Smart Growth

More Efficient Land Use Management

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Victoria Transport Policy Institute

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Updated 26 July 2008

This chapter describes various local and regional land use management practices that create more accessible, multi-modal, efficient and livable communities. People who live and work in such communities tend to drive less and rely more on alternative modes than in more automobile-dependent locations.

Description

Smart Growth (also called New Community Design) is a general term for policies that integrate transportation and land use decisions, for example by encouraging more Compact, mixed-use development within existing urban areas, and discouraging dispersed, automobile dependent development at the urban fringe. Smart Growth can help create more Accessible land use patterns, improve Transport Options, create more Livable communities, reduce public service costs and achieve other Land Use Objectives. Smart Growth is an alternative to urban sprawl. Major differences between these two land use patterns are compared in Table 1.

Table 1 Comparing Smart Growth and Sprawl (Ewing, 1996; Galster, et al, 2001)

	Smart Growth	Sprawl
Density	Compact development.	Lower-density, dispersed activities.
Growth pattern	Infill (brownfield) development.	Urban periphery (greenfield) development.
Land use mix	Mixed land use.	Homogeneous (single-use, segregated) land uses.
Scale	Human scale. Smaller buildings, blocks and roads. More detail, since people experience the landscape up close, as pedestrians.	Large scale. Larger buildings, blocks, wide roads. Less detail, since people experience the landscape at a distance, as motorists.
Public services (shops, schools, parks)	Local, distributed, smaller. Accommodates walking access.	Regional, consolidated, larger. Requires automobile access.
Transport	Multi-modal transportation and land use patterns that support walking, cycling and public transit.	Automobile-oriented transportation and land use patterns, poorly suited for walking, cycling and transit.
Connectivity	Highly connected roads, sidewalks and paths, allowing relatively direct travel by motorized and nonmotorized modes.	Hierarchical road network with numerous loops and dead-end streets, and unconnected sidewalks and paths, with many barriers to nonmotorized travel.
Street design	Streets designed to accommodate a variety of activities. Traffic calming.	Streets designed to maximize motor vehicle traffic volume and speed.
Planning process	Planned and coordinated between jurisdictions and stakeholders.	Unplanned, with little coordination between jurisdictions and stakeholders.
Public space	Emphasis on the public realm (streetscapes, pedestrian environment, public parks, public facilities).	Emphasis on the private realm (yards, shopping malls, gated communities, private clubs).

This table compares Smart Growth with sprawl land use patterns.

Because their impacts tend to be synergistic (total impacts are greater than the sum of their individual impacts) Smart Growth does not involve just one single change, it requires a number of integrated changes. For example, more compact development, improved walkability or increased transit service quality by themselves cannot be considered Smart Growth; rather, a Smart Growth program might involve more compact development, improved walkability and increased transit service quality.

Smart Growth emphasizes Accessibility, meaning that the activities people use frequently are located close together. For this reason, the basic unit of planning is the local community, neighborhood or “village,” that is, a mixed-use, Walkable area, one-half to one mile in diameter, with commonly-used public services (shops, schools, parks, etc.) Clustered into a central commercial area. This is in contrast to conventional planning, which tends to emphasize mobility as a solution to transport problems, and so tends to plan communities at a larger scale which relies primarily on motor vehicle travel, with little consideration to pedestrian access.

Smart Growth strives to provide the best of all possible worlds: adequate automobile mobility with good alternative Transport Options (as opposed to Automobile Dependent development which provides poor nonmotorized and transit travel, or Car-Free Planning which prohibits automobile use under certain circumstances), and Accessible, mixed-use, resource-efficient Land Use patterns that offer residents and employers a range of urban development density and price options, while preserving greenspace and community Livability as much as possible. Smart Growth results in modest reductions in per capita motor vehicle travel, typically reducing private automobile trips from the current 90-95% to 60-80% of trips by shifting a portion of local trips to nonmotorized modes, and regional trips to Ridesharing and Transit.

There is growing convergence of support for Smart Growth among a variety of professions and interest groups, ranging from transportation planners concerned with a variety of economic, social and environmental issues. For example transportation planners increasingly support Smart Growth as a way to improve Accessibility (ITE, 2002), public officials support it as a way to reduce public infrastructure and service costs (Hirschhorn, 2001), some people support it as a way to reduce environmental impacts, and others as a way to create more Livable communities.

Smart Growth includes a number of individual policies and practices, such as those listed in the box below. Which are implemented and how they are applied depends on the specific situation. Smart Growth is a relatively recent concept (although many of its practices are old), and so is developing and evolving as practitioners gain experience.

Smart Growth Practices

(Ewing, 1996; Bochner, 2000; USEPA, 2001; Trohimovich, 2001; Smart Growth Network, 2002; Smart Growth Policy Reforms)

· Strategic planning. Establish a comprehensive community vision which individual land use and transportation decisions should support.

· Create more self-contained communities. Reduce average trip distances, and encourage walking, cycling and transit travel, by locating a variety of compatible land uses within proximity of each other. For example, develop schools, shops and recreation facilities in or adjacent to residential areas. Mix land uses at the finest grain feasible.

· Maximize Accessibility and Transportation Options. Try to locate associated land uses close together (such as locating schools and commonly-used retail businesses within or next to residential neighborhoods), and support transportation diversity, including walking, cycling, ridesharing, public transit, Delivery Services and Telework.

· Create Walkable neighborhoods. Walkability is important for Smart Growth, because it increases community Livability and travel options (most transit trips include walking links).

· Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place. Encourage physical environments that create a sense of civic pride and community cohesion, including attractive public spaces, high-quality architectural and natural elements that reflect unique features of the community, preservation of special cultural and environmental resources, and high standards of maintenance and repair.

· Encourage quality, compact development. Allow and encourage higher density development, particularly around transit and Commercial Centers. Reduce minimum lot sizes, building setbacks, minimum parking requirements, and minimum street size. Allow transfer of develop capacity of outlying areas to more centralized areas. Demand high quality designs that addresses problems associated with higher density.

· Use Context Sensitive Design. Foster distinctive communities with a strong sense of place.

· Encourage Cluster development. Keep clusters small and well defined, such as “urban villages” with distinct names and characters. Coordinate development to facilitate accessibility. For example, encourage employment centers near commercial centers, so employees can walk to perform errands during their breaks.

· Encourage infill development. Reduce average trip distances, and encourage walking, cycling and transit travel, by locating new development in already developed areas, so that activities are close together. Review public costs to insure that public expenditures do not favor new, greenfield development over existing residents or infill development. Encourage redevelopment of older facilities and brownfields.

· Reform tax and utility rates. Structure property taxes, development fees and utility rates to reflect the lower public service costs of clustered, infill development, and focus economic development incentives to encourage businesses to locate in more accessible locations (Smart Growth Policy Reforms).

· Concentrate activities. Encourage pedestrian and transit travel by creating “nodes” of high-density, mixed development that are linked by convenient transit service. Concentrate commercial activities in these areas. Retain strong downtowns and central business districts. Use access management to discourage arterial strip commercial development.

· Encourage Transit Oriented Development. Increase development density within walking distance (0.25 to 0.50 miles) of high capacity transit stations and corridors, and provide high quality pedestrian and cycling facilities in those areas.

· Manage parking for efficiency. Encourage Shared Parking, and other Parking Management strategies. Reserve the most convenient parking for rideshare vehicles.

· Avoid overly-restrictive zoning. Reduce excessive and inflexible parking and road capacity requirements. Limit undesirable impacts (noise, smells and traffic) rather than broad categories of activities. For example, allow shops and services to locate in neighborhoods provided that they are sized and managed to avoid annoying residents.

· Good roadway Connectivity. Create a network of well-connected streets and paths, with short blocks and minimal cul-de-sacs. Keep streets as narrow as possible, particularly in residential areas and commercial centers. Use traffic management and traffic calming to control vehicle impacts rather than dead ends and cul de sacs.

· Site design and building orientation. Encourage buildings to be oriented toward city streets, rather than set back behind large parking lots. Avoid large areas of parking or other unattractive land uses in commercial areas.

· Improve nonmotorized travel conditions. Encourage walking and cycling by improving sidewalks, paths, crosswalks, protection from fast vehicular traffic, and providing street amenities (trees, awnings, benches, pedestrian-oriented lighting, etc.). Improve connections for nonmotorized travel, such as trails that link dead-end streets.

· Implement TDM. Use transportation demand management to reduce total vehicle traffic and encourage the use of efficient modes. This includes parking and road pricing, commute trip reduction programs, policies that favor high-occupancy vehicles, and other strategies.

· Improve street design to create complete streets. Use road space reallocation, access management, road diets, and traffic calming to insure that walking, cycling and public transit are convenient and comfortable, and to accommodate other street activities such as strolling, playing, shopping, sightseeing, eating and special events.

· Preserve greenspace. Preserve open space, particularly areas with high ecological and recreational value. Channel development into areas that are already disturbed.

· Encourage a mix of housing types and prices. Develop affordable housing near employment, commercial and transport centers. Develop second suites, apartments over shops, lofts, location-efficient mortgages and other innovations that help create more affordable housing.

· Utility Management. Use on-site stormwater drainage systems. Encourage water conservation.

Although clustering of activities (such as locating commonly-used retail and public services near residential areas, and grouping worksites and retail together into Commercial Centers) and increased density are important Smart Growth strategies, it does not require a particular level of density to be effective, it simply requires more clustering and density than would otherwise occur. Objectives and strategies tend to differ depending on whether an area is urban, suburban and exurban (JHK Associates, 1995).

· Urban: In urban areas it emphasizes redevelopment and infill of existing urban neighborhoods, improving mixed-use design features (such as Traffic Calming of urban streets and Location Efficient Development), and enhancing multi-modal transport systems, particularly walking and public transit.

· Suburban: In suburban areas it creates medium-density, mixed-use, multi-modal centers (sometimes called Transit Villages), either by incrementally developing existing suburban communities or by master-plan developments that reflect Smart Growth principles. It encourages more complete suburban communities (more local services and employment in suburban jurisdictions), and improved regional travel options such as Ridesharing and Transit Improvements. It supports greenspace preservation.

· Rural: In rural areas Smart Growth involves policies that help channel development and public services into accessible, mixed-use villages (for example, having schools, stores and affordable housing located close together and well connected by good walking facilities), and implementation of Rural Community TDM (Twaddell and Emerine, 2007).

Smart Growth can help achieve strategic land use objectives, including increased Accessibility and Transportation Options, more cost effective infrastructure, reduced impervious surface, and greenspace and historic preservation (Land Use Evaluation).

Smart Growth does not eliminate urban expansion or suburban development but it changes such development to help achieve resource efficiency and community Livability goals. Smart Growth reflects Sustainable Development objectives. Smart Growth incorporates many efficiency and amenity features private developers apply to “master planned” communities, such as incremental expansion of development to minimize infrastructure costs, and coordination between land uses to maximize access. It allows such features be implemented in existing communities and in new communities with multiple developers.

There is considerable debate concerning the desirability of Smart Growth (Gordon and Richardson, 1997, and counterpoint by Ewing; Burchell, et al., 1998; Moretti, 1999; Mills 1999; Litman, 2003). Critics argue that Smart Growth provides little real benefits, increases congestion, makes residents worse off, and is unpopular with consumers. Proponents counter that the total economic, social and environmental benefits are substantial, and point to the popularity of New Urbanism developments and to surveys indicating that consumers prefer communities with coordinated planning and Smart Growth design features (Eppli and Tu, 2000), and in some areas population and employment trends have favored urban over suburban areas (Hughes and Seneca, 2004).

Smart Growth critics tend to focus on individual factors without considering the overall effects of a coordinated Smart Growth program (Litman, 2003). For example, critics often highlight negative impacts associated with density, such as increased congestion, without considering how Smart Growth can offset such problems by improving access and travel choice.

How It Is Implemented

Smart Growth is usually implemented as a set of policies and programs by state/provincial, regional or local governments. It can be incorporated into land use development, often in exchange for reduced development fees and parking requirements (Seggerman, Hendricks and Fleury, 2005). Implementation often requires Policy, Institutional and Regulatory reforms (Hirschhorn, 2001). To be effective it requires multi-jurisdictional coordination. Many professional and non-profit organizations involved in planning, urban development and quality of life issues support Smart Growth, including the American Planning Association, the National Governor’s Association, and citizen-based environmental groups. The Table below indicates the level of government action that can implement specific Smart Growth measures.

Table 2 Smart Growth Implementation

Smart Growth Measure

Implementation Mechanism

Increased Density and Infill Development

State growth controls.

State development incentives.

Local growth controls.

Local incentives.

Transit Oriented Development

State development incentives.

Local growth controls.

Local incentives.

Jobs/Housing Balance

State growth controls.

State development incentives.

Local growth controls.

Local incentives.

Land Use Mixing

Local growth controls.

Local design controls.

Local incentives.

Tax, Development Fees and Utility Pricing Reforms

State tax policy.

Local development and tax policy.

Utility rate structure.

Neotraditional Design

Local growth controls.

Local design controls.

Local incentives.

Site Design and Parking Management

Local zoning codes.

Local design controls.

Travel Impacts

Smart Growth does not eliminate automobile travel, but it can significantly reduce per capita automobile travel compared with sprawled development patterns, as discussed in the chapters on Land Use Impacts and Transportation Price Elasticities. Smart Growth tends to reduce automobile travel through specific mechanisms described below.

· Clustering of population and employment, which increases Accessibility (e.g., proximity to employment, shops and schools), and travel choice (better transit, ridesharing, and better pedestrian facilities).

· Land use mix, such as commercial and public services located within or adjacent to residential areas, which increases access and travel choice.

· Parking Management and Parking Pricing can reduce automobile travel, encourage use of alternative modes, and reduce the amount of land paved for parking facilities, creating accessible and pedestrian-friendly landscape (see Evaluating Nonmotorized Transport).

· Traffic Calming and other measures that reduce automobile traffic speeds, which reduces driving and improves conditions for walking, cycling and transit use.

· A more Connected street network improves access.

· More attractive, safer streets, and pedestrian-oriented land use, encourages nonmotorized travel.

· An effective transit system tends to reduce per capita automobile travel, particularly when integrated with supportive land use (high-density development with good pedestrian access within half-kilometer of transit stations).

· Other TDM strategies can be incorporated into Smart Growth, including Commute Trip Reduction, School and Campus Trip Reduction, Carsharing and Road Pricing, to further reduce per capita vehicle travel.

A USEPA study (2004) found that regardless of population density, transportation system design features such as greater street Connectivity, a more pedestrian-friendly environment, shorter route options, and more extensive transit service have a positive impact on performance, (per-capita vehicle travel, congestion delays, traffic accidents and pollution emissions). The USEPA Smart Growth Index (SGI) Model (www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/sgipilot.htm) is a tool for predicting the impacts that various land use factors such as density, mix, roadway design, transit service and regional accessibility have on personal travel. One study predicts that households make 20-25% fewer automobile trips if located in a higher density, transit-oriented suburb than in a conventional, low density, auto-oriented suburb (Cambridge Systematics, 1992). The table below summarizes the effects that some design features can have on trip generation to a particular site.

Table 3 Travel Impacts of Land Use Design Features (Dagang, 1995)

Design Feature	Reduced Vehicle Travel
Residential development around transit centers.	10%
Commercial development around transit centers.	15%
Residential development along transit corridor.	5%
Commercial development along transit corridor.	7%
Residential mixed-use development around transit centers.	15%
Commercial mixed-use development around transit centers.	20%
Residential mixed-use development along transit corridors.	7%
Commercial mixed-use development along transit corridors.	10%
Residential mixed-use development.	5%
Commercial mixed-use development.	7%

Table 4 summarizes the effects of land use factors on travel behavior. Actual impacts will vary depending on specific conditions and the combination of factors applied, as discussed in Litman, 2005.

Table 4 Land Use Impacts on Travel (Litman, 2005)

Factor	Definition	Travel Impacts
Density	People or jobs per unit of land area (acre or hectare).	Increased density tends to reduce per capita vehicle travel. Each 10% increase in urban densities typically reduces per capita VMT by 1-3%.
Mix	Degree that related land uses (housing, commercial, institutional) are located close together.	Increased land use mix tends to reduce per capita vehicle travel, and increase use of alternative modes, particularly walking for errands. Neighborhoods with good land use mix typically have 5-15% lower vehicle-miles.
Regional Accessibility	Location of development relative to regional urban center.	Improved accessibility reduces per capita vehicle mileage. Residents of more central neighborhoods typically drive 10-30% fewer vehicle-miles than urban fringe residents.
Centeredness	Portion of commercial, employment, and other activities in major activity centers.	Centeredness increases use of alternative commute modes. Typically 30-60% of commuters to major commercial centers use alternative modes, compared with 5-15% of commuters at dispersed locations.
Network Connectivity	Degree that walkways and roads are connected to allow direct travel between destinations.	Improved roadway connectivity can reduce vehicle mileage, and improved walkway connectivity tends to increase walking and cycling.
Roadway design and management	Scale, design and management of streets.	More multi-modal streets increase use of alternative modes. Traffic calming reduces vehicle travel and increases walking and cycling.
Walking and Cycling conditions	Quantity, quality and security of sidewalks, crosswalks, paths, and bike lanes.	Improved walking and cycling conditions tends to increase nonmotorized travel and reduce automobile travel. Residents of more walkable communities typically walk 2-4 times as much and drive 5-15% less than if they lived in more automobile-dependent communities.
Transit quality and accessibility	Quality of transit service and degree to which destinations are transit accessible.	Improved service increases transit ridership and reduces automobile trips. Residents of transit oriented neighborhoods tend to own 10-30% fewer vehicles, drive 10-30% fewer miles, and use alternative modes 2-10 times more frequently than residents of automobile-oriented communities.
Parking supply and management	Number of parking spaces per building unit or acre, and how parking is managed.	Reduced parking supply, increased parking pricing and implementation of other parking management strategies can significantly reduce vehicle ownership and mileage. Cost-recovery pricing (charging users directly for parking facilities) typically reduces automobile trips by 10-30%.
Site design	The layout and design of buildings and parking facilities.	More multi-modal site design can reduce automobile trips, particularly if implemented with improved transit services.
Mobility Management	Policies and programs that encourage more efficient travel patterns.	Mobility management can significantly reduce vehicle travel for affected trips. Vehicle travel reductions of 10-30% are common.

This table describes various land use factors that can affect travel behavior and population health.

Although individual strategies may have modest travel effects, typically reducing total vehicle traffic by just a few percentage points, their impacts are cumulative and synergetic. A comprehensive Smart Growth program using cost-effective strategies (i.e., strategies that are fully justified for their direct economic and consumer benefits) can reduce total per capita automobile travel by 20-40% compared with conventional, automobile-dependent land use patterns and transportation policies.

The table below summarizes estimated travel impacts that can typically be achieved by Smart Growth. Of course, these impacts can vary significantly depending on specific policies, geography, demographics, and time frame.

Table 5 Travel Impact Summary

Travel Impact	Rating	Comments
Reduces total traffic.	3	Results in more efficient land use and improved travel alternatives.
Reduces peak period traffic.	2