Devil in the detail - detailed planning necessary for long-term visions

Without links to detailed, tactical planning, the vision of even the grandest plans for a livable, sustainable community will fall short.

Over recent decades, most cities and regions in North America have developed long-term visions or strategies that put a new emphasis on limiting urban sprawl through focused, compact urban development supported by networks of improved transit services. In other words, advancing elements of what might be loosely referred to as sustainability in its various guises.

In turn, these ‘big picture’ processes have sometimes led to a debate in land use and transportation planning circles about which is more important – long-range, visionary top-down planning or detailed bottom-up, project, corridor or route planning. In reality, this is largely a false dichotomy – both are needed and neither one can be effective without the other. However, if there are no linkages between both strategic long-term and specific initiatives then challenges will emerge over time.

With emerging climate change legislation in both the US and Canada – at national, state/provincial, and regional levels – these plans, more often than not, also include specific long-range targets for reducing greenhouse gases and other emissions as well as for increases to sustainable travel mode shares (i.e. non-single auto trips). Planners throughout North America have to be applauded for setting ambitious long-range targets that, if achieved, should help stem the impacts from climate change – however, the challenge is how to turn these visionary long-range targets into real, deliverable projects today.

The problem can be further compounded by the reality that decision-making bodies may find it easier to approve long-range plans which have no immediate funding requirements or defined near-term actions such as densification or control of Greenfield development. Yet no matter how noble a plan’s desired outcomes might be, without a commitment to specific actions or funding mechanisms to implement plans and programs, little can be achieved. This challenge can be magnified when, at the individual project level, even large-scale investments in transit network expansion often have very limited impacts on mode shares and travel patterns at a regional scale.

Over the past few years, Steer Davies Gleave has been working with a number of transit and transportation planning agencies on the development of long-range transit and transportation plans ensuring that processes are included to explicitly ensure that the critically-needed tactical actions, plans and projects can be implemented. Recent examples of our work in this area include: Sacramento Regional Transit’s 25-year TransitAction Plan, Portland Metro’s 2040 High Capacity Transit Plan, Ann Arbor Transportation Authority’s Transit Master Plan, the City of Edmonton’s Long-Term Public Transportation Strategy and TransLink’s 2040 Rapid Transit Strategic Network Review for Greater Vancouver.

While each plan was unique, a common theme emerged in each region: the forecast changes in the transit network and service frequencies on their own would not be enough to make significant changes in mode share or VKT/VMT and emissions reductions. They required comprehensive planning which combined transportation network improvements, land use changes, and transportation demand management (such as parking controls, roadspace (re)allocation, road charging, workplace and school travel planning). This combination of supply and demand side planning for travel, would not only achieve the targets, but more importantly, help us develop the livable, walkable sustainable communities that are typically sketched out by architects but rarely seem to materialize. Portland Mayor Sam Adams, has caught onto this challenge and has coined the phrase the ‘20-minute neighborhood’ as a livability and economic target where most goods and services are within a 20-minute walk/bike ride which reduces car travel and keeps spending in the local Portland economy.

The challenge of course goes beyond long-range planning and becomes much more ‘real’ when it comes time to plan and deliver these projects. Unfortunately, a lack of a clear and committed funding plan often leads to a situation where ‘when all is said and done, a lot more gets said than done’. Steer Davies Gleave has used a ‘Willingness-to-Pay’ tool as part of both the Sacramento and Ann Arbor planning initiatives to engage with the public and test how much and for what services the community is willing to pay for. While it doesn’t provide statistically accurate results, it does provide planners and decision-makers with a good sense of the level of support for transit investment in their communities.

Using the long-range plan and vision to help ‘set the course’, planners need to look at the challenge from the other end of the telescope to build the foundations for future success. While it is unlikely that any single project or initiative will be able to ‘move the needle’ in achieving the long-range vision, the combination of a range of projects, initiatives, and investments that support each other does have the potential to transform communities. The planners that grasp this concept are the ones that will be successful.