Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
FALL 1 9 9 4
N U M B E R 3
C O N T E \ T S
A c c e s s N o I F ( 1 1 1 1 9 9 4
ilighway Blues: 2
Nothing a Little Accessibility Can't Cure
SUSAN HANDY
Transit Villages: 8
rom I d e a ( 0 I m p l e m e n t a t i o n
ROBERT CERVERO
Papers in Print 3 2
The ACCESS A i r i o n a c A O
PI% h a P i l ( 1 1 0 8 4 I r
C a l v r e i t y o l C 0 1111 r n i e T r a n e p o r t o t i o n Certifier
IOS N a v a l A r c h l t e t u o r e I u I I d h I , S e r k l a y , C A . 4 7 1 0
Tell 51011.13,737 P a m $11064.115454.
e-eed: A C C I S S U C L I N C I l i t e t i t i t . 1 0 1 )
Aothors of posters repotting on OCTC lip:Aniseed mbearch ate wleiy frtpanlible Fer tiNer content This research was sponsored by the
US Departnsent al troneponotion OM the Carifornia Department al Transportation. neither of which it liols4e For itt content 0t VI4
1
In this issue of Acciiss, we examine how land use which simulates the effects of specific land use and trans-
considerations can improve transportation planning. ismation policies on urban growth patterns. The model
Transportation planners have traditionally sought to max- allows transportation planners to coordinate with city plan-
imize mobility by supplying better roads and common ners before new land use patterns develop, instead of
carriers, thus making it easier to move around. Seldom responding after the fact.
have they sought to improve the characteristics of desti- Future plans will undoubtedly include public transit.
nations. That's been the responsibility of city planners but the current transit financing crisis and the resultant
and land developers. But, say our authors, that separation cutbacks in many cities indicate that this will not be an
of land use and transportation planning is no longer good easy task. Charles Lave traces the origin of transit's
enough. financial problems. Starting thirty years ago, a series of
Susan Handy opens the discussion by urging that federal attempts to help the transit industry actually pro-
transportation planners promote accessibility, rather than duced a progressive decline in its basic productivity.
mobility. Having recently moved to Austin. Texas, where nearly doubling the cost of providing bus services. The
streets and highways dominate the transportation system. future seems likely to see continued financial crisis and
she bemoans having to drive everywhere, wishing she further service cutbacks.
could just walk in places having rich mixtures of shopping, Concerned about the decline, in some places the
eating, and other activities. Highways promote dispersion demise, of public transit, Melvin Webber looks at con-
of destinations, she claims, forcing dependence on cars. temporary land use patterns and concludes that mass
thus leading to further dispersion. She asks us to focus on transitthat is. transit using large vehiclesis a misfit
getting people to various places, instead of focusing on in America's suburbs. Given the small numbers of travel-
road construction that merely facilitates movement. In ers having the same origins, destinations, and schedules,
addition to encouraging alternative transport modes, plan. Webber holds that successful suburban transit must
tiers should explore alternative land use patterns, she says. use automobiles and other small vehicles. He envisions
proposing to get people to desired destinations by bring- centralized and computerized transport agencies using
ing the various destinations closer together. modern telecommunications to assure real-time door-to-
Land use patterns that concentrate housing near door transit service, comparable in convenience to that of
transit stations seem to boost accessibility. Robert private automobiles.
Cervero, Michael Bernick. and their students have been Our authors are calling on transportation planners*
studying the feasibility of transit villagessmall commu- creativity in getting people to their destinations.whether
nities where residents can live, shop, enjoy the outdoors, it's sending transit vehicles to our doors, or putting our
and walk to public transit. Their research into recent hous- doors next to transit stations, or planning for more shops
ing developments near California rail stations finds that and services to be clustered together. That means we
new properties were leased quickly, at above-average must work toward enhanced accessibility, not merely
prices, and to people who use the nearby transit. Their increased mobility. For them, as for our magazine, the
findings, summarized here by Cervero. led them to draft key concept is access.
a bill for the California legislature that creates incentives
for building mixed-use developments around transit sta-
tions. The Transit Village Act (AB 3152) has now been Lydia Chen.
adopted and signed into law. Editor
II transportation planners are actively to consider land
use patterns, even going so far as to advocate land use poli-
cies. they'll need improved analytic and planning tools.
John Landis describes his California Urban Futures Model
H i g h w a y Blues:
Nothing a Little Accessibility Can't Cure
BY S U S A N H A N D Y
A ( C I S S
iALL 1 9 9 4
The difference between Berkeley and Austin. as I see it. is the difference between
accessibility and mobility. In Berkeley. getting around by car is a pain, but I can get to
the kinds of places I like. In Austin, I drive around easily, but it doesn't really do me much
good because I can't get to the kinds of places I like. Of course, to some degree I have
noone to blame but myself for Austin's lack of accessibility. After all, the fact that I don't
like barbecue as much as burritos and I prefer walking to driving is a matter of taste and
training.
But Austin's lack of accessibilitythe lack from my perspectiveis the fault of
others. too. It's the fault of land use planners, whose traditional approach to zoning seg-
regated rather than integrated land uses and whose long-range plans have failed to coor-
dinate the city's growth. It's the fault of big retailers, who prefer big sites near freeways
and expressways with parking ample enough to meet Christmas-season demand. It's the
fault of developers, who favor the fringe of the city where the land is cheap and plentiful.
It's the fault of my fellow Austinites who haven't demanded the things I miss (partly
because they don't know what they're missing) and who are perfectly happy to drive.
And it's the fault of transportation planners, who have focused their attention on
increasing road capacity to accommodate ever-increasing traffic. This approach might
increase accessibility in the short run, but new freeways and expressways have enabled
lower-density development throughout the city and have pushed the edge of the city
outward. The resulting increase in mileage between activities and the automobile-orien-
tation of the development that has occurred have killed off almost all nonautomobile
alternatives.
Not only does this mean that accessibility declines, it means that automobile use
increases, which means that congestion increases, which means that automobile travel
times increase, which means that eventually accessibility declines even further. The net
result is that despite all that road construction, it's getting harder to get places.
SIGNS OF CHANGE
The problem is that transportation plannersin Austin and just about everywhere
elsehave historically focused their efforts on enhancing mobility, particularly auto-
mobile mobility, with little understanding of or thought for the long-run impact on acces-
sibility. Fortunately, we are seeing encouraging signs of a broadening perspective, a
growing awareness of the role of the transportation system in the development process
and in the creation of livable communities.
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) has helped
to propagate the concept of a single, integrated transportation system, rather than a
collection of competing modes. Although automobileor more precisely highway and
freewaymobility is still the primary focus of the federal program (as shown by the
breakdown of funding), ISTEA emphasizes transit and other nonautomobile modes as
well. Expanded alternatives to the automobile and improved coordination among modes
will create a greater range of choice, and more choices in the transportation system will
enhance accessibility.
A growing recognition of the importance of land use broadens the discussion
further. Transportation planners increasingly view transportation and land use as com-
plementary components of the larger metropolitan system. The question transportation
planners often now ask is: how can we design communities to provide better envi-
ronments for pedestrians. bicyclists, and transit riders and thus reduce automobile depen-
dence? They may also ask: how can we provide more opportunities within closer dis-
tances and thus reduce total travel? Trdnsportation planners are implicitly asking: how
can we enhance accessibility by changing land use patterns rather than only by expand-
ing the transportation system?
It's not that transportation planners haven't recognized the importance of land use
in the past, but rather that they've left it to others. Transportation planners have tradi-
tionally taken the current or projected land use pattern as a given, then analyzed the
implied generation and distribution of trips. They have focused on the performance of
the transportation system, not the overall performance of the metropolitan system. In the
emerging ISTEA way of thinking, transportation planners must consider how best To
change land use patterns, as well as how best to change the transportation system. I don't
mean to say that transportation planners shouldn't worry about movement. Rather, they
should worry about movement not for mobility's sake but for accessibility's sake.
Three lirst steps are now needed: agreement on the distinctions between accessi-
bility and mobility, consensus among transportation planners and everyone else involved
on the goal of enhanced accessibility, and development of performance measures that
will allow us to monitor our progress toward this goal.
WHAT I S ACCESSIBILITY?
Accessibility is the potential for interaction, both social and economic. It is deter-
mined by the spatial distribution of potential destinations, the ease of reaching each
destination. and the magnitude, quality, and character of the activities found there. Travel
cost is central: the less that travel costs in time and money, the more places that can
ElliE111101=
N U I I I S FA L L 1 9 9 4
be reached within a certain budget and the greater the accessibility. Destination choice
is also crucial: the more destinations, and the more varied the destinations, the higher
the level of accessibility. Travel choice is equally important the wider the variety of
modes for getting to a particular destination, the greater the choice and the greater the
accessibility. Accessibility is thus determined by both patterns of land use and the nature
of the transportation system, although two people in the same place may evaluate their
accessibility differently, as wants and tastes vary.
In contrast, mobility is the ability to travel, the potential for movement. It reflects
the spatial structure of the transportation network and the level and quality of its service.
Mobility is determined by such characteristics as road capacity and design speed and.
in the case of automobile mobility. by how many other people are using the roads. Like
accessibility, mobility may vary by person, as different people have different physical
and monetary capacities. But mobility is a characteristic of the transportation system
alone; it is one half of the equation only.
Good mobility usually contributes to good accessibility because it means easier trav-
el between two points, but good mobility doesn't do you any good if the places you'd like
to reach don't existmy situation in Austin. And poor mobility doesn't necessarily mean
poor accessibility. if goods, services, and activities can be accessed without vehicular
travelby using telecommunications, for exampleor within very short distances, as
wasmy situation in Berkeley. Mobility is not a sufficient condition, nor is it always a nec-
essary condition for accessibility.
The concept of accessibility acknowledges that the demand for travel is derived
from the demand for activities. The concept of mobility ignores the derived nature of
travel demand, focusing instead on the the ability to travel, as though sheer movement
were an end in itself. But mobility is only the meansactivities are the end and acces-
sibility the key.
As a planning goal, accessibility has two critical advantages over mobility. First it
allows for trade-offs between land use and transportation policies and focuses attention
onthe levelof-service of the metropolitan system as a whole, rather than ofjust the trans-
portation system. Policies designed to increase the mixing of land uses can be compared
to policies designed to increase the capacity of an intersection, for example, by answer-
ing the question: what effect does each have on accessibility? Second, accessibility as a
planning goal provides clear direction for policy makers. While increased mobility may
be a good thing, higher levels of accessibility are inherently a good thing.
This means that transportation planners and land use planners must work together,
for a change. The best example we have of coordinated transportation and land use plan-
ning is probably Portland. Oregon. where state-level mandates have pushed coordina-
tion: an urban-growth boundary was adopted at the same time that policies shifted away
from freeway expansion. and land use plans are now being created for development of
areas around current and future light-rail stations. Austin planners look longingly to
A C C I S S
F U R T H E R R E A D I N G
Portland and dream of the day when cooperation between land use and transportation
plannersand among the environmental community, the neighborhoods, and the J. B l a c k a n d M . C o n r o y, "Accessibility
developersmight be even half as good. Getting all parties to buy into the common goal M e a s u r e s a n d t h e Social E v a l u a t i o n o f U r b a n
S t r u c t u r e . - E n v i r o n m e n t a n d Planning A ,
of enhancing accessibility is a crucial step toward building livable communities.
Vo4. 9. 9977. pp. 1013-1031.
change as well. Because mobility has been so central to transportation planners, they P. R . S t o p h e r. a d s , . B e h a v i o u r a l Tr a v a l
Modelling ( L o n d o n : C r o o m H e l m . 1 9 7 9 1 .
almost universally use performance measures that reflect the ease with which vehicles
can get through the transportation systemmeasures like freeway and intersection level- R e i d E w i n g , ' ' l l ' a n S n O r t a t i O n SIN4ce-
S t a n d a r d s : A l 11 People M a t t e r . '
of-service, or volume-to-capacity ratios, or vehicle-miles-traveled. If our goal is accessi-
Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n R e s e a r c h R e c o r d .
bility, then we must abandon these measures and develop new measures that reflect the Vol, 1 4 0 0 , 1 9 9 3 ,
with accessibility and its contribution to quality of life in a metropolitan region, then our Vol, 1 3 4 . 1 9 7 9 . p p . 9 1 - 1 0 9
measures of accessibility must accurately reflect residents' own evaluationsconscious Wa r r e d O w e n , T h e Accessibto Ctry
and unconsciousof their COMMUnity. ( Wa s h i n g t o n , D.C. T h e B r o o k i n g s
inst)tution. 1 9 7 2 )
While an extensive literature on accessibility measures provides a place to start, a
great deal more work is needed before we'll understand how best to measure accessi- Pills. " T h e Possibility a n d P o t e n t i a l
bility. A number of research efforts are underway, in fact, to develop new kinds of per- of Public Policy o n Accessibility."
Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n R e s e a r c h A . Vo l , 1 5 A , N o . S .
formance measures and may produce recommendations for measuring accessibility. 1981. 00. 3 7 7 - 3 8 1 .
Communities will find it even harder. however, to set accessibility standards and imple-
M. Wa c h s a n d I . G o r d o n K u m a g a i .
ment the policies necessary for reaching their goals.
" P h y s k a l Accessibility as a Social I n d i c a t o r. "
Socio-,Econorntic M a n n i n g Science, Vo l . 7 .
GETTING PEOPLE TO WHERE THEY WANT TO BE 1 9 7 3 . P P. 4 3 7 - 4 5 6
If we start thinking about accessibility rather than mobility, we will begin to envi-
sion all kinds of new possibilities, new approaches, new solutions. Instead of fighting
the endless conflict between maintaining mobility and controlling the negative effects
of transportation, we can move on to constructive discussions of alternatives that
enhance accessibility while protecting the environment and improving the quality of life
in our communities.
Metropolitan life is rich because it offers a spectrum of opportunities for work, for
learning, for shopping, for play. The problem with today's metropolitan regions is not
how slowly the traffic flows on the freeway during rush hour. but rather how hard it is
to get from home to work, to the store, to a friend's houseand sometimes to a good
Chine-se restaurant.
A ( M S
TRANSIT One of the more disappointing transportation trends of the 1980s
was mass transit's declining market share of metropolitan trips
throughout the United States. Despite the infusion of tens of
- A C C E S S
Transit Villages have been attracted to these sites because, by building on exist-
The soinewhat nostalgic-sounding name of 'transit village" ing lots, they eliminate the risks of negotiating land purchases
has gained currency in recent years to describe these places among multiple property owners. Bay Area planners hope that
moderately dense, rnixed-use communities that. by design, invite building housing atop former park-and-ride lots will lead to mini-
residents, workers, and shoppers to drive their cars less and use communities mushrooming around dozens of rail stations, as
transit more. Transit villages are hardly new ideas. They borrow BARrs creators envisaged more than 40 years ago.
from the visions of early city planners like Ebenezer Howard, Local governments are doing a lot to promote transit-ori-
who in M S advanced the idea of building garden cities that ented development in California. The city of El Cerrito, for
would orbit London. separated by protected greenbelts and con- instance, formed a redevelopment district around the Del Node
nected by inter-municipal railways. In the United States, exam- BAIn. station in the early 1990s for the purpose of promoting
ples of early streetcar neighborhoods include Back Bay in affordable housing development near the station. Using tax-
Boston. Riverside near Chicago, Roland Park in Baltimore, and increment financing to help underwrite the cost of assembling
central Pasadena_ These neighborhoods, designed by the likes land for the project, the city worked closely with a developer to
of Andrew Jackson Downing and Frederick Law Olmstead. create the Del Norte Place project, a 135-unit apartment
depended on pedestrian access to transit to reach downtown jobs complex with 19,000 square feet of ground-floor retail; 27 of
and neighborhood centers, since they were built prior to the the units are priced below market as set asides for low- and
invention of the automobile. Many of America's early rail-served moderate-income families. Del Norte Place has leased rapidly.
neighborhoods featured small cottage houses, had distinctive It opened in mid-I992 and by mid-1993. 97 percent of its apart-
grid-iron street patterns, and focused on a prominent civic space ments were occupied.
near the rail stop. In Santa Clara County, several large housing projects, called
Few good examples of transit village development exist in -trandominiums" by local boosters, have recently been built that
the United States today. Of course there are high-rise apartment rely on rail proximity as a marketing tool. As part of the county's
towers near subways in big cities like New York and some recent Housing Initiative Program, plans are underway to build more
mixed-use concentrations near suburban rail stations in metro- than 13.700 units of moderate-density housing (at 12 to 40 du per
politan Washington. D.C. and in the San Francisco East Bay; how- acre) near light-rail stations. Sacramento's updated General Plan
ever, few such places could be characterized as "villages." calls for using an array of development incentives at 13 light-rail
Perhaps Europe offers the best modern-day examples of transit stations, including higher allowable densities, lower minimum
village development, where dozens of compact, mixed-use satel- parking requirements, tax increment financing, and industrial
lite communities are interconnected by regional rail systems in development bonds. The city of San Diego has perhaps done the
metropolises like Stockholm and Copenhagen. In 1990, 38 per- most in recent years to embrace transit-oriented design concepts,
cent of the residents and 53 percent of the workers of Stockholm's adopting a formal policy "to direct growth into compact neigh-
rail-served new towns commuted by transit. borhood patterns of development, where living and working envi-
ronments are within walkable distances of transit sytems,"10tay
Transit-Focused D e v e l o p m e n t In California Ranch, a n taster-plan ned community under construction adjacent
While the transit village is merely a concept today, recent to the cities of San Diego and Chula Vista, will feature five village
housing developments near California rail stations could turn the clusters, at blended densities of 18 du per acre, that will be served
concept into a reality. Over the past decade., 28 large housing pro- directly by an extension of the trolley line. A.-
jects have been built within one-quarter mile of such stations.
Most are rental apartment complexes with densities of 20 to 60
dwelling units (du) per acre, well above the benchmark of 12 to
15 do per acre used by planners as the minimum threshold nec-
essary to support rail in the suburbs. Presently, both Santa Clara
County Light Rail and BART are converting surface parking lots
at several stations into residential/retail projects. Developers
A C C E S S
EAU 1994
M a r k e t f o r Tr a n s i t Villages return for more amenities like neighbor- Builders are starting to recognize that a
Relatively little is known about the hood parks, retail shops, and eateries. number of young downtown workers
market potential of transit village devel- Far more respondents were willing earning professional wages are attracted
opment, in large part because little has to reside in a transit village setting with to rail-based housing. Projects with more
been built to date. Transit-oriented pro- densities of 36 du per acre and nicer amenities and catering to the tastes of
jects such as the celebrated Laguna West amenities than in a similar setting with 24 young professionals will likely appeal to
development south o f Sacramento. du per acre but fewer community services potential renters and buyers. One exam-
designed by architect Peter Calthorpe. or amenities. Notably, people preferred ple is the Park Regency Apartment devel-
have struggled financially and for the tightly spaced two-and-a-half-story row opment near the Pleasant Hal BART
most part incorporate modest transit pro- houses located near a public park and station, an upmarket complex, complete
visions. Significant obstacles to building retail shops, to one- or two-story row with a pool, spa/sauna, and recreational
transit villages include questionable mar- houses with larger yards but no nearby building, that has a waiting list of hopeful
ket viability, a shortage of conventional park and fewer local services. tenants. Three-quarters of the Park
financing, not-in-my-backyard opposition Regency's occupants are in the 18-34 year-
to multi-unit housing development (espe- W h o C u r r e n t l y Lives in old range, and more than 50 percent earn
cially in the suburbs), and the existence Rail-Based Housing? more than $40.000 annually.
of multiple landholders near many rail We also recently surveyed the resi- Because rail-based households own
systems (thus impeding land assem- dents of 28 large-scale housing projects relatively few cars, zoning standards
blage). Presently, the entire transit village near California rail stations. They tend to should be relaxed to allow just one park-
movement seems caught in a catch-22: be young professionals, singles, and ing space per unit in complexes near rail
there are few examples, in part, because emptynesters, with typically just one car stations. This would help drive down con-
of questionable market feasibility, arid the per househokl. In twelve housing projects struction costs by an estimated $12,000
market potential of transit villages is ques- near BARI', for instance, there is an aver- per unit and also create a more petiestri-
tionable because there are few examples. age of 1,66 people and 1.26 vehicles pee an-oriented environment. Tenants could
In the absence of good U.S. examples household, compared to an average of choose to pay a monthly surcharge for
of transit villages, researchers with the 2,40 people and 1.64 vehicles for all other leasing a second parking stall in a central
National Transit Access Center at UC households in the same census tracts. location. Another novel idea would have
Berkeley recently attempted to dynami- However, what most distinguishes resi- banks grant those living in rail-based con-
cally simulate them using computer-gen- dents of housing near California rail sys- dominiums an -efficient-location" loan. If
erated images. We presented slides of the tems is their tendency to work downtown rail-based housing does lower transporta-
computer images, showing a -walk and in other locations well served by Iran - tion costs, then these savings might
through- four neighborhoods with differ- sit In the case of five apartment and condo be subtracted from principal, interest,
ent density/amenity mixes, to more than complexes near the Hayward and San taxes, and insurance when calculating
170 residents throughout the San Leandro suburban BART stations, 43 mortgage qualifications.
Francisco Bay Area and more than 20 of percent of employed residents work in
the region's largest housing developers. downtown San Francisco or Oakland. Rail-Based Housing, Rents,
We controlled factors such as building compared to just 13 percent in the sur- and Ridership
style and newness so that only densities rounding census tracts. And an estimated We recently compared 1990 rents
and amenities varied across the neigh- 50 percent of the residents of 1.600 apart. between multi-unit suburban projects
borhoods. We particularly wanted to learn merit units near the suburban Pleasant within a quarter mile of BART stations ver-
how willing people might be to accept Hill BART station work in downtown San sus projects beyond walking distance of a
moderately high residential densities, Francisco or Oakland, compared to a city- station in Pleasant Hill, El Cerrito, and
needed to sustain rail transit services, in wide average of just 10 percent. Fremont. Using hedonic price models, we
(continued on pg. 12)
A C C S S
A
A A
These four computer-generoted images simulate a 'walk though'
a transit village designed at 36 dwelling units per acre, First, a view
out of a second-story rear window into the rear yard al a house in the
village Second, a view outside the front door looking down the street
Third, o public pork at the end of the street (Mat did not exist in simu-
A ( ( I S S
111.1111t11 5 [ O a t 1 9 9 4
found residences near BART leasing for around 835 more per month, controlling for the
influence of unit size. amenities. and other factors. Monthly rents per square foot for one-
and two-bedroom apartments near Pleasant Hill were $1.20. compared to an average of
$1.07 for comparable projects in the same geographic submarket but away from BAWLI
A healthy market demand plus the potential for developers to command higher rents
bodes well for the future of rail-based housing in the Bay Area
From the transit agency's standpoint, the primary benefit of clustering housing
around rail stations is that transit usage is likely to increase. Our surveys find that resi-
dents living within a quarter mile of a California rail station are three times as likely to
commute by rail as is the average worker living in the same city. The two most impor-
tant determinants of rail usage is whether trip destination is within walking distance of
a rail stop and whether parking is free. Among those living near HART stations and head-
ing to San Francisco job sites with no free parking, nearly nine out of ten work trips art-
by HART. For trips to secondary urban centers like Oakland and Berkeley. half of com-
mutes are by BART. For all other destinations (where often workers park free), only 6
percent of commute trips by station-area residents are by rail.
Merely clustering housing around rail stops will do little good if. as during much of
the 1980s. job growth occurs mainly along suburban freeway corridors. Both ends of
work tripshousing and job sitesmust be within reasonable proximity of stations if
clustered growth is to pay any accessibility and environmental dividendsin short,
more mixed-use transit village development will be necessary.
Housing developmeni ond Rice buildings around the Plooseat Hon BART siotion,
A C C E S S
F U R T H E R R E A D I N G
R o b e r t C e r v e r p . "Trairtait.iSissed H o u s i n g in
California: E v i d e n c e o n Ridership I m p a C t s . "
Tr a n s p o r t Policy Vo l . 1 , N o 3 . 1 9 9 4 .
PP- 1 7 4 1 9 3 .
R o b e r t C a r v e r . Tr a n s i t S u p p o r t i v e
Devetoprnerrt: E x p e r i e n c e s a n d P r o s p e c t s
( Wa s h i n g t o n , D . C . : F e d e r a l Tr a n s i t
Administration, 1 9 9 3 )
R o b e r t C a r v e r . M i c h a e l B e r n i c k . a n d Jill
Gilbert, M a r k e t O p p o r t u n i t i e s a n d B a r r i e r s
to Tr a n s i t , B a s e d D e v e l o p m e n t in California
(Berkeley: I n s t i t u t e o f U r b a n a n d R e g i o n a l
Development, Working Paper No. 6 2 1 ,
1994). UCTC No. 2 2 3 .
Creating Transit Villages
Robert C e r v e r o a n d Peter B o s s e l m a n n
Perhaps the most promising recent development in the transit village movement is
Evaluation of the M a r k e t P o t e n t i a l for
the signing of California's Transit Village Act. AB 3152, b y Governor Pete Wilson in Tr a n s i t - O r i e n t e d D e v e l o p m e n t Using Visual
September 1904. This was a small but important step toward bringing the transit village Simulation Te c h n i q u e s ( B e r k e l e y : I n s t i t u t e o f
Urban a n d R e g i o n a l D e v e l O P m e r n .
idea to fruition. Sponsored by Assemblyman Tom Bates of Oakland. the bill as original- Monograph 47, 1 9 9 4 ) . UCTC N o 2 4 7 .
ly drafted would have allowed municipalities to designate a -transit village district- sim-
Robert C e r v o r o a n d John D. L a n d i s .
ilar to a redevelopment district. with special land assemblage and tax increment financ-
" D e v e l o p m e n t I m p a c t s o f U r b a n Tr a n s p o r t :
ing privilegees. The original bill also stipulated that developers building within the district A LLS. P e r s p e c t i v e . " lin Tr a n s p o r t a n d U r b a n
be granted a density bonus of at least 50 percent. Because of stiff opposition from fiscal D e v e l o p m e n t , D . B a n i s t e r. a d ( L o n d o n ,
C h a p m a n a n d Hall, 1 9 9 5 , f o r t h c o m i n g )
conservatives, most of these provisions were later removed from the bill
As passed. AB 3152 is a voluntary statute encouraging cities and counties to plan J. H o l t i c t e w , R e s i d e n t i a l P a t t e r n s a n d
Transit. A u t o D e p e n d e n c e , a n d C o s t s
more intensive development around rail stations, but it provides few fiscal powers or spe-
(San Francisco: R e s o u r c e s D e f e n s e
cial authority to do so. Sponsors hope the bill will eventually be expanded to provide more Council, 1 9 9 4 ) .
financial incentives, perhaps granting transit village districts priority access to discre-
Peter K e i l , T h e N e w U r b a n i s m : To w a r d an
tionary state funds, such as from the Interrnodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act A r c h i t e c t u r e o r C o m m u n i t y ( N e w Yo r k !
and fuel-price rebate programs. M c G r a w - H i l l , Inc., 1 9 9 3 ) .
Transit villages have a long way to go until implemented in states like California.
Allan Pisarski. N e w P e r s p e c t i v e s in
However, it's encouraging that many housing projects near rail stations are leasing C o m m u t i n g ( Wa s h i n g t o n . D.C. F e d e r a l
quickly, making profits, and attracting residents who patronize transit. Having a recep- Highway Administration. U.S titioartmerrt
at Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n . 1 9 9 2 )
tive legislative environment, such as AR 3152. should also help pave the way for more
pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use communities around transit systems. Together, strong R. PUIIIIIMAIrEV a n d J. Z u p a n , Public
Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d L a n d U s e tilicsornington:
market interest and a conducive policy environment should prove a powerful combina-
Indiana U n i v e r s i t y Press. 1 9 7 7 ) .
tion in taking transit villages from idea to implementation.
i k C C I S S
HuM1111 5 F a l l i t
Aerial photos such as
theseoftenmakethe
process of urbanization
seem inevitable. In fact,
urban developmentCLIPI
takemanydifferentforms
and occur at many differ-
entdensities,depending
onwhatpublicpoliciesare
adopted. The California
Urban Futures Model
visualizethe landuseand
transportationresults
ofdifferentpublicpolicies
beforethosepolicies
areadopted.
outside their purview and have generally accepted existing (or proposed)
land use policies and patterns as a given. That attitude changed. however,
use policies on local land use patterns and thus on transportation system
performance.
respects. First, the existing models could not be reliably used to test the
land use and transportation implications of alternative regional and local
land use or development policies. Nor could the models be used to analyze
tems might shape future land use patterns. What was neededand is still
neededwas a new conceptual approach for connecting local land use poli-
104. n, Leadia de aus,ortate volette r i t p .and awttian41 plamoini at tit, fmiversAly ol Catilorsid. RfPiteleit, CA 01720)851,'
A C C E S S
NUIASEi 1 1 1 .
FIGURE I ALAND USETRANSPORTATION POLICY PLANNING FRAMEWORK
-
Conventional transportotioa planning
louses on the second hell LOCAL,COUNTY, I REGIONAL MARKETFORCES LANDUSEOUTCOMES
LANDUSEPOLICIES
of this diagram (hive arrows), 0 1111 0
hut CUFM focuses on the lint holt zanies demand for specs mix al eses
(brown arrows). imfrastroctere supply of load densities
plans prices L casts developensni potierls
loud toinfortios
financing
1
TRANSPORTATIONSYSTEM
TRAVELDEMANDANALYSIS OUTCOMES
The California Urban Futures Model transportation planning. Thus, they can rently exists to test the relationship
(cunt) offers one such approach. It is an examine how different land use policies between transportation investments and
urban growth simulator that "grows' might affect transportation-system out- land use forms. Instead, policy discus-
counties and their constituent cities by comes (traffic volumes, congestion levels. sions are often dominated by unsupport-
determining how much new residential pollutant emissions, transit ridership). It ed claims regarding the ability of specific
development is likely to occur at specific may be, for example, that policies pro- transit or highway investments to radical-
locations. It mimics the economics of real mating more compact urban development ly reshape urban development patterns.
estate markets, with outcomes deter- lead to greater transit ridership in some etrs'm provides an empirically founded
mined by profitability, site characteris- corridors and to greater highway conges- framework for testing such hypotheses.
tics. population growth trends, and a tion in others. Alternately, to the extent Recent studies of rail mass transit
series of scenarios consisting of alterna- that certain environmental protection systems in California, for example, have
tive development restrictions and/or policies might work against higher densi- produced differing estimates of this capi-
incentives. CUFM is distinguished by its ty development, they might ultimately talization effect. Home sales prices in
explicit focus on the effects of alternative lead to greater auto usage. Alameda and Contra Costa Counties in
land use policies. 2. Transportation planners can use 1993 increased between $1.96 and S2.30
the model to test the effects of specific per meter of travel to a BART station.
USING THE MODEL FOR transit investments on development pat- Homes near San Diego trolley stations
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING terns and densities. To the extent that also sold at a premium. Researchers found
transportation investments are worth- nosuch premiums for proximity to free-
Local, county, and regional trans-
whilethat is, create valueneighboring way interchanges or to other mass transit
portation planners can use CUFM in two
property values should rise, leading ulti- systems. These types of transportation
ways.
mately to more intense development and premiumswhen and where they
1. They can use the model to check
higher densities. (CUFM assumes more occurcan easily be included in the
effects of land use on travel by aggregat-
profitable sites develop earlier and at model's calculations.
ing the model's outputsthe locations
higher densities than less profitable
and densities of new developmentinto
sites.) No empirically tested model cur-
traffic analysis zones for conventional
A C C E S S
THE LOGIC OF !UEFA FIGURE 7
L The Bottom-up Population Growth Submodel is the demand side of the model.
CITY OF LAMORINDA
It consists of two regression equations, one for cities, one for counties. This submodel
generates five-year population growth forecasts for every city and county in the model
study area. Unlike most urban forecasting models, which project local population growth
solely by distributing regional or county growth totals, this model projects each city's
population growth as a function of its current size, its growth history, its outward expan- 1910 1990 2 0 1 0
sion potential, and adoption of specific policies intended to promote or retard growth.
I. gollam-vp Population Growth Softwood
2. The Spatial Database is the supply side of the model. It consists of a series of prolects city residential growth as a function
map layers that describe the environmental, land use, zoning, current density, and acces- of past trends, state growth, and local
g r owth p o I i d e
sibility characteristics of all sites in the region or county. These various layers can be
analyzed individually or merged into a single layer describing development or redevel-
opment. An example of a developable land unit MRS) would be an undeveloped site with
steep slopes, served by sewers, zoned for light industrial uses, located less than 500
meters from a major freeway. DIAN are not legal parcels; however, they may approximate
collections of parcels in urbanized areas. The spatial database is also the primary tool for
displaying the model's outcomes in map form.
size, and location of Dills). The submodel evaluates, eliminates, and sorts the sites accord-
ing to profitability and suitability and then assigns projected population growth accord-
ingly. The allocation process is complete either when all forecast population growth is
allocated, or when all available [Airs are filled. Depending on the land use policy scenario
chosen, the model can collect any unallocated population growth as potential "spillover."
These procedures assume land developers seek to maximize profit, while adhering
to governmental land use and environmental regulation and conforming to prevailing or
permitted development densities.
3. * H s i Allocation Soboodol
4. The Annexation-Incorporation Submodel is a series of division rules for annex.
allocates praiected residentiol growth to the
ing newly developed DUN to existing cities. or for incorporating clusters of rit.lis into most profitable M s consisteni witts policies
new cities. being simulated
Once the data and parameters required for the Spatial Database and Spatial Allocation
Submodel have been assembled, any number of policy scenarios can be easily tested.
'Running' a scenario consists of filling out a computerized Scenario Form (Figure 3) indi-
cating which specific development prohibitions, regulations, or incentives are to be
applied in which areas.
cifFsi differs from other operational urban forecasting/simulation models. It details
the supply side of urban land and housing markets, and it uses a geographic information
system (GIS) to assemble and manage the supply side, GIS makes it possible to
incorporate a wide variety of available map-based data directly into the model. 4 A t h o u letetpetailee Sehmeidel
Furthermore, the model allocates growth to individual sites, not to aggregate areas such annexts or incorporates OtUt as apprapriose
A C C E S S
NUM OEN 5 FA L L 1 9 9 4
FIGURE 3 CLIFMassumes residential land devel-
Semple Growth Anatolie' Scowls Form (Shaded rectangles indicate clsaices.1 opers serve as intermediaries between
households (the ultimate consumers of
ENTERTHENAMEOFTHISSCENARIO: land), and the various suppliers of inputs
into the development process. Thus, the
A. Soka popolonon protection; E ABAG r - - LOCAL J CUM model incorporates localized differences in
the cost and revenue structure of residen-
. Choose s Armin stomas:
tial land development and then mimics the
F WITHTRANSIT
WITHOUT MUNE decision-making processes of private land
C.Allow development iv wetlands? NO 1 YES developers. Work-trip travel times (or dis-
tances)the key determinant of growth
D. Reside:lid o p t i o n : HISTORIC patterns in the majority of urban growth
MARKET modelsenter the model only indirectly, as
USERDEFINED determinants of intercity housing price dif-
E. Nap restriction on
hillsidedevotopment?
1 ION
ferentials. The critical variables are devel-
opment policies, not travel impedances.
The model also has a number of defi-
P. illeskkittial de vaopittont GRAZING ciencies. In its current form, it allocates res-
mil hi assigned toHee LOCALLYIMPORTANT idential growth but not commercial or indus-
fallowingformland types: PRIME trial growth. Employment growth, specified
STATEIMPORTANT at the county level, is treated as outside the
UNIQUE
model, and thus the model cannot be used to
OTHER
address issues of "jobs-housing balance."
AGRICULTURE OPENSPACE And, because it does not deal explicitly with
G.Residentialdevelopment on be
essigatd fa riP following LANDEXTENSIVEAGITOATURI INDUSTRIAL O f Ha travel times or costs. Cl.411 is not a spatial-
GeneralMoecotegories: LANDINTENSIVEAGRICULTURE NI-DENSITYRESIDENTIAL interaction model.
DIVERSIFIEDAGRICULTURE 11101-DENSITY RISIDOMAI
RURAL m a m a to-onerrir 11911111MAL AN EXAMPLE:
PUBLIC URBANRESIDENTIAL COUNTY GROWTH PLANNING
CO
COMMERCI
AL
CUFMcan be used at regional, county,
H. Mere dopopulotion ;fellow, go? UNINCORPORATEDAREAS or local levels. In a pilot study undertaken
ALLAREAS with t h e Association o f Ray Area
Governments (ABAG). we examined the
I.Choose 0 residential deosity tot 1 MARKET development impacts of Measure A. a farm-
devtlopmen r in /Wei: HISTORIC
land-preservation ordinance adopted in
COMPACTCITY
Solano County, California.
GENERALPLAN
Situated midway between San
MAURT Francisco and Sacramento, Solari County
J. Cheat/ residential density
fordevelopment HISTORK is currently one of the Bay Area's growth
unincorporatedareas: COMPACTCITY hotspots. According to ABAG, the popula-
GENERALPLAN tion of Solano County is projected to grow
by 201.000 persons by the year 2010. The
Doyorewont to have a weft el the retritz? YEA NO majority of the county's growth would be
Doywo wen te view the tot-tilting woe YES NO focused in three cities. Fairfield (+48.100).
Vacaville (444.600), and Vallejo (+29.800),
111.1 sumo.'" pfesents weonds tnLo,Ors, ar-o rnost typo di iderskond InJi allows ressdantini rkrmIopmeoton veal
curnwohrzoned for 4orenrarcidium%
lano residents and officials want land exists in all three cases. Under sce- gauged using today's planning models
job growth and economic development, natios B and Ceach city would be able to and planning frameworks.
but they are concerned about effects on accommodate its projected level of ctIFM presents onebut by no
the natural and historic environment. growth within its current sphere-of-influ- means the only approach to filling this
Measure A enacted in 1984. prohibits the ence. Growth would not be displaced from critical gap. Beyond the immediately prac-
intense urbanization of unincorporated one community to another. tical. the promise of models like this lies
county lands outside existing city The same cannot be said for scenario in three areas. First, they pnwide an effec-
spheres-of-influence. More significantly. A. With Measure A in effect, large tive framework for collecting. organizing,
it limits the density of new development amounts of farmland in the spheres-of- and understanding the millions of pieces
on lands designated in the county gener- influence of Benicia and Suisun City of information now available that describe
al plan as reserved for agriculture. would be precluded from urban develop- urban development and its effects.
Because such lands cannot be intensively ment, and both cities would become large Second, because models lack imagina-
developed, Measure A made them less growth exporters. Benicia would export tion, they force researchers and model
attractive to large-scale subdividers and 12,000 residents to other parts of the coun- users to be explicit about their assump-
homebuilders. ty. while Suisun City would export 1000 tions and about their knowledge of cause
Although recently reenacted. residents. Most of this displaced growth and effect. In complicated dynamic sys-
Measure A was originally set to expire in would spillover into Vallejo and Dixon. tems such as urban areas. this -what-ir
1995. How would future development pat- A picture being worth a thousand capability is extremely useful. Finally.
terns in SoIan County have been differ- words. (me of the useful aspects of CUEN efforts such as CUM teach their users
ent if the measure had not been renewed? is its ability to present results in easily about the organization, structure, and
We considered three scenarios: understood map form. Figures 4 and 5 dynamics of complicated urban systems.
graphically compare projected develop- Used in this way models can be effective
A: Measure A remains in effect ment patterns under scenarios A and B. in public education and teaching and pow-
through 2010. (this is the status quo.) With these maps, local transportation erful tools for both land use and trans-
planners can gain a much clearer picture portation planning.
B: Measure A expires in 1995, and of precisely where new facilities (high-
current general plan land use designa- ways or transit lines) might be needed to
tions remain in place. Many lands now in serve growth. Similarly, county planners The constructions. testixg. and use of the
agricultural use would become open to can use these scenario results to evaluate California Urban Futures Model was undertak-
more intense development. Development how different land use alternatives might en at the 10101111ft of Urban and Regional
of each particular site would depend on its increase or decrease congestion levels on Development with finds from The California
profitability in residential use. freeways. Policy Seminar, the Ustiomity of California
Transportation Center, and the Association of
C: Measure A expires in 1995. but SUMMARY A N D CONCLUSIONS
Hay Area Governments. Key contributors to the
current general plan land use designa- Ininsportation planners have made development of CLIFM hare included Michael
tions can be changed. Many agricultural considerable progress in recent years in
Teitz.Teti Bradshaw, Peter Hall, Edward Egan,
parcels would become open to more refining and improving transportation-
Aysr PaMJIA, RolfPendall, David Simpson. Qing
intense development, and residential system demand and performance models.
development could occur on commercial- Shen, Ming Zhao, axd Ming Zkong,
Very little progress has been made. by
ly designated and agricultural sites. contrast, into modeling the underlying
Again, profitability in residential use land use patterns that determine trans.
would determine the rate of development. portation.system demand. The extent to
which changes in land use policies will
None of these policy scenarios would turn ultimately reduce congestion and air poi.
development away from Solano County lution. alter modal splits, and improve
because more than adequate developable accessibility cannot be adequately
A C C I S S
111111E11 L I 1994
FIGURE 4 F U R T H E R R E A D I N G
NEWLOWDENSITY
Et.iti per Ion/Duel John 0 . L a n d i s a n d M i n g Z h a o , Pitot S t u d y
o f Soiano a n d S o n o m a L a n d U s e a n d
NEW HIGHER DENSITY M I Ovveioument Policy Alternatives etterkeley:
1_4 p41SCNIVIKIft)
URBANIZEDAREAS
1 institute o f U r b a n a n d Regional D e v e t o p m o n t
Working Paper 6 1 8 . 1 9 9 4 ) . I . / C M No. 2 4 5 .
Michael W e g e n e r, - O p e r a t i o n a l u r b a n
models: State or the Art.- Journal of the
A m e r i c a n Planning A s s o c i a t i o n Vo l . 5 0 .
No.t. 1994. pp, 17.90.
FIGURE S
I-110k
HEWLOWDENSITY M I
pit tea/ Oct.)
NEWHIGHERDENSITY
psites/strel
UR1ANIZID ARIAS
SPHERES-0E-INELIJINCI
HIGHWAYS
Under scenario A (Figure A), new low-density single-family residential development would
concentrate along the northern edge of Fairfield, along the eastern and northern edges al
Vacaville, and along Dixon's northwestern edge
A C C E S S
It W a s n ' t Consider the urban transit -problem." In the 1960s the problem
was declining transit patronage. Finances received little discus-
sion because the industry was essentially self-supporting: oper-
ating costs were so low that passenger revenues covered costs.
Supposed hi the 1990s -problem- has a whole new meaning financial
deficits. Today, most transit revenue comes from governments.
not passengers, and the result is continual fiscal crisisthe
To T u r n O u t search for money to continue the subsidies.
The new transit problem grew from our efforts to solve
the old one.
The Study
We compiled detailed records for the 61 largest transit prop-
ertiesthose with operating revenues greater than 81 million in
1964tracing their individual financial histories from 1950
through 1985. These are shown in Table 1. To avoid the distort-
ed -averages- that aggregate statistics often produce. ,----
Citadel. L i a r. to proloaaor e c o a a n o c a t a r e
A C C 1 S
COMM 5 , FAIL 1994
FIGURE 1 we worked with individual transit
properites. We combined data from a
40
given year. giving equal weight to all
3S properties. Thus our averages reflect t
characteristics of a typical property.
30 Consider first the financial situation
2S
of a typical transit property thirty years
ago. In 1964,82 percent of the properties
were still privately owned. The top row in
Table 2 shows one of the key financial
is
1950 1955 1940 1965 1970 1975 1930 1935 indicators, revenue divided by operating
costs. Revenue was greater than operat-
ing costs during the period 1950-1964. In
Coil in constant 1 985 di:ilk:11i
1964 the revenue/cost ratio was 1.05 at a
typical property. The only really low ratio
IAILE 1
was 0.70 for San Francisco Muni-which,
significantly, has been publicly owned
TRANSIT PROPERTIES I N THE SAMPLE, 1 Y SIZE and operated since 1912.
1964REVENUE 1964REVENUE Since the transit industry was cov-
ISOM (S0001 ering its operating costs, why did the goy-
IL 81403 NY
ernnient deem it necessary to get into the
*Chicago Albany 3,213
NewYorkCity (TA) NY 74,726 Philadelphia(Subur) PA 3,163 transit subsidy business? One reason
Newark NI 54,510 Jacksonville Ft 3,017 had to do with projections of long-run via-
Philadelphia Pe 33,478 Nashville IN 2,993
Detioa MI 26,992 OrnohaCouncil NE 2,964
bility. Although the transit properties
Cleveland OH 23,155 Chicago(Subutbonl IL 2123 were taking in more money then they
Baltimore MD 21,662 Toledo OH 2,473 were paying out (row t h a t did not
MinneapolisSt Paul MN 13,420 WOrtgildr IAA 2,444
'Oakland 12,169 MA 2,241
assure long-run viability because these
Springfield
Iluilala NY 12,419 Allan OH 1,995 figures donot include depreciation costs.
Pittsburgh PA 11,611 FoilWorth TX 1,990 In row 2 we add depreciation to operat-
Menlo GA 10,132 Celt,Newpoil Coy KY 1.926
Cincinnati OH 1,189 Reading PA I 922 ing cost. This statistic answers the ques-
'SonFrancisco(MUNI) (A 8,613 Charlotte NC 1830 tion: can the property cover its immedi-
lEansosCity MO 1,105 Evanston It 1792 ate cash flow andhave enough money left
Mankirritom1 peens NY 6,640 Gory IN 1.719
loston MA 1,441 Wilmington Of 1,636 1 over to replace equipment when it wears
Dallas IX 6,378 DesPlaines It 1501 out? The answer for a typical property in
NeeMeans LA 6,105 Chattanooga TN 1.401 1964 was, no. The typical property was
'Memphis TN 5,691 'Sacramento 1.239
Portland OR 5,014 Knoxville TN 1,347 gradually running down its capital stock.
'SonDiego 5,053 'Immo 1,334 This was the background for one inter-
Soninterim rx 4,732 Harrisburg PA 1,321
vention theory: passengers were fleeing
Louisville KY 4,781 Allentown PA 1.316
Indionapern IN 4,437 Youngstown OH 1,211 the worn out. ill-maintained, outdated
Honolulu HA 4,502 Charlestoci wv 1,204 rolling stock. If only the properties could
Columbus OH 4118 GrandRapids t
m 1,113 somehow obtain modern equipment and
Novidence RI 3,919 DuluthSuperior MN 1,135
Itridgeport cr 3,426 ROS1041,WO( 1 NY NY 1.044 restore service, passengers would return
Sytocuse NY 3,218 Roanoke VA 1.020 to public transit.
Savonnali GA 1.002
Thus UMTA's program began as a
Publicly rimmed in 1964, oil others were primate companies. kind of one-shot injection of new capital.
Tobloconixeinx dolo 4 11 i . i u t procmotel neporlimg &tuba Ike Amonom Inmost Aziotillion Ic 194411wit hod Give the transit properties new equip-
manetkan si imilikAinPoseentlertummy*that row
A C C E S S
Indicator s f a r a Typical Trams11 Property ( 1 9 3 5 donors)
1950 9551960 1964 1970 197$ 1980 1985
Revenue/Operaling Cosis 1.09 1.08 1.06 1.05 0.92 0.57 0.38 0.34
Ravenut/Op. Casio + Dearer. 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.87 0_50 0_38 0.34
50.63
Revenuetlaseaue Passesigers S 0.56 S 0.70 5 0.79 S 0.87 S 0.88
Operating Casts SI 8.84 520.39 522.15 $22.95 $24.54 529.16 534,39 540.18
54
(w/o depronXiles Hours
ment and all would be well. As we know, Implementing the new goal required
it didn't turn out that way. expansion of transit service into low den-
The initial UMTA subsidy program, sity areas that could not generate much
in 1964. was confined to capital subsidies; patronage, and reduction of fares to make
transit companies still had to earn their them affordable to anyone. The fall in rev-
own operating costs. But 1975 saw a rad- enue was a direct consequence.
ical change in the UMTA program: the
federal government began subsidizing The Productlytty P l u m m e t
operating costsas well. The third row, rev- But transit's financial crises is not
enue per revenue-passenger, hints at the just a revenue problem. More is involved
consequence of this decision, Passenger than the decline in earnings. The other
fares had been rising steadily up through half of the problem is an enormous
1972 as transit managers struggled to increase in the cost of supplying the ser-
cover their rising costs. After 1975 all vice (reflected in the falling productivity).
attempts at fare-discipline were put aside. The fourth row in Table 2shows that oper-
and passenger revenue fell. ating cost per bus-hour rose from :522.95
The drop in revenue may be viewed in 1964 to $40.18 in 1985, (Ali costs are in
in two quite different ways. First, one may constant 1985 dollars.) That is, the real
see it as the result of removing the remain- cost of putting an hour of bus service onto
ing constraint on transit management: the the street has nearly doubled since the
obligation to earn operating costs. federal government became involved in
Second, one may see it as a major change the transit industry.
in the goals assignedCotransit managers.
The old goal was straightforward: provide A Digression o n Productlytty
a self-supporting service for those who Mea5urement
wished to use it. The new goal, assigned Productivity is output divided by
by the government. was complex and input. What is the "output" Oa transit sys-
nebulous: use transit service as a tool to tem? It would be unfair to use bus-miles
solve urban problems, save the central as the output-measure: increases in traf-
city. provide cheap mobility for the poor. fic congestion lower a property's output
transport the handicapped, and so on. of bus-miles, hence lowering its
apparent productivity. But congestion is This is, in effect, a weighted average of the Table 3. The total time period is divided
not a factor within their control, and the cost of everything that goes into produc- into three parts: the pre-UMTA era, the
greater congestion in large cities would ing transit service. era of capital-subsidy only, and the era of
put their transit properties at a disadvan- capital-plus-operating subsidies. In the
tage on this measure. Likewise passen- The P a t t e r n o f pre-UMTA era, productivity declined at
ger-miles is not a fair measure of transit Productivity Changes the rate of 1.I percent per year: in the era
output: this is an era when transit man- It is not enough to know that pro- of capital subsidies, productivity declined
agers have been told to run buses into low ductivity plummeted after the govern- at 2.1 percent per year: and in the era of
density suburbs to lure people out of cars, ment began helping the industry. We operating cost subsidies, productivity
and to provide mobility in areas which are need to ask what would have happened to declined at 3.1 percent a year. That is, the
inherently unsuited to achieving reason- productivity in the absence of govern- decline in productivity accelerated by 50
able bus load factors. We should not ment help. Such contrafactual questions percent when capital subsidies began,
judge the productivity of a transit system are inherently difficult. We need an alter- and accelerated by another 48 percent
by using measures that its managerial native baseline to compare to the actual when operating subsidies were added in
decisions cannot affect. Bus-hours of ser- productivity change. So we project the as well Government intervention strong-
vice is a fairer indicator. 1950-1964 productivity trend into the ly altered productivity trends.
To measure the input side of pro- future and then compare this to the All transit properties were not equal-
ductivity. we use total operating costs. observed outcome. This is shown in ly affected. Productivity trends differed
A C C E S S
TABLE 3 F U R T H E R R E A D I N G
J.R- M e y e r a n d J.A. G o m e z - I b a n e z .
- M e a s u r e m e n t a n d A n a l y s i s Of
Productivity In Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n i n d u s t r i e s "
by the size of the transit property: it fell way. The subsidy money encouraged in K e n d r k k a n d V a c c a r o .
transit properties are mostly in older to management and labor. Management Policy. VOL 2 4 . N o . 3 . 1 9 8 5 . p p . 2 8 1 - 2 9 8 _
cities, those built before the auto age. interpreted the message to mean: effi- J. P u n t e r, A M a r k e t e d t . a n d I H i r s c h m a n .
These cities have poor street systems, lit- ciency was no longer primary: rather, it - I m p a n t s o f Subsidies o n t h e C o a t s o f U r b a n
Public Tr a n s p o r t . - J o u r n a l o f Tr a n s p o r t
tle parking, and more people who depend was more important to expand passenger-
Economics a n d Policy. Vo l . 1 7 , No. 2 , 1 9 8 3 .
on transit as their primary source of demand and to provide social services. So pp. 1 5 6 - 1 7 6
mobility. A transit strike in such cities is routes were extended into inherently
M a r t i n Wa c h s . " U . S . Tr a n s i t Subsidy Policy:
genuinely paralyzing. Transit strikes unprofitable areas and fares were low- In N e e d o f R e f o r m , - S e l e n e , , Vo l 2 4 4 .
have much less effect in the smaller cities ered to the point where no one would find J I M * 30, 1 9 8 9 . pp- 1545-49_
because residents there have many alter- them burdensome. Labor interpreted the
native forms of mobility. Thus, it seems message to mean: management now has
likely there will be far more pressure to aSugar Daddy who can pay for improve-
settle strikes at higher wage terms in ments in wages and working conditions.
large cities, and that transit management Thus, over time, the federal doctor
in these cities will be less able to resist developed new therapeutic goals, and the
productivity declines (labor is about transit patient developed an addiction to
three-fourths of total operating costs). the treatment_ Our attempts to solve the
original problem created a new one: a
It Wa s n ' t Supposed serious decline in the basic productivity
To Turn O u t Like This of the industry, with an inevitable growth
Federal policy started out with the in financial problems as the result.
notion of a one-shot injection of capital to
rejuvenate the aging physical plant of our
transit systems. A cure, not perpetual
hospitalization. It didn't work out that
A C C E S S
1111111113 leti
The M a r r i a g e o f
A u t o s & Tr a n s i t
H o w To M a k e Tr a n s i t
Popular A g a i n
BY M E LV I N M . W E B B E R
A C C E S S
They've made it possible for most of us to leave the old urban centers and move into
decent houses in the spacious suburbs. They permit most of us to live where we choose
and then to accept jobs located at any compass point from Our homes. We're free
to go wherever we wish and whenever we wish, freed from the rigid schedules of
common carriers.
These freedoms have mixed consequences. During this, the century of the auto-
mobile, the high-density downtowns of most cities have stabilized or declined and, with
them, proportions of downtown jobs, radial patterns of travel, and use of public transit.
Declining transit riding must be the most tragic of those effects. Transit patronage
has been falling during most of this century, except for that brief period during World
War II when gasoline was rationed and there were no new cars to buy. In the years since
the War, transit riding has fallen steadilyfrom 114 trips per capita in 1950, to 37 in 1970.
to 31 in 1990 Since 1964 the federal government has spent more than $IM billion to
improve and expand transit service, and yet trips to and from work in urbanized areas.
the ones widely believed to be most amenable to transit, have been falling even more
dramatically: from 25 percent of work trips in 1960. to 14 percent in 1970. to 10 percent
in 1980. down to perhaps 5 percent today. In the suburbs, transit use is down to about
2.5 percent of trips to work. Nationwide, people use transit for only 2 percent of their
urban trips. With the exception of walking and bicycle trips, virtually all the rest are by
private car.
Journalists keep telling us that -Americans have a love affair with the automobile.-
asthough some irrational infatuation has seized us. But they're wrong. Americansand
Europeans and Asians and Africanshave simply discovered that the automobile is the
most effective surface-transportation system yet devised. Unlike all other modes, it pro-
vides no-wait, no-transfer service and, owing to substantial subsidies, it does so at toler-
able cost. Where parking is available, as in most suburban settings, it provides door-to-
door accessibility. It's no wonder that Americans, and everyone else who can do so. have
adopted cars as their primary mode of travel.
Moreover, travel times for automobile commuters have been fallingfalling slight-
ly but falling nevertheless. Between 1983 and 1990, the national average commute trip
by car ebbed from 20.4 minutes to 19.7 minutes. During the same period, commuting
times via public transit increasedfrom 46.1 minutes to 49,9 minutes. (That's roughly 20
minutes by car and 50 minutes by transit.) During that same period, average mileage dis-
tances increased for auto commuters (from 9,9 to 10.6 miles) and decreased for transit
commuters (from 15.1 to 12.6 miles). For most automobile users the trends are toward
fewer minutes and greater access. For most transit riders, it's just the oppositemore
minutes and less access_ The time savings are surely one reason commuters chose cars
over buses and trains.
Even in America, all adults do not yet have discretionary use of cars. About 11 per-
cent of U.S. households still don't own one. About 10 percent of the driving-age popula-
tion aren't licensed to drive; they're either too old or too disabledor they live
A ( ( 1 5 5
ILIMS(1 5 I L I I 1 9 9 4
in New York City where they can scarce- mpolitan areas, extending a long-term his- hence to a livelihood and to the many
ly use a car, even if they've got one. torical trend. Autos, like telephones, per- advantages of modern urban life. To be
Perhapsafourth of unlicensed adults can't mit direct connection from everywhere to sure the plight of the jobless can't be
afford cars. About a third of U.S. house- everywhere, and that's what allows our blamed solely on the transportation sys-
holds still have only one car that all fami- contemporary suburbs to thrive econom- tem: but, just as surely, automobile trans-
ly members share. Thus, even though ically and socially. It would be a great loss portation is implicated in the tragedy.
automobiles dominate our transportation if that widespread connectivity were to be So, what can be done to reverse that
system. even though there are more cars weakened by anti-auto mandates con- decline of public transit service?
than licensed drivers, many Americans stricting free use of cars.
still don't have access to them. Second, and equally important, the RIDESHARING AS PUBLIC TRANSIT
That inequality poses a central issue auto's popularity and the expanding sub- Bryan Clymer. the former adminis-
for transportation policy. It compels us to urbs have caused the decline and, in some trator of the Federal 'rransit Administra-
ask. Bow can we bring the advantages of places, the virtual demise of mass transit tion. redefined transit to include all pas-
automobile accessibility to everyone? One services. Trips between dispersed origins senger vehicles carrying more than a solo
way, of course, is to expand car ownership and dispersed destinations of contempo- driver. He was declaring in effect that mod.
but that might increase congestion, pol- rary suburbs are not readily served by ern public transit includes carpools and
lution, and energy consumption. conventional mass transit's large vehi- other small vehicles having multiple pas.
Alternatively we might invent a kind of cles: instead, they inevitably get served by sengers. If we're willing to accept his con-
public transit offering accessibility for small, individualized vehiclesthat is, by cept, my question can be modified to ask:
the carless, comparable to what car own- automobiles. Most often by automobiles What incentives might induce solo drivers
ers enjoy. carrying only the driver. As a result. car- to share their cars with others? Or What's
less persons who remain dependent on needed to turn solo-driven cars into tran-
THE CARS CONSEQUENCES transit are made worse-off. In something sit vehicles? Or How can we turn more
It's important to remind ourselves of akin to a national social disaster, the rise drivers into riders?
two value-laden facts: of the automobile and the decline of tran- It's something of a paradox that,
sit have meant that many citizens are despite all the complaints about highway
1
First, automobiles were a major force
behind the geographic explosion of met- deprived of access to suburban jobs and congestion, we enjoy a tremendous
CARPOOL
LOADING
6-9 AM
ummilo
A C C E S S
excess of capacity. As Wilfred Owen of
Brookings once observed, because most
American cars are carrying only the dri-
ver, at least three seats remain empty
enough empty front seats to cany the rest
of the U.S. population and enough back
seats for the entire population of the for-
mer Soviet Union. That fact has led to
many efforts to encourage carpooling. but
the sad part of that story is that rideshar-
ing has been on the decline. Nationwide.
carpooling fell from about 20 percent of
work trips in 1980 to about 13 percent in
1990. Can we now reverse that trend? Jitneys w e i t i n g a t Son FrenCiSce frilarnotionoi A i r p o r t
A C C E S S
110M111 5 ' A L L 1 9 4 4
that arrives is a neighbor's car, van, small bus, or taxi_ is probably inconsequential: what-
ever the small-vehicle type, the operational service characteristics are approximately the
same. Any of these interchangeable paratransit vehicles can provide door-to-door, short-
wait_ no-transfer service, comparable to the level of service that a private car provides
and, for some, without the hassle and costs of parking.
The utility of auto-based transit service need not be reserved to suburbanites. By
far, the largest number of transit-dependent adults today have low incomes, live in cen-
tral cities, and lack discretionary use of cars. Because most new jobs are opening in the
suburbs and because many center-city residents cannot live near those jobs, the decline
of conventional public transit continues to worsen their predicament- Where no bus routes
run from nearby inner-city locations to specific suburban job sites, some fortunate job
holders use gypsy cabs and other informal, perhaps illegal, paratransit services. But these
may be expensive and unreliable. A great many other persons simply remain unemployed.
Far better that everyone be able to dial 711 and be assured a ride to work and a ride home
Hong Kong public light bus at an acceptable price or_ for would-be drivers, a new source of income.
Other countries long ago demonstrated the viability of automobile-based transit ser-
vices. Jitneys are the main components of transit systems in many Third World coun-
tries. Some jitneys ply fixed routes while others operate like collective taxis and take pas-
sengers directly to their destinations. They offer employment opportunities for a great
many otherwise unemployed or underemployed persons. They furnish low-cost trans-
portation service that, in some places, approximates that of private autos. In virtually all
placesin sharp contrast to the heavily subsidized transit systems in the United States
they operate at a profit for their private operators.
Although jitneys have largely disappeared from this country, we still hold onto the
memories of their effectiveness and profitability. The new door-to-door airport shuttles
in Los Angeles and San Francisco suggest we may have a rebirth of privately owned, prof-
itable, small-vehicle systems operating in public-transit modes. However, a high barrier
stands in the way of expanding paratransit service in the United States. Strict regulations
in many cities severely constrain entry into the taxi-jitney business, largely through lim-
its on the numbers of licenses they allowno doubt a direct response to the wishes of
the taxi industry. However, if that oligopolistic constraint can somehow be overcome
if the jitney-taxi business can be opened to new entrants and if the attributes of high-tech
communications can be merged with the attributes of low-tech Third World jitneyswe
might generate a new high-quality transit service.
Any such paratransit system will have to deal with passengers' potential fear of
strangers. Recent experience with Shirley Highway and Bay Bridge carpools and with
rideshare benches in retirement villages suggest that persons living in the same neigh-
borhood are likely to be fairly trustingand safe. Nevertheless, a formalized transit
system must provide reasonable assurance of safety, at least comparable to that of munic-
ipal bus operators,
A C C E S S
Of course, no transit system can become a panacea. Real-time carpools might never F U R T H E R R E A D I N G
attract more than 10 percent of potential commuters. But. by serving only that niche with-
Robert W B e h n k e . California S m a r t Tr a v e i e r
in the corn miller market, it will go a long way toward reversing transit's long-term decline. Sifsfilm ( Wa s h i n g t o n . D.C.; U S D O T. F e d e r a l
Tr a n s i t A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , F e b r u a r y 1 9 9 2 1 .
CC S S
P A P E R S I N P R I N T
Michael G. McNally David D. Little "Impowing Traffic Congestion by 'Profiling Profitabk Bus Routes"
'In-laboratory Experiments to -Earthowike Elleeta on Employee Regulating Employee Travel:. A 1990 U C T C 92
Investigate I )river Behavior Under Transportation."Studies on the Lorna Phoenix Survey-
Advanced Traveler Information Pettis Earthquake. No. 2 1991 ' C T C 2'2 Cervero, Robert
Systems tATISl' 1990 U C T C 152 "Ridership Impacts of Transit-Focused
1993 1 2 C T C 164 Burnio, Elizabeth Development in California"
Bennett, Anna K. and -Linking Geographic Information 1993 U C T C 176
Adler, Jeffrey 1... David D. Little Systems anti Trip Reduction: Success
Michael G. McNally and -Earthquake Effects on Employee and Failure in a Pilot Application' Cervern. Ruben
Wilfred W. Recker Transportation:Studies on the Loma 1993 u c r c 143 -Suburban Employment Centers;
'Interactive Simulation for Modeling Prieta Earthquake. Probing the Influence of Site Features
Dynamic Drivel- Behaviur In Response No. 2 Executive Summary Burns. Elizabeth on the Journey-to-Work'
to ATIS- 1999 U C T C 153 . " Vi l l i t t . S C o m m u t i n g A n a l ) N i S 1991 U M 49
1993 U C T C 171 Extended to the Suburban Southwest:
Berechman. J. and Tempe Arizona" Cervero. Robert
Adler. Jeffrey L . Thom** F. Golob Kenneth A. Small 1992 L ' C T C -Surviving in the Suburbs: TrainSICS
and Michael G. McNally -Modeling land Use and Ultimate Challenge"
"A Structural Model with Discrete- Transportation: An Interpretive Bums. Elizabeth K. UCTC 169
Choice Variables fur Predicting Review for Growth Areas" 'Employee and Student Trip
Enronle Behavior Under AT1S" 1968 L I C T C I Reduction: First Year Results from Cervero. Robert and John Landis
1993 U C T C 174 Metnipallian Phoenix" -Suburbanizatitle Of Jobs and the
lillankrion. Charles and 1994 u c - r c 226 Journey to Work-
Adler. Jeffrey L . Martin % t a u t 1991 u c r c
Wilfred W. Recker and 'Preliminary Evaluation of the Buena. Elizabeth K.
Michael G. McNally Coastal Transportation Corridor "Linking Geographic Information Cervero. Robert and Mark Durum
"A "..orillict Model and Interactive Ordinance in Los Angeles' Systems and Trip Reduction: -An As..es,rtient of Suburban-Targeted
Simulator (FASTCARS) for Predkting 1990 1 ; C 1 ' C 32 limitations in a Pilot Application" Transit Service Strategas in the
Enroute Driver liehavita in Response 1991 I C I C 241 United States"
In Real-lime Traffic Condition Brosobnatime. David 1903 U C T C 17fi
Intormation" -Multiple I w o ' a1ions tor I .Inear Cerwero. Robert
1992 U C T C 127 Regression Mode "Accessibility and Third World Rural Cervero. Ruben and
1991 u c r c 37 Development: A Case Study of Peter ileoweltrunin
Adler. Jeffrey Sumatra" "An Evaluation or the Market Potential
Wilfred W. Recker and Brownstone. Ilkinid and U M 108 lor Tranah4 >maned Development
Michael G. McNally M a m a * E. Gulch Using Visual Simulaltion Techniques"
'In-Laboratory Experiments to Analyze EffeetiverICSS ot Rideshiring Cervero. Robert 1991 U C T C 217
Emma'. Driver Behavior Under ATIS" Incentives: Discrete-Choice Models "Cungestion. Grovilh anti Public
1993 U C T C 148 of Commuting in Southern California" Chokes" Cervero, Robert and Val Menotti
1991 U C T C 93 1991 u c r c 51 -Market Profiles ci Rail-Based Housing
Adler, Jeffrey. L, Projects in California"
Wilfred W. Recker and Brownstone. David, Cervero, Robert 1991 U C T C 242
Michael G. McNally David S. Bunch and "Jobs-Musing. Balancing and
-Uaing Interactive Simulation to Thomas F. Golob Reginnal Mobility" Cervero. Robert. Michael Bernick
Model hiver Behavior Under ATIS" "A Demand Enrecaming System 1969 U C T C 50 and Jill Gilbert
1992 U C T C 126 for Clean-Fuel Vehicks' -Market Opportunities anti Bement to
1994 I I C T C 221 Cervero. Robert Transit-Based Development in
Baer, Chriatopher T.. "Land Market Impact* of Urban Rail California'
Daniel B. Klein and John Slajewaki Bunch, David S. Transit and Joint Development. An 1994 U C T C
"From Trunk to Branch Toil RI lads "Eatintability in the Multinomial E:mpirical Study ul Rail Transit in
in New York, 18004660" Probit Model" Washington, D.C. and Atlanta" Choy. Manhol. Mei-Po Kwan
1992 U C T C 121 1991 U M 71 1992 u c r c 135 and Hong L e o n g
RealTitne Distributed
Barnett. Roger Bunch. 1/asid S. and Cervero. Robert Geographic-al Database Systems"
-linfish i n t e r C i t y 125 and 225.- Ityuichi Kitamara "land 1:ses and Travel it Suburbaii 1994 U C I C 215
CalSpeed Series Proba Model Estimation Revisited: Activity Centers"
1992 U C T C 114 Trinomial Models of Household Car 1991 U C T C 91 Chu. Nueluto
Ownership" 'Endogenous l'op Scheduling,
Barnett. Roger 1991 L I C T C 70 Cervero, Robert The Henderson Approach
-Tilting Train11: The Italian Ell( and -1.olut Use Mixing and Suburban Reformulated and Compared with
the Swedish X-2000.. Burns, Elizabeth Mobility" the Vickrey Approach"
CalStwed Series " A - i o n ' . Metropolitan Travel 1986 U C T C 3 19913 1 3 C 1 . 0 199
1992 u c r c 113
Reduction Program'.1
T
C
U
2
9 Cervero, Robert
"Paratransit in Southeast Asia:, A
Market Reponiie to Poor Roads
1991 u c r c 90
A C C E S S
P A P E R S I N P R I N T
Chu, Xuetiao and Deakin, Elizabeth Garrition. William L and Giuliani. Genevieve, Keith liwzing.
Gordon J. Fielding l i t e United States" f i r m Transpon Reginald R. Souleyrette 11 D i n e Perrine. and Martin Wachs
-Electronic Road Pricing in Southern Policy and the Environment: Six Case "The Relationship between "Preliminary Evaluation i.f Regulation
Caliturnia: Policy Obstacles la Studies) Transportation and Innovation" XV of the South Coast Air Quality
Congestion Pricing- 1999 U C T C 66 1994 L ' C T C 230 Management District"
199I L I C K 189 1991 t r c T c 60
Dealdn, Elizabeth Giuliano, Genevieve
Cohn. Theodore E. "Toll Roads: A New Direction i s Jobs-Housing Balance a Glazer, ilunihni and Esko Niskanen
"Integration by the Human Eye: lrnnsportation Issuer "Parking Fees. Congestion, and
Implications for Wanting for ELS Highways1
Ivry56
0
9 1991 u r n - 133 Consumer Welfare"
Signal Design" 1991 U C T C 24
1993 W I C 207 Deakin, Elizabeth Giuliano, Genevieve
"Transportation and Air Quality in 'New Directiuns for Understanding Glazer. Amihni and Esko Niskanen
Cohn. Theodore E. and Transportation and Land Use "When Do Consumers Favor h i m
David .1. Lasky California: A PolicyAnalysis1910(V
5
IC 1989 1 1 C T C 2 Increases: With Applications to
"Wallpaper Illusion: Cause of Congestion and to Regulation"
Disorientation and Falls on Escalators" lieakin. Elizabeth Giuliano, Genevieve and 1992 u r r c 193
1990 U C T C 160 Inutsportation and land Use Kenneth A. Small
Planning in California: Problems "Alternative Strategies Mr Coping with Glazer. Antihni and Esko Nisicanen
Crime. Randall and Opportunities for Impraved Traffic Crimp-ohm- "%liv Voters Mis Preh-r Corige,11 11
"Cars anti Drivers in the New Suburbs: Perfonnance" 1994 U C I C 188 Public Clubs"
Linking Access to Travel in 1988 U C T C 53 1992 I I c r c 195
Neotraditional Planning" Giuliano. Genevieve and
1994 U C T C 239 DeLuchl. Mark A. and J.M. Ogden Kenneth A. Small Glazer. Amihai and Kai A. Konrad
-S0lainilYtirtigen Furl-Cull Vehkles- i s the Journey to Work Explained by -Ameliorating Congestion by Income
Crime. Randall 1993 U C T C 158 Urban Structure?" Redistribution"
'Die Influence of Expected 1992 1 ICIC 107 1993 I VIC p c
Sullorhanization an Urban Form and Del.urki. stark A... QUAnki %Vilna
the Journey to Work" and Daniel Sperling Giuliano, Genevieve and Glaser. Amihni and kernel HibLinil
1994 I I C P C 240 "Electric Vehicles! Performance. Life- Kenneth A. Small "Governmental Failures in Evaluating
Cycle Costs, Emissions. and 'Nils:enters in the Los Angeles Programs"
De Vany. Arthur and Recharging Requirements- Region" 1994 U C T C 194
W. David Walla 1989 U C I C 7 1999 U C T C 39
"Network Connectivity and Pr It t Glazer. Amihai, Daniel Klein and
Convergence: Gas Pipeline Fielding, Gordon J. and Ginhano, G(1110(441.1- and Chartist; Lave
1)i-regulation* Daniel H. Klein Kenneth A. Small "Clean for a I lay: Troubles with
1993 U C T C 202 lligh Otrupancy / l o l l lanes; l l i c Determinants of Growth of California's Smog Check"
Phasing in Congestion Pricing a Lane Employment Subcenters- 1993 U C F C M t
De %any. Arthur and at a Time' 1994 u c r c 2211
W. David Walla 1993 I L I C T C 179 Gulledge. Reginald G.
"Pipeline Access and Markel Giuliano. Genevieve and -Ito People l'nderstand Spatial
Integration in the Natural Gas Fielding Gordon J. and Martin Wachs Concepts: The Ciao of First-Order
Industry: Evidence from Daniel H. Klein "Responding to Congestion and Traffic Primitives"
Cointrgration Tens" -HOW to Franchise Highways- Growth: Transportation Dentand 1992 I I C I C 211
1993 U C T C 200 1992 U C T C 134 ManagemeM"
1991 U C H . ' 86 Golledge. Reginald G.
De Vany. Arthur and Galling, Tommy. MeiIla Kwan "Place Recognition and Wayfinding:
W. Din-Id Walls and Reginald G. Golledge Gthibtrin, GeneVieNe a n d Making Sense al Space"
"When 'larders to Markets Fait "Computational-Process Modelling of Thomas F. Guard) 1992 l i n t 212
Pipeline Deregulation. Spot Markets. Household Activity Scheduling" "Using Longitudinal Methods tor
and the Topology of the Natural 1919 U C I C 217 Analysis of a ShomTerm Gulledge, Reginald G.
Gas Markel" Transportation Demonstration Project- l i m e and Space in Route Preference'
1992 U C T C Glisling. Tommy, Me4-11n kwan 1990 U C T C 28 1993 l i C T I C 213
and Reginald G. Golledge
Deakin. Elizabeth -Computational-Process Modelling of Giuliano, Genevieve, Keith Hwang Gulledge. Reginald G.,
"Land Use Mid Transportation Travel Decisions, Review and and Martin Wachs Mei-Po Kwan and Tommy Galling
Planning la Response to Congestion: Conceptual Analysis" 'Employer Trip Reduction in Southern "t'omputational Process M[41-fling of
The California Experience' 091 U C T C 200 California: First Year Results' Travel Deentionsl Empirical Tests"
1989 I I C I C 54 1993 U C T C 164 19)1 u r r c
Garrison, William 1- and
Reginald R. Souleyreite I I Giuliano, Genevieve, Keith Hwang tiolledge. Reginald t;.,
Deakin. Elizabeth "Relations between Transportation and Martin Wachs Mei-Po Krim and Tommy Gairling
"Suburban Traffic Congestion, land and Production" -Mandatary Trip Reduction in Computational'Process Modelling al
Use and Transportation Planning 1990 U C T C 45 Southern California: First Year Household Travel Decisions Using a
Imes: Public PolicY flations. Results" Geogniphical Infomation System"
1990 I I C I C 57 11412 w i t ge 1994 I I C T C 2111
mod, 0mv*O.m.r . . r f m T
A C C E S S
FAIL 1 9 9 1
P A P E R S I N P R I N T
GoHedge, Reginald G., Valerie Goulista, Kineitadinoo G. and Handy, Susan J Mani*. Paul P.. Telauysi Kaneko
Dougherty and Scott Hell Ryuichi Kitamura -A Cycle of Dependence: Automobiles, and Truoo-Din Lin
-Slu-vey Versos Route-liased -Recursive Model System for Trip Accessibility and the Evolution of the -Exploratory Analysis of Moira'
lA'ayfinding in Unfamiliar Generation and Trip Chaining" Transportation and Retail Hierarchies- Carrier Accident Risk and Daily
Environments" 1991 I T T ( ' 411 1993 1 1 1 - 1 - C 233 Driving Patterns'
1993 u c r c 211 1991 U C T C TJ
Goulian. Konstadintia G., Handy. Susan
Graph. Worms F. Ram M. Pendyain and -Reginald versus Local Accessibifitr Kaneko, Tetiouya anti
-Structural Equation Modeling of Ryuichi Kittanning hnplications for Ninivaak Traver Paul P. Jovitnist
Iravel Choice Ifynamies- "A Practical Method for thr Estimation 1993 U C T C 231 -Multiday Driving Patterns and
1988 u c r c of Trip Generation and Trip Chaining' Motor Carrier Accident Risk:
1991 1 ICTC Ce2 Handy, Susan L. A Disaggregale AttalYsil'"
Gollob. Thomas F. *Regional versus Local Accessibility: 1991 u c r c 59
-rhe Dynamics of HousehoM Travel Goullaa, Konatadinos G., Neo-Traditional Development and ha
Time Earenditures and Car Ownership Rem M. Pendyala and Implications for Non-Work Travel- Keekr, Theodore E.
Decisions" Ryuichi Kinsman 1993 1 CTC 235 ights-ay Safety, Economic Behavior,
1990 I 'cric 26 'Updating a Panel Survey and liriving Environment'
QueNionnaire I Bunten. Mark and Jacob Sutter 1993 U C T C 65
T h o m a s F. and 1991 u c r c 'The Shake with Freight The Impact
Jacqueline M. Golds of the Emilia Marta Earthquake on Ray Seynung
-Practical Considerations in the Guensler. Randall find Area 'Truckers,' Studies on the 11/M2 -After the Resolution: Excess
Development of it Transit Users Miner Daniel Sperling Priela Earthquake, No, 1 Commuting fur Two-Worker
1929 I 7CTC 17 -Congestion Pricing and Nlotur 19911 I C I C 151 Households in the Los Angeles
Vehicle Emissions: An Initial Review" Metnipolitan Area"
T h o m a s F. and 1993 U C T C 229 Hansen, Mark and 1993 U C T C 144
len VIII %Nissen Sharon Weinstein
-A Joint Household Travel Dimance Ilan. Peter, Brian Sands -East bay Fern Service and the Loma Kim. Sryoung
Generation and Car Ownership m m k r and %filter Streetrr Priem Earthquake," Studies on the -tkinter I littererices in Commuting-.
1989 1 - C T C 8 -Managing the Suburban Commute: Loma Prieta Earthquake. No. 5 An Empirical Study of the Greater Los
A Cross-National Comparison of Three 1991 U C I t 1112 Angeles Metropolitan arra-
Cada., Themuot IF.. Saluting Kim hiletnasilitaii Areas" 1994 L ; C T C 190
and %Veining Hen 1993 U C I C 177 linesman. N o m and
-A Structural Wald of Vehicle I:sr in John M. QuittlrY Kitarnura. Rystichl
Hall, Peter. Daniel Leavitt and -The Spatial Segregation of Ethnic and "Panel Analysis in Transportation
Twn-Nerhick Households1
2
T
C
U
4
9 Erin Vara Demographic Groups_ Comparative Manning: An Overview-
"High-Speed Trains for California. Evidence from Stockholm and San 11-1-C 68
Goullas Konrandinote (;. Strategic Choice: Comparisons of Francisco--
-A I lymintic M icrosimulator for Travel Technologies and Choice of Route.- 1993 U C T C 149 hitamura. Kinds-hi and
Demand Forecasting- CalSpeed David S. Hunch
1992 D C T C 95 1992 U C T C 104 Hedrick, J.K. and )(autism Yi -Heterogeneity and State Dependence
-The Effect of Alternative heavy Truck in Household Car Ownership:
Goulias. Konatatliniat G. Hall, Peter, Daniel la-us-in hind Suspenainal on Flexible Pavement A Panel Analysis Using Ordered-
-Forecasting the Impati Erin Vaea Response' Response Prabit Models aith
Sociodemographk Changes un Travel 'High-Spred Trains for California. 1991 U C T C 46 Error Components-
Demand Experiments with ii 1 Jytiatnic Volume Ii. I hialled Segment 1990 U C T C 52
Itcscriptions. Cost Estimates. Hwang, Keith and
Microsimulation Model System1
T
'C
1
2
9 and Travel Time Cakallations,- Genevieve t;iulismo Khanna's. Ryttichi. Jock M. Nines,
CalSpeed Series 'The Determinants of Ridesharinke Patrick Conroy. and David M.
GOVI144%. Kmstadinos C., 1992 I ICIC 105 ljleratune Review' Fleming
and Ram Pendyala 1990 t a L T C 38 eiecommuting as a 1 ransportation
-Innovations in Transponatinn Kali. Randolph W. Planning Measure: Initial Results of
The Case of Telecnnunuting" 'Design tor Local Area Freight Jaynkripthmtn. Cal:Banda Pilot Proleer
1991 u c r c 72 Networks" Prilehm-1 G. McNally and 1991 U C T C 58
1991 D C I C 63 Michael I, Cohen
Gotdials. Krimaadino% G. -Simulation of Advanced Traveller laburnum R'yuichl. Patricia L.
and Rynichi Kitamura Hall. Randolph W. Information Systems (NUS) Strategies Mokinarian. Ram M. Pendy-ala.
"Analysis ol Binary Choke "Pkium and Delivery Systems tor to Reduce Non-Recurring Congestion and Konatictinos G. Gonna'
Frequencies with Limit Cases: Overnight Carriers' from Special EVenle "An Evaluation of 'Telecommuting
Comparison of Alternative Estimation 1992 I I C I C 106 1993 U C T C 173 as a Trip Reduction Measure"
Methods ;Ind Application Iii Weekly 1991 U C T C 5
Household Mode Choice" Hall, Randolph W. and Jayakrishrum. R., W e l l . Tsai.
1991 U C T C 91; Wei Huts Lin Joseph N. Prrishker, and Klein. Daniel H.
-1.11. Trucking in Los Angeles: Stibodh itakiadhyaksha -The Voluntary Provision of Public
Congestion Relief through Faster Path-Based Algorithm fur Gnosis? The Turnpike Cumpanati of
Terminal Siting" Traffic Amign mime' Early America'
1990 I I C T C 43 1994 U C T C 191 1990 U C T C 18
A C C 1 5 5
P A P E R S I N P R I N T
Klein, Daniel K. and Chi Yin Ijinclis. John Leinitt, Daniel, Peter Cheng. Molduarian. Patricia L
"The Private Provision of Frontier Subhraiit Guliathakuria and Erin It'isen, and Peter Hall "An Empirical Analy..is of the
infrastructure: Toll Roads in California. Ming /Jiang 'Potential for Improved Intercity Transportation Impacts of
1850-190e" "Capitaluation of Transportation Passenger Rail Service in California: Teleeormitutine
1994 L I C T C 238 I nVeStriteritS into Single Family Study of Corridors." Calspeed Series 1991 U C T C 134
Hume Prices: A Comparative 199-1 U C T C 222
Klein, Daniel K. and Analysis of California Transit Mokbtarian, Patricia L
Gordon J. Fielding Systems and Highways' Lem, tewison Lee. JiainiAng 'An Empirical Evaluation of the
"Privaie TnIll Roads. Learning from the 1994 U C T C 246 and Martin Wachs Travel Impacts of Teleconferencing'
19th Century" -Comprehensive Transit Performance 19101 1 1 C T C 132
1992 t i C T C 118 Linden', David Indicators"
Russell D. Hamer, Robert Disler. Peal U C T C 225 Mokluarian, Patricia L
Klein, Daniel K. and and Theodore E. Cohn "Defining Teleeorinnotine
John Majewaild Postural Stability and Stereo- Loultaitou-Sideria. Anastasia 1992 t i c r t : sit
"Economy, Community and Lave Ambiguity in Man-Designed Visual "Retrofit of Urban Corridors- Land Use
The Turnpike Movement in Environments" Policies and Design Guidelines for Moithearian. Patricia L
New York. 17971845" 1991 I I T C 157 TransilEriendly Environments" -Trirommiuting ;mil I r a n + Stair
1991 t r o t 76 1993 U C T C 100 at the Practice. State of the Art"
Line. Charles 1991 1 VIC 79
Klein, Daniel B. And "Federal Subsidies and the Ruinous Majewksi John, Christopher
John Milewski Decline In Transil Productivity; M i n e r and ihaniel R. Klein Makhinelam. Patricia L
"Ilank Road Fever in Antebellum It Wasn't Suplanied to Turn Out "Nlarket and Community in and Han Salomon
America; New York State Origins" Like This" Antebellum America: The Plank Roads "Modeling the Choice tit
1994 U C I C 243 1991 I I C T C 74 of New York- Tick-commuting: Setting the Context'
1991 u e r e 47 1993 U C T C 147
Klein, Daniel H. and Lave. Charles
John Majewski "Measuring the Incline in Transit McNally. Michael G. Monismith. C.11.-, J. Lyamer,
"Priminters and Investors in Productivity in the U_S." "Regii mill Impacts id Neatratlitinual J. Siouan, anti JAC. Hedrick
Ankle-Hutu America:111e Spread 1991 U C T C 159 Neighborhood Development" "Truck Pavement InierActions:
of Plank Road Fever- lucrc172 Requisite Research"
1091 1 1 ( . . - I C 75 Lavv. Chariest 1988 u c r c
"State and National VMT Estimates: McNally, Michael G. and
Kroll. Cynthia A., Jahn D. landia. It Ain't Necessarily So" Sherry Ryan K R I Va l l a n d
Qing Shen, and Sean Stryker 1994 t 7(TC 231 'A Comparative 411014./614111,1111 of Travel Ednard C. Sullivan
"FA:onotnic hutiatis of the Lima Priela Characierisiics for Neotraditional 'A m i g h t Network Mt airl for Wale
Earthquake: A Focus an Small Lave, Charles Developments' and Route Choice'
Husiness."Studies cm the tinna Meta "The Demand Curve Under Road- 1902 U C T C 142 19,44 U C T C 25
Earthquake. No. 3 Pricing and the Problem of Political
1991 ' , I T C 154 Feasibility" McNally , Michael I.. and NOVIICO, Raymond W.
1992 I S C I C 136 Sherry Ryan "Aggression on Roadways
Kurani. Kenneth S., Thomas "Accesaibility of Neotraditional 1989 U C T C If;
Turrendne and Daniel Sperling Lime. Charles Neighborhoods: A Review of liesign
-Demand for Electric Vehicles in "Things Won't Get a Lot Worse: The Concepts, Policies. and Recent Novae, Raymond W.
ilybrid Householde An Exploratory Future of U.S. Traffic Cungestion. Literature- "Automobik Driving and Aggressive
Analysis.' 1990 U C T C 1992 U C T C 141 Behavior'
1991 1 7 C I C 232 1990 1 V I C 42
Lave, Charles and Patrick Elias Menne. Heinle Leo van %Instil
Kwan. Mei-Pa and "Did the ti5 Mph Speed Limit Save and Jacqueline Visser Novae. Raymond W. and
Reginald G. Gulledge lives." (revised) 'Measurement Biases in Panel Data- Cheryl Collier
"t:ontrihotions of GIS to AT1S" 1990 i r a t 1989 I I V I C 'Commuting Stress. Milesharing and
1994 I I T C 2 1 5 Gender Analyses from the 1993 State
lannitt. Dan, Sean Ennis and Stiller, Vincent P. and of the Commute Study in Southern
Landis, John Pat McGovern John M. Quigley California'
"The California Urban Futures Model: "The Cost Escalation of Rail Projects: "Segregation by Racial and 19I4 U C T C 200
A New Generation of Metropolitan Using Previous Experience to Re, Demographic Group: Evidence from
Simidation Models" Evaluate the CalSpeed Esti:flutes," the San Fran-ken Huy Area' Novacli. Raymond W. Onniel
1894 u c r c 244 CalSpeed Series 1989 I I C I C 14 Stokniti and [Antis Milariesi
1993 I , c r c 150 1 dip-dive and Imikirci is e Dimensions
lAndis. John D. and Ming Zhno Moklitariati. Patricia L of Travel Impedance as Detennhuttits
"Pilot Study of Sulam) and Siintirita Leasirt, Daniel, Erin Vaasa and "A 'Typology of Relationships of Commuting Stress"
Land Use and Development Policy Peter Ilan Between Telecomniunicatians 1990 U C T C 30
Aliernatives" "Revenue and Rideraltip Potential for a and Transportation"
1994 U C T C 245 Illigh-Speed Rail Service In the San 1990 t ! L C I C Novae. Raymund W.. Wendy
Francisco / Sacramento - Los Angeles Khmer and Alexander liroquei
Corridor" Calvert/ Series Environimrni Clinsequences
1994 U C T C 185 of Commute Travel !tont-dance"
1991 l ' C T C 77
m i d .11Mematty
A C I C t S
1111011(1 I I I 1994
P A P E R S I N P R I N T
A C C E S S
P A P E R S I N P R I N T
Taylor, Brian D. and '.aflWissen. Leo J., Wang, Quaniu and Willson. Richard VW.
Paul M. Ong Thurman F. Goinh and Mark A. Dellatchi "Estimating the lravel and Parking
"Racial and Ethnic Variations in Hank J. Meurs Impacts of Eiretric Vehicles on Demand Effects of Employer-Paid
Employment Access: An Examination -A Simultaneous Dyrounic Travel and Primary Energy Consumption and Parking"
of Residential Location and Activities lime Allocation M odel" Petroleum Displacement" 1992 U M 139
Commuting In Metropolitan Areas' 1991 U C T C 21 1991 U C T C 6
1993 U C T C 175 Willson, Richard W. and
Wachs, Martin Wang. Quanin, Catherine Kling Donald Shoup
Tatichithe Pamela and "Learning from Los Angeles; and Daniel Sperling "Parking Subsidies and Travel
Linda Wilshumm Transport. Urban Frain. and "Light-Duty i'ehicle Exhaust Emission Chuices: Assessing the Evidence'
"Conimule Behavior in Santa Cniz Air Quality" Control Coat Estimates Using a Part- 1990 u c - r c 34
County,' Studies on the Lorna Prieta 1993 l i C I C 166 Pricing Approach"
Earthquake, No, 4 1993 U C T C 206 Kyonou and J.K. Hedrick
1991 1 1 C T C 155 Wachs'. Martin "Active and Serniactive Heavy Thick
"PolicY huntications of Recent Wang, Quanlu, Catherine Kling Suspensions to Reduce Pavement
Turn-nil:tie, Thomas and Behavioral Research in Transporiatinn and Daniel Sperling I /arnage"
Daniel Sperling Demand Management' "Marketable Credits lin Light-Iluty 1989 U C T C
11114ilieS of New Technoloo 1991 L : C T C 165 EntiSSiall Control in California"
Purchase th9:1111411nC The Case of 1932 l ' C I C 109 11, Kyongsm Margaret Wargelin
Alternative Fuel Vehicles' Wachs. Martin and L K . Hedrick
1992 U C T C 129 'Regulating Traffic. by Controlling Wang, (antral% Daniel Sprrting -Dymunic Tire Force Control by
Land Lac: The Southern California and Janis Olmstead Semi-As-live Suspensions"
Turrentine, Thomas. Experience" -Emission Contind CosEElltsmvearos 1992 L I C T C 97
Martin Lee-Goaselin. 1990 U C T C 12 of Alternative-Fuel Vehicles"
Kenneth Kurnni. and 1993 t r C I C 227 Youngbin
Dank-1 Sperling Wachs. Martin "Shopping Trips and Spatial
"A Si udy of Adaptive and Optimizing --Ennsportalion Demand Wang, Quaniu, Mark A. lielawhi Distribution of Food Storrs"
Behavior for Electric VehicleI Management Policy imPlicallonb and Daniel Sperling 1993 L i c i t 125
Based on Interactive Simulation of Recent liehaviciral Research" 'Emission Impacts of Electric
Gainew and Revealed Behavior of 1990 L I C T C Vehicles" run. YounOiln
Electric Vehicle themenc" 1990 U C T C 41 - I l k Effects of Transportation Service*
1992 t C T C 130 War-ha. Martin and on the Scale of Food Retailing'
Genevieve Giuliano Webber. Melvin M. 1992 I -c-rc 112
lihlaner, Carole J. and 'Empicoyee Transportation "The Joys of Autocambility"
Seyourkg Kim Coordinators: A New Profession in 1991 U C T C 110 Vim. Youngbin
"Designing and Implementing a Panel Southern California' -Travel Distance and Market Size in
Study of Commuter Ikhavior lLeasons 1992 U C T C 99 Willitam, Richard and Food Retailing'
fur Future lerseareh" Elham Shirazi 1992 U C T C 121
1993 u c r c 145 Wadi*, Martin, Brian D. Taylor, 'Transportation Demand
Ned Levine. and Paul Ong Management Polky Implications
Vat-a. Erin -The Changing Cummute: A Casc of Recent Behavioral Research'
' W e r t * Rail Ridership Forecasting study of the Jobs! Housing Symposium Sununm)
and the Implementation uf Ifigh-Speed Relationship over Time" 1991 L I C T C 29
Rail In California." Caispeed Series 1993 P C T C 167
1993 L I C I C
Walla, W. David
VatCa Erin, Thomas Bordeaux, "A Cointewration Rank Test Lit Market
Daniel Leavitt. and Peter Han linkages with an Applicatinn in the
'Revenue and Ridership Putential for a V S Natural Gas Industry'
High-Speed Rail Service in the San 1993 I I C T C 201
Francisco / Sacramento IAA Angeles
t'urrideor Treholical App. stthe Walls, W. David
Calspeed Series "Ceempetition and Prices in the
1994 L I C I C Deregulated Gas Pipeline Network
A Multivariate Cointegnitiun Analyaiii"
van Whitten. Leo J. 1993 r r c 2113
"A Model of Household Interactions in
Walls, W. David
Activity Patterns1
UCTC15
1
9 'Competition in a Network of Markets:
The Natural Gas Industry"
vim Wiamen. Leo J. and 1992 U C T C 122
Thomas F. Golub
-Simultaneous Equation Systems
Involving Binary Choke Variables' Boom in Jakarta
1990 u c r c 21)
A C C E S S
110111111I
Ph. D. D I S S E R T A T I O N S
Ditsrtations kis.. not been reprinted, Owing to !heir length However, copies son he mode on tocial order
A C C E S S B A C K I S S U E S
Access No. 2, Spring 1193 (Oct el Point) Access No. 4, Spring 1994
Coshing Out Employer-Paid Parking, Door:MC. Shoup Time Again tor Reif?, Paw Nail
Congestion Pricing: New life for on Old Idea?, Kenneth A. Small No Rusts To Cokh the Train, Acial Konoioni
Private Toll Roads in AnstwicaThe First Time Around, Daniel 8 Klein Will Congestion Pricing Ever Be Adopted?, Moran Wochr
Invelligoting Toll Roods in California, Gordon .1 Fielding Coshing in an Curb Parking, Dona.'d C Shoup
Telecommuting: What's the Payoff?, Potricio I My/testi:tikes Reviving Transit Corridors oriel Transit Riding, Al10110100 LOtafhlar Sideris
Surviving in the Suburbs: Transit's Untapped Frontier, Rakiert Cervero Access Almanac: Love, Lies, and Transportation in LA,
A C C E S S
O R D E R F O R M
AC C I S S N U N D E D 3
fail 1 9 9 4
UM A AUTHOR TITLE Q U A N T I T Y
-
teliseri Ly d i a Chen
m e n g t s Smogs m i l l e t
University o f C a l i f o r n i a
Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ctsntor
Prited an recycled p a p r t
UCTC Papers and Access bock I r e free, but please Ionia yoot request
to 'Alves at genuine interest Pa you
PH.0 Dissettotiont ore ovolloble on special order
It you would like to be added la out mailing list to reCtims Ilutute issues al
Access, please ( h e t i here U
NAME
ORGANIZATION
AODRESS
PHONE _
Send t o :
Publications. University of California Transportation Center
Photo C r s i l i s
1 0 8 N a v a l Architecture Building, University a l California, Berkeley, CA 9 4 7 2 0
Telephone (510) 6 4 3 . 3 4 5 4 F a x 1310) 6 4 3 . 3 4 5 6
E - m a i l : A C C E S S 6 U C L I N B A R I B I L E Y, 11 0 0 Front Case, bacligtottna Cahtont. P tont Cover
insets Sean McCrary !Sop. c r a w l , Vol Menotti
!bottom). pg 2 U.S Deportment oh transportaiion
A C C E S S
11111111(11 1411 1 9 9 4
The Access A l m a n a c :
A C C E S S
TABLE 1
FUEL E C O N O M Y 1 RR I L E S P E R 0 A 1 I 0 1 1
Note: Each country may use different
UNITEDSTATES JAPAN FRANCE WESTGERMANY I t A t Y U N I T E D KINGDOM
YEAR methods for calculating new car
ISMCon N e w Cam MI Carl N e t . Altw Cm A l Cora N o w (Ars A l l Col R o w Cus All (An
-- hrel economy Only opproxirnase
1970 12.6 211 27.8 23.1 23.5 comparison can be mode across
1971 12.6 20.7 27.8 22.1 23.4 countries Doia wale generated for
1972 21.9 27,8 21.5 22.0 onternationol comparison and are 1101
1973 12.4 13.1 11.3 22.6 27.0 22.0 2 3 . 0 27.9 - 21.11 COMpOtable with other domestic fuel
1974 12.6 13.9 21.0 22.1 27.8 22.3 - 21.9 economymeasures
1975 12.7 15.4 21.4 21.2 27.4 2 7 - 7 22.0 CO 22.6
1976 12.7 16.8 21.2 22.6 26.4 2 8 . 2 21.9 22.7 Source: Tronsponloncin Energy Data
1977 12.9 17.8 21.0 24.9 26.6 2 8 . 5 21.7 22.5 Book, 14th Edilion, Stacy C Davis,
1978 13.1 18.7 20.8 26.6 26.2 2 8 . 7 71.5 H A 22.1 Oak Ridge National laboratory,
1979 13.4 18.8 20,4 27.3 26.6 2 9 - 1 21.8 2 5 . 4 27.9 - 21.6
May 1994. Tables 1 S and 1.6
1980 14.3 22.6 20.4 28.2 25.8 3 0 . 4 21.6 2 6 . 1 27.9 2 8 . 4 77.7
1981 14.7 24.2 20.8 28.9 25.6 3 1 . 9 21.7 28.2 28.1 2118 23.6
1982 15.3 24.8 21.1 3 0 . 6 25.4 3 3 . 1 21.7 29.1 28.1 2 9 . 6 23.8
1983 15.7 24.1 21.1 3 0 . 1 25.4 3 3 . 7 21.7 29.3 28.4 3 1 . 9 23.8
1984 16.2 24.7 21.5 30.1 25.7 3 4 . 5 21.7 31.4 28.9 3 2 . 9 73.8
1985 16.5 2 5 . 1 21.9 29.2 25.9 3 5 . 1 21.7 3 2 . 0 29.1 3 2 . 9 74.2
1986 16.5 M I 22.0 28.2 26.0 3 5 . 3 21.7 3 2 . 1 29.6 3 3 . 8 24.2
1987 17.1 2 6 . 0 22.4 27.8 26.3 3 5 . 7 21.9 3 1 . 1 30.0 3 4 . 3 24.5
1988 17.8 25.9 22.5 27.3 26.2 3 6 . 1 22.1 3 0 . 5 30.3 3 4 . 3 25,0
1989 18.2 25.6 22.5 26.8 26.6 3 6 . 3 22.5 3 0 . 0 30.1 25.8
1990 18.6 25.3 22.3 27.1 26.7 3 6 . 3 22.7 3 0 . 0 30.1 25.6
1970 1.36 0.42 1.16 0.71 2.99 2.22 2.24 1.66 3-81 3.02 3.13 2.26 would hove made the price level in
1971 1.36 1.36 2.86 2.24 3.60 - 3.06 - the foreign country equal the price
1972 1.36 0.39 1.36 0.69 2.79 2.01 2 . 1 8 1.60 4.01 3.14 2.86 1.96 level in the United Stales then we
1973 1.36 0.41 1.36 0.69 2.65 2.05 2.11 1.29 3.60 2.71 2.72 1.,741 oditist for Inflation Therefore. the
1974 1.70 0.33 1.70 0.56 3.33 2.04 2 . 4 5 1.25 311 2.41 2.72 1.42 price in a foreign country is not the
1975 1.63 0.33 1.63 0.54 3.13 1.88 2 . 5 2 1.31 4.89 3.35 3.94 245 price expressed at current exclsonge
1976 1.56 0.31 3.13 1.31 2.99 1.73 2.58 1.71 4,35 - 3.60
- rates, it is roughlywhatthe price of
1977 1.56 0.30 3.33 1.25 3,76 2.11 2.45 1.24 5.91 3.26 i
gasoline in the foreign country would
1978 1.50 0,31 2.86 1.24 3.60 2.18 2.52 1.21 5.51 2.92 ni
1979 1.84 0.28 3.33 1.39 3.67 2.52 2.65 1.15 5.17 - 3.40 - be were average paces the same as
1980 7.24 3.74 3.81 2.18 2.92 1.46 5.51 3.38 3.67 1.75 in the United States in 1994
19411 2.24 0,23 3.74 1.39 3.88 1.78 3.33 1.59 5.85 3.58 3.94 LIS
Sources: Gasoline prices ore from
1982 1.97 0.24 3.88 1.27 3.94 2.08 3.13 LSO 5.85 3.48 3.94 2.14
1983 3.54 0.84 3.88 2.05 1.19 5.78 3.78 4.01 lee Schipper, at ciE. 'Mind the Gap
1.70 0,26 2.99
1984 1.63 0.39 3.26 1.21 3.94 2.26 2.99 1.46 5,78 3.79 3.14 2.16 TheViciousCircle of Meoliuring
1985 1.63 0.29 3.20 14.01 2.99 1.1$ 5.37 3.65 3.94 Automobile Fuel Use, Endegy Poky,
1986 1.22 0.40 2.79 1.22 3.33 2.46 2.24 1.38 4.96 1.88 3.33 2.13 December 1993, 2113): 1173.1190.
1987 1.22 - 2.72 3.26 2.11 4.76 - 3.26 Table 1 111CTIC No 2281 These retail
1988 1.16 0,36 2.51 1.20 3.20 2.46 2 . 1 1 1.36 4.76 3.75 3.06 2.05 prices include boxes
1989 1.27 0.36 2.511 1.22 3.33 2.49 2 . 4 5 1.59 5.91 4.49 3.06 1.95
1990 1.29 0.34 2.65 1.21 3.26 2.41 2.45 1.54 - - 3.06 1.110 Gasoline in-Re are From Siotissical
Abstract oi the &MoodStates, various
Change -5% -19% 95% SS% 9% 9% 9% -7% $5% 49% -2% -16% years, and from Energy Prices and
1197090 Taxes. Fourth Quarter, 1992, OECD,
atnewestviers] p 282.
- ' ;I
U.SP
.O
S
A
T
GE
A
P
ID
U
NV
IE
RS
T
IY
O
F
C
AO
IF
L
R
NIA N
ON
P
-R
OF
T
IO
R
G
AN
A
IZ
O
T
N