Appendix E

Briefing Paper on Exploratory Topic 4: Implementing Sustainable and Resilient Land Use and Transportation System Design

Tasman Crowe, University College Dublin, Ireland

Timothy Sexton, City of Minneapolis, United States

A shift to zero-emission vehicles is critical to prevent the worst potential outcomes of the climate crisis. However, we need to do more than simply substitute vehicles powered by low/zero-emission fuels for current fossil fuel–powered vehicles or we will fail to achieve climate goals in other economic sectors (e.g., housing, industry, agriculture) and perpetuate existing inequities in health, safety, and access to economic opportunities. This topic area is built around opportunities to rethink our built environment to reduce climate pollution AND promote efficient use of resources, minimize environmental impacts more broadly, and promote the social and equity benefits of climate-smart community design. Sustainable and resilient land use and transportation system design are built around the following topics:

1. Integrated land use and surface transportation system design to enable low-carbon mobility, including the movement of people (walking, cycling, public transport, passenger rail) and the movement of goods (trucking, rail, and maritime freight transport needs).
2. Sustainable urban mobility planning, such as carbon-neutral cities, 15-minute cities, and reallocation of space.
3. Region-specific challenges and opportunities to shift modes based on movement of people or goods, geography, weather, land use patterns, and other variables.
4. New mobility, land use, and logistics options that consider smart land use and transportation system design.
5. Climate-smart and resilient infrastructure connections to low-carbon mobility, such as urban heat islands, sustainable pavements, and stormwater management.
6. System approaches to transport decarbonization (e.g., effects of setting targets or goals, holistic policy packages, assessing impacts and user needs).

The following sections present key questions to consider for discussion during the symposium.

RELEVANT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS

Sustainable transportation system design, including land use considerations, is directly influenced by government policies, programs, incentives, and investments that target decarbonization. However, land use and sustainable transportation systems may be even more influenced by government actions where transportation is not the primary consideration. This is especially true in the United States where the majority of transportation investment decisions are made at the state or county level but where nearly all land use decisions are made locally.

This disconnect between transportation investment and land use authority is one reason why state goals, policies, and incentives that target sustainable transportation may not be realized on the ground, especially in outer suburban or exurban communities focused on growth.

Sustainable Design

• How can sustainable design principles be integrated into land use and transportation planning?
• How can we integrate low-carbon goods transport vehicles and operations into land use planning?
  • E.g., how can government agencies partner with industry to develop Sustainable Urban Logistics Plans for refueling infrastructure, curb access for deliveries, timing and pricing considerations for urban deliveries, etc., to reduce congestion, noise, and other negative impacts?
• How should we design urban, sub/semi-urban, and urban communities for city concepts that support walking and cycling (e.g., 15-minute cities), while also taking account of housing and real-estate considerations?
• How can land use and transportation systems be designed to enhance resilience to climate change and natural disasters?
• How do we make the adoption of climate-smart infrastructure on urban streets economically feasible in transitioning to climate-neutral cities?
  • E.g., how can we maximize economic, ecologic, and safety co-benefits of green infrastructure?

Policies and Programs

• How can government policies, programs, and initiatives support compact growth in urban areas, suburbs, and rural towns?
  • E.g., how to provide public transport services for people in low-density rural and suburban areas?
• How do federal, state, and/or local transportation funding processes and requirements support or disincentivize climate-friendly land use?
• Where is the overlap between network management and public transport planning (e.g., ordinary versus emergency or disaster circumstances) and how can it be leveraged to promote climate resilience?

Public Engagement

• How are communities involved in land use and transportation planning decisions?
• How can involvement help stimulate acceptance and behavioral change?

New Mobility

• How do we increase safety for shared, micro-mobility, and other active transport modes and vehicle innovations (e.g., autonomous vehicles) in interactions with people walking, biking, and driving in order to enable shared and reduced car usage in cities and foster green mobility?
• How can public health benefits of active transportation modes be leveraged to strengthen policy and increase uptake?

Are there multidisciplinary approaches that can aid forecasting to improve the disaster management cycle (mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery, etc.) for transportation networks?

CURRENT STRATEGIES, TECHNOLOGY, AND RELEVANT CASE STUDIES

There is a growing base of examples and case studies of strategies to promote sustainable transportation system design at the various levels of government in the United States and the European Union, some of which have lessons learned that can be applied more broadly. The following thoughts and questions are meant to support a broader discussion about those best practices to better understand which have the potential for more universal application.

• What are examples of planning strategies that focus on sustainable land use, compact development, and transportation alternatives to support economic growth while minimizing environmental impact?
• How can planning policy allow for the coexistence of residential, commercial, and industrial uses in the same area, reducing the need for extensive travel?
• What factors influence individuals’ transportation choices and behaviors and how can we design interventions that encourage sustainable modes of transport?
• How can emerging technologies such as advanced data analytics, artificial intelligence, and the Internet of Things help with optimizing transportation systems and enhancing resilience?
• How do we encourage sustainable transport modes between towns in close proximity or clusters that may provide different services (schools, general public, shops, etc.) and therefore currently generate significant numbers of car journeys?
• What could be the impact of reduced “‘car storage’” requirements (when autonomous vehicles are dominant) on land use in town centers? Would this free up space for more housing, commercial activity, and green spaces?
• How can we manage limited urban space more dynamically (e.g., adaptive curbside management using real-time data)?
• What levers can be used to regulate access to space appropriately and effectively (e.g., for parking)?
• What are the opportunities for and costs of these strategies and technologies?
• What do we need to consider for adopting these strategies or technologies faster?
• What additional research is needed?

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

For the clean energy transition to be successful and sustainable, governments, nonprofits, and private-sector actors can prioritize actions with social, economic, and environmental co-benefits. For example, if we replace all internal combustion engines with electric motors, people walking, biking, and driving would still be killed in car crashes and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color would still be killed disproportionately to White people in the United States. Furthermore, people with lower incomes would still have the financial burden of car ownership that accounts for more than 30% of total income in the United States. In comparison, communities are generally denser in the European Union and have more complete transit networks that reduce the need for car ownership and driving to access critical services such as work and healthcare.

The following intends to inspire discussion about the specific consideration described above and encourage sharing of systems and decision-making frameworks that support transportation decarbonization and promote equity, social benefits, and economic vitality.

• How can design processes be structured to ensure social equity and inclusivity in urban and rural development to accommodate diverse communities?
• What methods should be used for involving communities and stakeholders in the decision-making processes related to land use and transportation planning?
• How can the true social and environmental costs of car dominance be made evident to communities to support a cultural and behavioral shift?
• How can we better understand perceived and real risks to a modal shift; what can be learnt from case studies where segregated sustainable transport infrastructure has been successful in precipitating a modal shift in rural areas?

• What strategies could support the transition to sustainable modes and/or autonomous vehicles, and how can we bring communities along with the changes? Where has this been achieved and how? What is the role of collaborative information and community technology tools in this?
• How do we ensure seamless connectivity for optimized and decarbonized transport while accounting for the unquantifiable social qualities of streets (sense of place and belonging, social interaction, vitality, etc.)?
• How can city planners design climate-proof urban streets (e.g., through wider inclusion of green infrastructure) while considering the pressure on urban land development and, at the same time, not losing street design qualities that contribute to street walkability, such as human scale, street proportions, and degree of enclosure?
• What actors (e.g., infrastructure owners, service users) are involved in decision making and land use planning? What objectives do the actors have and do they conflict? Can any objectives be seen as constraints and what are the limitations (e.g., network capacity in terms of flow that can be carried)?
• What aspects of network interdependence need to be considered? For example, in terms of electric vehicles, is there overlap or separation between the peak/off-peak hours of the power grid and transport network/traffic flows? Depending on the correlation, what strategies could help overcome related barriers?

NEW AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES OR OPPORTUNITIES

• What are the benefits and challenges of integrating green spaces (parks, urban forests) and blue infrastructure (water bodies, wetlands) into urban planning for enhanced sustainability and resilience?
• Is the New European Bauhaus (values and principles) an appropriate and effective framework for supporting the implementation of sustainable and resilient land use and transportation system design?
• What are the implications of co-working spaces (CWSs) on commuting habits and transportation system design? How does the location of a CWS (e.g., in a town center or in a peripheral business park site) relate to sustainable and resilient land use and transportation system design?
• How can we promote collaborative research efforts across disciplines—such as urban planning, engineering, environmental science, and sociology—to address the multifaceted nature of sustainable urban development?

CHALLENGES AND BARRIERS

The following examples outline different barriers in land use and transportation design and potential solutions to overcome these obstacles. Despite political, land use, and other differences, there are common threads and shared lessons between the United States and the European Union.

• Barrier: Lack of public awareness and involvement.
  • Solution: Implement robust public engagement strategies to involve communities in decision-making processes. Educate the public about the benefits of sustainable and resilient practices, addressing concerns and fostering support.
• Barrier: Insufficient funding for sustainable projects.
  • Solution: Explore innovative financing models, such as public–private partnerships, green bonds, and value capture mechanisms. Advocate for dedicated funding sources and demonstrate the long-term economic benefits of sustainable and resilient infrastructure.
• Barrier: Resistance to adopting new technologies.
  • Solution: Promote the integration of smart technologies and data analytics to optimize transportation systems. Offer training and incentives to encourage the adoption of innovative solutions among planners, engineers, and policymakers.
• Barrier: Outdated or restrictive zoning regulations.
  • Solution: Update zoning codes to accommodate mixed-use developments, higher density, and diverse housing options. Encourage flexible zoning that supports sustainable practices while meeting the needs of growing populations.

• Barrier: Lack of consideration for climate change impacts.
  • Solution: Integrate climate resilience considerations into planning processes. Conduct vulnerability assessments and develop adaptive strategies to address the potential impacts of climate change on transportation infrastructure.
• Barrier: Reluctance to adopt unproven strategies.
  • Solution: Implement small-scale demonstration projects and pilots to showcase the benefits and feasibility of sustainable and resilient practices. Use these projects as evidence to build support and confidence among stakeholders.
• Barrier: Short-term focus and lack of flexibility.
  • Solution: Adopt long-term planning perspectives that consider future trends and uncertainties. Design systems with the flexibility to adapt to changing conditions and emerging challenges.

CONCLUSION

The goal of this briefing paper was to inspire thoughts and discussion about how transportation professionals can and should think beyond technology to decarbonize our transportation systems. This includes solutions using existing technology and ways to use new transportation decarbonization technologies that will be introduced in the future. In some ways, there are vast differences between the United States and the European Union in terms of land use, governance, economics, etc. In other ways, there will be shared strategies, thought processes, creative solutions, and decision-making frameworks that can be successful in both places, sometimes with modifications to address these differences. When thinking through these strategies, big picture questions that should be considered include:

• What does the decarbonization of transport look like in urban and rural contexts?
• How will it affect land use and planning, particularly in rural towns and villages?
• How can the transition be made irresistible for communities?