EVOLUTION OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROGRAMS














The Federal Highway Act of 1963 required urban areas to use a “continuing, comprehensive, and
cooperative” transportation planning process (the 3C process) to qualify for federal funding.
Section 4(f) of the federal law governing regional transportation planning enacted in 1966
required “special effort . . . to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park
and recreation land, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.” U.S. Sac’s of
Transportation is permitted to approve construction of a facility in such a sensitive environment
only if “there is no feasible and prudent alternative,” and only if planning has been done to
“minimize harm” to such sites.”
Clean Air Act of 1970 identified auto as major contributors to nation’s air pollution problem and
enlisted transportation planners to in effort to meet air quality goals
The 1990 Clean Air Amendments of 1990 required that transportation planning process to
include clean air planning and transportation planning at the regional level. Set out goals for
cleaner vehicles , for cleaner fuels, and for transportation programs to meet air quality
standards
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA, passed in 1991) and Transportation
Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) recognize the transportation problem is far broader
than had previous policies to include energy consumption, air pollution, and economic
competitiveness as goals to increase in addition to increased mobility.
Funds that earlier had been reserved for highway projects can now be used for all surface
modes of transportation, including walking, bicycling, and public transit , which planning process
had neglected in the past
ISTEA also encouraged the building of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and gave priority to
managing existing transport on facilities more efficiently rather than increasing supply (i.e.,
building more roads)
Under ISTEA and TEA-21 regional planning agencies have greater powers in the planning arena
and public participation is an integral part of the planning process.
Now clear that public transportation not a panacea for air pollution ,energy consumption, and
congestion problems, but it does fill an important niche.
In 1999 transportation of all types consumed one-quarter of all energy, but two-thirds of the
petroleum
Environmental impacts stemming from facility construction and from the use of motor vehicles
still a problem.
Air pollution per auto has declined significantly in past several decades, but increases in VMT
mean that transportation sources remain primary contributor to air quality problems
Standardized methods and published manuals describing travel modeling methods so that
transportation modeling and planning practice became standardized.
Four steps for travel modeling (known as the Urban Transportation Modeling System (UTMS) or
the Urban Transportation Planning System (UTPS).












Four steps are (1) trip generation (predicts the number of daily household trips; (2) trip
distribution (predicts where each trip goes); (3) modal choice (which predicts which travel mode
is chosen; and (4) route assignment (predicts travelers’ routes on roads, rail lines, or bus lines.
This traffic flow on network links is then described in terms of volume (quantity) and in terms of
speed (quality).
Model is run on base-year data and traffic volumes are calibrated in actual traffic counts in
certain parts of the region. Models generally run on 20-year horizon for facility planning for
facility planning and also run on the intermediate years for which there is a vehicle emission
reduction deadline
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 requires detailed environmental assessment of all
federal environmental assessment of all federally funde3d project.
In 1975 USDOT adopted regulations requiring not only a long-range (20-year) plan, but also a
short-term element focusing on low-cost Transportation Systems Management (TSM) policies,
such as carpool lanes, ramp metering, and limited parking. These measures were intended to
reduce peak-hour travel demand and to manage peak hour flows better. These were first
demand management rather than supply management.
Clean Air Act of 1970 required all states to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that includes
an emission inventory for each region of the state and a plan for attainment of all ambient
federal air quality standards.
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 and the subsequent Highway Act of 1977 both required all
regional transportation plans to show attainment of the vehicle emissions reductions specified
in the SIP, through the modeling of travel and emissions from on-road vehicles. W/o plan no
federal funds
EPS software predicts emissions taking into account daily VMT in each vehicle speed.
Clean Air Act of 1990 provides that federal transportation funds can be withheld from regions
that adopt plans but cannot show attainment through modeled emissions reductions by the
deadlines for each pollutant.
1990 act also strengthens role of demand-side policies, by requiring that Transportation Control
Measures (TCMs) be studied in all nonattainment regions, and list the TCMs that must be
studied for particular level of nonattainment (moderate, serious, severe, and extreme). TCMs
include much stronger demand reduction policies than had appeared on earlier lists of TSM
policies. TCMs, for example, include peak-period road tolls.
1990 act requires all MPOs for the AQRs in their area whose air quality is rated “serious” or
worse to be able to model peak-period tolls, parking charges, fuel taxes, flextime, paratransit,
transit, land use intensification near rail stations, bike and pedestrian facilities, park-and-ride
lots and for carpooling, ramp metering, and carpool lanes.
1990 for serious and worse models must show induced travel, land development patterns musts
be consistent with facility plan, must model peak and off-peak hours
Transportation planning has evolved from adding road and transit capacity to also managing
travel demand, connecting models, and reducing emissions.




Federal rule (conformity rule) adopted under the act requires all regions with ozone or carbon
dioxide nonattainment status to run recalibrate model so as to represent the effect of changes
in accessibility on travel demand. Increased road capacity speeds up travel and leads to longer
trips and increased travel.
Conformity rule also requires that land development effects of regional transportation plans be
accounted for in regions with at least serious “serious” conditions. It requires land-use patterns
and facility plans to be consistent with each alternative.
Need for models that take into account induced travel and induced land development
Environmental justice arises when some communities (1) get benefits of improved accessibility
and other do not; (2) when some suffer disproportionately from negative impacts like air
pollution and neighborhood disruption; (3) some have to pay higher transportation taxes and
fees; (4) some re3ceive a disproportionately small share of jobs created; (5) some are les
represented than others in the policy making debates