ITE 2003 Technical Conference and Exhibit Program
Transportation’s Role in Successful Communities
Weston, Florida
March 23rd to March 26th, 2003
Overview
The theme for the 2003 Institute of Transportation Engineers Conference was “transportation’s
role in successful communities.” The conference was divided into three tracks: 1) livability/
community issues 2) mobility/operations and 3) safety. Background information for a large
percentage of the conference’s presentations is on a compendium CD, which will be provided to
each of the SFRRC partners. Throughout the conference, there were several reoccurring subthemes that may be of interest to planners and other community-oriented professionals and
organizations. This summary aims to capture major points within these sub-themes.
Transportation’s Codependency
Gloria Jeff, Director of Michigan’s Department of Transportation, opened the conference by
discussing the impact of transportation on communities and the role of the transportation
professional in creating successful communities. Because transportation bridges all sectors of a
community (i.e. business, residential, etc), there is a need for participation from all levels of a
community in the decision-making process. Transportation links the multiple purposes of a
community and provides communities with an opportunity to form a dialogue around shared
values.
After the Korean War, the federal Department of Transportation (DOT) focused on building our
interstate highway system as the means for connecting communities. Now that the interstate
system has been constructed the question is what is the DOT’s new role? There is an array of
options and challenges which could provide the underpinnings of new policy for DOT:
promoting successful communities. The Australian definition of successful communities is that
they are “built on the strengths of local individuals, communities, and institutions.”
Successful communities:
1. Focus on specific actions and measurable results.
2. Promote participation using a language that non-professionals can understand.
3. Ensure local decision-making and ownership of the decisions.
4. Draw upon resources of the entire community.
5. Bridge all sectors to raise healthy children.
6. Share experience and knowledge to promote continuous community learning and are
constantly evolving.
7. Interact within themselves and beyond themselves to complement each other.
Because transportation is the framework, or the skeleton that links community and its functions,
it requires collaboration with other parties it shares its codependency with—most notably - land
use. Ms. Jeff stated the most recognized American example of a successful partnership between
land use and transportation can be found in Portland, Oregon. However, some non-traditional
examples of success and steps in the right direction include: Chicago, Illinois with its walkability
and many connections; Cleveland, Ohio, and the introduction of new light rail lines, and
Columbus, Maryland and Reston, Virginia with their ability to appropriately link major
employment centers to residential areas. Internationally, Sydney, Australia was cited for its
advancements and town planning efforts that have shifted focus on accessibility and public
safety.
The Role of the Transportation Professional
Ms. Jeff also spoke of two spheres faced by the transportation professional: the sphere of
operations and the sphere of influence. Sphere of operations includes planning, designing,
maintaining, etc. where a box of solutions is utilized. The sphere of influence, however,
recognizes the how and why of what impacts a community. It allows the transportation engineer
to move beyond the role of expert and become a planner. In this sphere, the transportation
engineer collaborates and shares knowledge. The toolkit of the transportation planner includes
mediation and resolution methodologies to ensure that the various mechanisms used to deliver
information are better and more community sensitive. Community ownership of decisions is
achieved when transportation planners partner with urban designers to protect the natural
environment and the social and economic environment as well.
The transportation professional should be:
 An Educator
 An Expert
 A Facilitator
 A Collaborator
The transportation professional’s tool-kit should include knowledge of:
 Community development
 Context sensitive design
 Mechanisms for making decisions
 Public engagement skills
 Urban design skills
 Protection of natural, social and economic patterns of a community
 Safety issues/solutions
 Communication tools (ability to write and sell ideas)
Other key roles of the transportation professional include engaging people in a process,
not a project; directing funding to visions by educating decision-makers; and focusing on
having a technically-sound solution rather than controlling the outcome.
Healthy and Active Living
Active living is a way of life that integrates physical activity into daily life. The connection
between transportation and great health and active living was reiterated throughout the major
sessions sponsored by the Robert Wood Foundation. Presentations about the nation’s growing
obesity rate, expanding sedentary society, and increase in sprawl and automobile use were just
some of the issues discussed in these sessions. Although the discussion linking sprawl to public
health is not new, there are many issues and challenges that have to be addressed in this area, and
it is going to take foresight.
The key to promoting active and healthy living can be found in the five “P”s:
Preparation – Building diverse partnership, vision, assessment of policies
Promotion – Mass media for public works, education, policy, sell the message
Programs – Safe routes to school, commuter choice programs, incentive campaigns, events
Policies – Addressing school siting, connecting pedestrians and bicycle networks
Physical Projects – Development of mixed-use communities
Policy Implications
Many of the session and plenary discussions addressed how policy does or does not promote
livable and successful communities. While there have been advancements (evident in
transportation Acts such as ISTEA and TEA-21) to incorporate alternative modes of
transportation and livability issues into transportation planning, policy still serves as a road block
to major advancement and change. Among some of the issues discussed are the conflicting
values and driver-centric thinking that is inherent in transportation policy. Refining policy will
require an ongoing change in thinking, pathways to overcoming challenges in behavior,
education, and more inclusive participation. Change in policy also means addressing funding
biases and the institutional inertia that exists in transportation organizations and institutions.
A Paradigm Shift
To address the roadblocks that prevent successful communities, research and transportation
thinking must shift to facilitate changes in policy. More general research questions that must be
addressed include:




Gaining a better understanding of correlation and causation among personal preferences,
urban form, human behavior, and expectations
Addressing definitional issues. What is walkable? What is good road connectivity?
Where does “your” neighborhood or community begin and end? Why do we need ¼ mile
buffers?
Understanding the interdependencies of ways in which people are physically active. Where
and how we are active is poorly understood



Better non-motorized data – such as trip types, urban form variables, and use of subjective
data that comes from perceptions, mental maps, and individual constraints
Viewing transportation as part of an urban system
Shift planning tools to focus on accessibility vs. mobility. Mobility is based on a
transportation system alone, while accessibility is gauged by a transportation and land use
system.
FLEXIBILITY—Key Underlying Theme
One of the major underlying themes throughout the conference was the issue of flexibility.
Thinking outside the box is difficult for most transportation engineers because every decision is
based on widely accepted, published standards, which makes them supportable in courts of law.
Engineers rely on several manuals to decide how wide a residential street should be, what the
ideal curb radius is, and when to provide sidewalks and lighted intersections. But this way of
thinking has created barriers to healthy communities, particularly in low income neighborhoods
that are split by highways and where the lack of sidewalks and safe routes to schools impedes
safe access and dictates the level of inactivity of its residents.
Flexible thinking allows the transportation system to be tailored to the needs of the community.
Traffic calming measures are easier to design at the outset than to retrofit after the fact. Also,
since each community has different needs and desires, flexibility in the process allows the
generation of a greater number of alternatives that can be better supported by the community.
And flexibility in funding allows the community to benefit from a greater pool of resources so
that the project outcome is more holistic.
Several new publications promoting greater flexibility in the development of context sensitive
design are in the pipeline, including:
•
Re-Engineering the Suburban DNA: Context Driven Design by Rick Hall of Hall
Planning and Engineering, Orlando, FL (NOTE: Mr. Hall was recently involved in
the Catanese Center’s Florida Public Officials Design Institute at Abacoa).
•
ITE Smart Growth Transportation Guidelines
•
Flexibility in Highway Design (FHWA)
•
A new major design guide sponsored by ITE, CNU, EPA, and possibly FHWA
•
A publication or study on “Designing Streets to Support Smart Growth: Context
Sensitive Design for Major Urban Streets,” containing influences from CNU, Smart
Growth, and context sensitive design.
•
“Road Network,” by Peter Calthorpe, in preliminary stages.
Advances in Communities and Neighborhoods
Community and agency advancements were highlighted throughout various tracks of the
conference. Papers that accompanied their presentations may be found on the conference’s
compendium CD. A listing of the papers is attached to this document. A sample of some these
advancements include:
South Kenyon Street – Seattle, Washington – A poor community in southeast Seattle, where
the population is 38% foreign born. There are five neighborhood plans in the area - all have been
adopted by the city of Seattle. South Kenyon Street lacks curbs, cars park on the planting strip
leading to compacted/degraded soils and drainage problems. It is a local street located between
two arterials and experiences excessive speeds and volumes. There were no dedicated funding
sources for the community. A grass roots organization, ACORN (Association of Community
Organization for Reform Now) formed in Fall 2001got involved in the revitalization process of
the street and community and community leaders were identified for outreach purposes. With the
active involvement of the community, CDBG funds were then re-allocated from human services
to infrastructure. Neighborhoods helped with landscaping and participated in community
building and stewardship as they were responsible for working together to maintain the
landscaping the newly constructed traffic circles that were placed at key intersections.
Downtown Oklahoma City, Oklahoma – I-40 is in the process of being relocated out of the
city and realigned to bypass downtown to provide for redevelopment within the city and
connectivity in the city once. Environmental statements have already been completed and the
project is moving forward.
Kirkland, Washington – Kirkland is a city of 12-square miles with a population of 45, 000. The
city of Kirkland used an area wide approach to neighborhood traffic calming. Streets in Kirkland
experience heavy cut-through traffic because of the nearby downtown. A recently adopted plan
for its downtown calls for narrowing downtown streets, thus increasing the problem of cutthrough traffic in the surrounding residential areas. To address the issue, the city developed a
neighborhood traffic plan. The planning process involved the collection of data such as volumes,
speed data on primary through streets and all local streets, as well as counting peak hour cut
through traffic. Neighborhood teams were formulated. They were involved in the data collection
process and participated in traffic calming education activities. Outreach, neighborhood open
houses, and e-mail updates were just a few ways residents were kept informed and involved.
Citizens designed the plan, a ballot process was used to attain approval, and neighborhood
residents signed an agreement to maintain new landscaping. Citizens lobbied for the $200,000
needed to fund their plan, which included 12 traffic circles, 4 neck-downs, and several curb bulbs
and mediums, but no speed bumps.
Concluding Thoughts
The topics addressed at the ITE 2003 conference demonstrate that transportation engineers are
trying to move to more outside-the-box thinking. Transportation professionals are relying more
on communities wishes. Transportation professionals must figure out how to meet the needs and
desires within a “supportable” framework, meaning one that has certain standards that can be or
are supported by studies, data, etc. This is very important because transportation professionals
must be able to justify any decision if challenged.
Transportation planners, engineers included, are subject to the law, and the law decides what is
funded and what isn’t. However, within the legal framework there is some flexibility, and
transportation professionals are beginning to find it and use it. This flexibility is allowing
transportation professionals to shift their approach and include tools such as context
driven/sensitive design to make transportation decisions. The flexibility is also allowing
transportation professionals at all levels of government to reevaluate existing policies that may or
may not have done justice to the communities that they impact.
A successful community involves the participation of all sectors so that transportation networks
can work efficiently to all those who rely on it. Effective participation at all levels will better
ensure that transportation also enhances a community and connects it to its surroundings and
provides access to opportunity. Therefore, as transportation professionals embrace outside-thebox thinking, it is essential that they educate and coordinate with planners, elected officials,
community groups, environmental agencies, and so forth about new and old concepts, learn from
the mistakes of the past, and embrace future models of success.
Attachment
2. Making the Case for Active Transportation
PRIMARY SPEAKER:
Richard E. Killingsworth, Director, University of North Carolina, School of Public Health, Chapel Hill,
NC USA
3. Improving Your Neighborhood Streets: Livability/Community Issues Track
SPEAKERS:
Using Street Improvements to Stimulate Neighborhood Revitalization
Tony J. Mazzella, Associate Transportation Planner,
Seattle DOT, Seattle, WA, USA
A Case Study in Neighborhood Traffic Calming
Tracy Burrows, Neighborhood Traffic Control Program Coordinator, City of Kirkland, Kirkland, WA, USA
The Pattern of Intra-Urban Accessibility Problems in Historic Lagos Island, Nigeria
Joshua A. Odeleye, Principal Staff Development Officer, Nigerian Institute of Transport Technology,
Zaria, Nigeria
5. Safety in the Planning Process: Safety Track
SPEAKERS:
Development of Safety Impact Study Guidelines
Brian J. Malone, Vice President, Synectics Transportation Consultants Inc., Grimsby, ON, Canada
A Model for Performing Statewide Traffic Crash Analysis: Michigan Experience
Kohinoor Kar, Graduate Teaching Assistant, Wayne State University,
Detroit, MI, USA
Safety Planning: New Developments at the Federal and State Levels
Kathleen F. Hoffman, Transportation Specialist, U.S. DOT-FHWA, Office of Safety, Washington, DC,
USA
6. Designing Streets to Support Smart Growth: Livability/Community Issues Track
SPEAKERS:
Arterial Streets for All Users
John N. LaPlante, Chief Traffic Engineer, T.Y. Lin International Inc.,
Chicago, IL, USA
Re-Engineering the Suburban DNA
Richard A. Hall, President, Hall Planning & Engineering Inc.,
Tallahassee, FL, USA
ITE Smart Growth Transportation Guidelines
Brian S. Bochner, Senior Research Engineer, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University,
College Station, TX, USA
7. Walkable Communities: Mobility/Operations Track
SPEAKERS:
Can 25,000 Pedestrians Cross the Street Safely?
Rock E. Miller, Vice President, Katz Okitsu & Associates, Tustin, CA, USA
Warrants for Pedestrian Overpasses in Large Urban Areas
Tanweer Hasan, Associate Professor, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Department
of Civil Engineering, Dhaka, Bangladesh
8. Intersection Safety: At the Crossroads: Safety Track
SPEAKERS:
Traffic Signal System Power Failures
Keith R. Gates, Associate Engineer, U.S. DOT-FHWA, Washington, DC, USA
The Impact of Improved Friction at Intersections Experiencing High Proportions of Wet-Road
Accidents
Jonathan S. Bray, Director, Safety Management System, New York State DOT, Albany, NY, USA
Managing Automated Enforcement Programs
James R. Flechtner, Transportation Manager, City of Wilmington,
Wilmington, NC, USA
What is Red-Light Running?
Christopher D. Hunter, Assistant Professor, University of Rhode Island, Department of Civil Engineering,
Kingston, RI, USA
9. About Roundabouts: Livability/Community Issues Track
SPEAKERS:
Alternate Design Methods for Pedestrian Safety at Roundabout Entries and Exits: Crash Studies and
Design Practices in Australia, France, Great Britain and the USA
Bill Baranowski, Transportation Engineer, RoundaboutsUSA, Provo, UT, USA
Public Opinion, Traffic Flow and Safety Impacts of Modern Roundabouts
Richard A. Retting, Senior Transportation Engineer, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Arlington,
VA, USA
Video Comparison of Roundabouts and Signalized Intersections
Mark T. Johnson, Transportation Engineer, Wisconsin DOT, Madison, WI, USA
Tester Road Roundabout: A Retrospective
William D. Goodwin, Vice President, Reid Middleton Inc., Everett, WA, USA
10. Hot Topic: Evacuation Management: Mobility/Operations Track
SPEAKER:
Evacuation policies Across the Southeastern States
P. Brian Wolshon, Assistant Professor, Louisiana State University, Department
of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
11. Safety: Spokes and Folks: Safety Track
SPEAKERS:
Safety Effects of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks and Recommended Treatment Alternatives
Charles V. Zegeer, Associate Director, University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center,
Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Walk vs. Don’t Walk: Improving the Pedestrian Experience
Pei-Sung Lin, Traffic Engineer, Sarasota County Public Works, Sarasota,
FL, USA
Modeling and Stimulation of Driver-Pedestrian interaction at Uncontrolled Mid-Block Crosswalks
Dazhi-Sun, Graduate Assistant, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA
12. State and Local Perspectives on Smart Growth: Livability/Community Issues
Track
SPEAKERS:
Arterial Street Design for Smart Growth
Frederick C. Dock, Associate Principal, Meyer, Mohaddes Associates Inc., Minneapolis MN, USA
Roles of State DOTs in Smart Growth
Laura L. Higgins, Assistant Research Scientist, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University,
College Station, TX, USA
Chicago Metropolis 2020: The Business Community Develops an Integrated Land
Use/Transportation Plan
Lucinda E. Gibson, Vice President, Smart Mobility Inc., Norwich, VT, USA
Corridor O: A Toolbox for Environmental Streamlining
Katherine M. Farrow, Associate, Orth-Rodgers & Associates Inc., PA, USA
13. Planning for Special Events: Mobility/Operations Track
SPEAKERS:
Wayfinding Signs in the Communities of Florida
Craig Berger, Director, Education and Professional Training, Society for Environmental Graphic Design,
Ardmore, PA, USA
Managing Travel for Planned Events
Walter M. Dunn, President, Dunn Engineering Associates P.C.,
Westhampton Beach, NY, USA
14. School Safety: Beyond the Crossing Guard: Safety Track
SPEAKERS:
Using ITS Technology to Enhance After-School Traffic Operations: An Elementary School Case
Study
Wayne A. Sarasua, Associate Professor, Clemson University, Civil Engineering Department, Clemson, SC,
USA
An Evaluation of School Accessibility Using Computer Micro-Simulation
Joel Rabinovitz, Transportation Engineer, Fehr & Peers Associates Inc., Lafayette, CA, USA
A Comprehensive School Safety Effort: The San Jose School Access Enhancement Program
Brett Hondorp, Senior Planner, Alta Planning + Design, Berkeley, CA, USA
[NOTE: Sara has a CD on the 2001-202 School Access Enhancement Program developed by ALTA
Planning.]
Precious Cargo: Texas DOT’s Continuing Commitment to Safety
Mark A. Ball, Public information Officer, Texas DOT, Mesquite, TX, USA
15. Designing Transportation Systems for Active Communities*
PRIMARY SPEAKER:
Jose Luis Moscovich, Executive Director, San Francisco Transportation Authority, San Francisco, CA,
USA
16. The Transportation Professional’s Role in a Successful Community: Livability/Community Issues Track
SPEAKERS:
Alachua County Corridor Design Manual
Patricia S. Hurd, Transportation Planner, Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez Rinehart Inc., Orlando,
FL USA
The MPO’s Role in Finding Successful Transportation Solutions
Steven B. Gayle, Executive Director, Binghamton Metropolitan Transportation Study, Binghamton, NY,
USA
17. Safe Streets for the Visually Impaired: Mobility/Operations Track
SPEAKERS:
Do Drivers Stop at Unsignalized Intersections for Pedestrians Who Are Blind?
Dona J. Sauerburger, Orientation and Mobility Specialist, Gambrills, MD, USA
Audible Pedestrian Signals: Research on Detectability and Localizability
Robert S. Wall, Assistant Professor, Bill Wilkerson Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA
18. Tools for Improved Safety: Safety Track
SPEAKERS:
Why Florida is Over-represented in Fatal Crashes on the State Highway System
Patricia A. Turner, Transportation Safety Program Manager and Senior Research Associate, Center for
Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
Analysis of a Road Diet Conversion and alternative Traffic Controls
“Urbanizing” the MUTCD
W. Scott Wainwright, Highway Engineer, MUTCD Team, U.S. DO-FHWA, Washington, DC, USA
19. Livable Communities Are Safe Communities: Livability/Community Issues Track
SPEAKERS:
Livable Communities are Safe Communities: The Australian Experience
Andrew P. O’Brien, Principal and Managing Director, Andrew O’Brien & Associates Pty., Ltd., Hawthorn
East, VIC, Australia
20. Dealing with Non-Traditional Intersections: Mobility/Operations Track
SPEAKERS:
Implementation of Roundabouts in a Mixed-Use Corridor: A Case Study
Stephen C. Sargeant, Senior Transportation Engineer, LSC Transportation Consultants Inc., Colorado
Springs, CO, USA
Factors Affecting the Operation of Triple Left-Turn Lanes
Thobias M. Sando, Graduate Research Assistant, Florida A&M University-Florida State University,
College of Engineering, Tallahassee, FL, USA
21. Safety and Mobility for Older Persons: Safety Track
SPEAKERS:
FHWA’s Design Guidelines for Older Persons: Implementation and Impact
Hari Kalla, Transportation Specialist, U.S. DOT-FHWA, Washington, DC, USA
Transportation Alternatives in Livable Cities
Helen Kerschner, President and CEO, Beverly Foundation, Pasadena, CA, USA
Materials
The following materials are available in the Catanese Center Library for your convenience:
Frederick, Michael, “Why do we use traffic calming,” Neighborhood Transportation Management Program, St.
Petersburg, FL, 2003. Presentation materials.
ITE, “ITE Task Force Report Summary—A Proposed Recommended Practive: Smart Growth Transportation
Guidelines,” ITE Journal, Vol. 73, No. 3. March 2003, pp. 55.
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Providing a Safe, Reliable and Secure Transportation System: 2004 and
Beyond—ITE’s Policy Recommendations for the Reauthorization of the Federal Surface Transportation
Program, ITE, Washington, DC, Fall 2002.
Killingsworth, Rihcard E., Audrey de Nazelle, Richard Bell, “A New Role for Public Health in Transportation -Creating and Supporting Community Models for Active Transportation,” White Paper. Active Living by
Design National Program Office, University of North Carolina—Chapel Hill, NC, 2003.
KLD Associates, Inc., Innovation in Transportation: WATSim Simulation (3/4-D). Disks are available for viewing.
Walsh, Thomas, “Beyond Trains, Planes & Automobiles—Designing Transportation Systems for Active
Communities,” presentation. Department of Transportation, Madison, WI, 2003.
Wolshon, Brian, Elba Urbina, and Marc Levitan, National Review of Hurricane Evacuation Plans and Policies,
Louisiana State University Hurricane Center, Baton Rouge, LA, 2001. 2 copies.
Womble, Joseph E. and W. Martin Bretherton Jr., “Traffic Calming Deisgn Standards for New Residential Streets:
A Proactive Approach,” ITE Journal, Vol. 73, No. 3. March 2003, pp. 50-54.