheet that rates individual projects according to various objectives and impacts.

Vision California – Charting Our Future” ( )
Vision California uses the new ‘Rapid Fire Model’ spreadsheet tool to evaluate regional and statewide land use and transportation scenario impacts on vehicle travel, pollution emissions, water use, building energy use, transportation fuel use, land consumption, and public infrastructure costs.

Canadian Guidelines for the Measurement of Transportation Demand Management Initiatives” ( ).
This guidebook is designed to help organizations implementing TDM strategies to evaluate progress toward established objectives.

TDM Supportive Guidelines For Development Approvals: A Handbook For Practitioners” ( )
This report provides recommendations for planners to better incorporate Transportation Demand Management strategies into land development.

ITDP in South Africa” ( ).
This video by Brian McAllister describes the success of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) in Africa, particularly the new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems. Also see

Equity Analysis of Land Use and Transport Plans Using an Integrated Spatial Model” ( ).pdf )
This study used the PECAS Activity Allocation Module to evaluate the equity effects of land use and transport policies intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The results show that a more compact urban form designed around transit stations can reduce travel costs, labor costs, and housing costs by increasing accessibility, which can lead to substantial net benefits for various industries and lower income households.

The Role of Land Use in Reducing VMT and GHG Emissions: A Critique of TRB Special Report 298” ( ).
This short report provides additional information on the effects that smart growth land use polices can have in achieving VMT and GHG reduction targets. It critiques the assumptions and modeling methods used in the TRB report, and investigates consumer demand for more accessible, multi-modal residential locations.