Urban Transportation Planning In The US - A Historical Overview/Nov 1992
.
Urban Transportation Planning
in the United States
An Historical Overview
Revised Edition
November 1992
Prepared by
Edward Weiner
Office of Economics
Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Policy and International Affairs
Office of the Secretary of Transportation
Washington, D.C. 20590
Distributed in Cooperation with
Technology Sharing Program
U.S. Department of Transportation
Washington, D.C. 20590
DOT-T-93-02
PREFACE
Urban transportation planning is carried out primarily by state and
local agencies. Over the years, much experience has been gained in
the planning and evaluation of urban transportation systems. This
knowledge can be useful to planners and decision makers in the
development and implementation of transportation system changes.
In this context, it is important to understand the transportation
and planning options which have been tried, and how they developed
into the approaches we have today. This report describes the
evolution of urban transportation planning over the last sixty
years.
This is the Fourth Edition of this report which was first published
in 1983. The earlier edition discussed urban transportation
planning to mid-1986. This edition updates the evolution of urban
transportation planning and policy to mid-1992. it also contains
many additions and some revisions to the earlier edition. This
report is an updated version of "Evolution of Urban Transportation
Planning" which was published in 1979 as Chapter 15 in Public
Transportation: Planning, Operations and Management., edited by
George E. Gray and Lester L. Hoel.
The report focuses on key events in the evolution of urban
transportation planning including developments in technical
procedures, philosophy, processes and institutions. But, planners
must also be aware of changes in legislation, policy, regulations
and technology. These events have been included to provide a more
complete picture of the forces that have affected and often
continue to affect urban transportation planning.
Summarizing so much history in a single report requires difficult
choices. The efforts of many individuals and groups made important
contributions to the development of urban
i
transportation planning. Clearly, not all of these contributions
could be included or cited. This report concentrates on the key
events of national significance and thereby tries to capture the
overall evolution of urban transportation planning. Focusing on
key events also serves as a convenient point to discuss
developments in a particular area.
The report is generally arranged chronologically. Each period is
titled with the major theme pervading that period as viewed by the
author. Not all key events fit precisely under a particular theme,
but many do. The discussion of the background for some events or
the follow-on activities for others may cover more than one time
period and is placed where it seemed most relevant.
The report takes a multimodal perspective and attempts to provide a
balanced view among a number of subject areas including:
Significant Federal legislation
Major, relevant Federal regulations and policies
Highway concerns
Transit concerns
Environmental issues
Energy issues
Safety issues
Relevant conferences
Technological developments
Transportation service alternatives
Manuals and methodological developments
National transportation studies
National data resources
Local events with national significance
Over the years, the author has discussed these events with many
persons in the profession. Often they had participated in or had
first hand knowledge of the events. The author appreciates their
ii
assistance, even though they are too numerous to mention
specifically.
In preparing this report, the author was directly aided by several
individuals who provided information on specific events. Their
assistance is appreciated: Barry Berlin, Susan Binder, Norman
Cooper, Frederick W. Ducca, Christopher R. Fleet, Charles A.
Hedges, Anthony R. Kane, Thomas Koslowski, Ira Laster, James J.
McDonnell, Florence Miller, Camille C. Mittelholtz, Norman Paulhus,
Elizabeth A. Parker, John Peak, Sam Rea, Carl Rappaport, James A.
Scott, Mary Lynn Tischer, Jimmy Yu, and Samuel Zimmerman.
The author appreciates the review comments provided by: Donald
Emerson, David S. Gendell, James Getzewich, Charles H. Graves,
Thomas J. Hillegass, Howard S. Lapin, Herbert S. Levinson, Alfonso
B. Linhares, Gary E. Maring, Ali F. Sevin, Gordon Shunk, Peter R.
Stopher, Carl N. Swerdloff, Paul L. Verchinski, and George
Wickstrom.
Any errors of fact or interpretation are the responsibility of the
author.
Edward Weiner
Washington, DC
November, 1992
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. EARLY HIGHWAY PLANNING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Need for Highway Planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1934. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
Electric Railway Presidents' Conference Committee. . . . . .12
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. . . . . . . . . .13
AASHO Policy on Geometric Design of Rural Highways . . . . .14
Toll Road Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
Highway Capacity Manual. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
Interregional Highway Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
3. BEGINNINGS OF URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING19
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1944. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
Early Urban Travel Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
Early Transit Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
Dawn of Analytical Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
AASHO Manual on User Benefit Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . .27
Breakthroughs in Analytical Techniques . . . . . . . . . . .28
National Committee on Urban Transportation . . . . . . . . .31
Housing Act of 1954. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31
Pioneering Urban Transportation Studies. . . . . . . . . . .32
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34
Sagamore Conference on Highways and Urban Development. . . .36
Housing Act of 1961. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
v
4. URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMES OF AGE . . . . . . . . .39
Joint Report on Urban Mass Transportation. . . . . . . . . .39
President Kennedy's Transportation Message . . . . . . . . .41
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1962. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41
Hershey Conference on Urban Freeways . . . . . . . . . . . .43
Implementation of the 1962 Federal-Aid Highway Act . . . . .44
Conventional Urban Travel Forecasting Process. . . . . . . .47
Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission. . . . .50
Highway Planning Program Manual. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53
Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964. . . . . . . . . . . .54
Urban Development Simulation Models. . . . . . . . . . . . .55
Williamsburg Conference on Highways and Urban Development. .56
5. IMPROVED INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION. . . . . . . . . . .59
Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965. . . . . . . . . .60
1966 Amendments to the Urban Mass Transportation Act . . . .60
Highway and Motor Vehicle Safety Acts of 1966. . . . . . . .61
Department of Transportation Act of 1966 . . . . . . . . . .63
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 . . . . . . . . .64
Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development
Act of 1966 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65
Dartmouth Conference on Urban Development Models . . . . . .66
Reserved Bus Lanes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
National Highway Needs Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1968. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73
"Continuing" Urban Transportation Planning . . . . . . . . .75
Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968. . . . . . . . . .77
Bureau of the Budget's Circular No. A-95 . . . . . . . . . .77
6.ENVIRONMENT AND CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT81
Citizen Participation and the Two-Hearing Process
for Highways. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81
vi
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. . . . . . . . . .82
Environmental Quality Improvement Act of 1970. . . . . . . .83
Nationwide Personal Transportation Study . . . . . . . . . .84
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85
Boston Transportation Planning Review. . . . . . . . . . . .87
Urban Corridor Demonstration Program . . . . . . . . . . . .89
Census Journey-to-Work Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91
7. BEGINNINGS OF MULTIMODAL URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING . . .95
Urban Mass Transportation Assistance Act of 1970 . . . . . .97
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98
Conference on Urban Commodity Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . .99
Mt. Pocono Conference on Urban Transportation Planning . . 101
DOT Initiatives Toward Planning Unification. . . . . . . . 102
Process Guidelines for Highway Projects. . . . . . . . . . 103
UMTA's External Operating Manual . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Williamsburg Conference on Urban Travel Forecasting. . . . 106
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Endangered Species Act of 1973 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Urban Highways. . . . 110
1972 and 1974 National Transportation Studies. . . . . . . 111
National Mass Transportation Assistance Act of 1974. . . . 113
PLANPAC and UTPS Batteries of Computer Programs. . . . . . 114
8. TRANSITION TO SHORT-TERM PLANNING. . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Emergency Energy Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Service and Methods Demonstration Program. . . . . . . . . 119
OTA's Report on Automated Guideway Transit . . . . . . . . 120
Model 13(c) Labor Protection Agreement for Operating
Assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Joint Highway-Transit Planning Regulations . . . . . . . . 124
Policy on Major Urban Mass Transportation Investments. . . 128
Characteristics of Urban Transportation Systems. . . . . . 130
vii
Light Rail Transit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1976. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
ITE Trip Generation Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Urban System Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
Road Pricing Demonstration Program . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
National Transportation Trends and Choices . . . . . . . . 138
Transit Uniform System of Accounts and Records . . . . . . 139
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
9. ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
1978 National Urban Policy Report. . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978. . . . . . . 148
Quick Response Urban Travel Forecasting Techniques . . . . 150
National Energy Act of 1978. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
Council on Environmental Quality's Regulations . . . . . . 153
BART Impact Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
International Conferences on Behavioral Travel Demand. . . 158
National Ridesharing Demonstration Program . . . . . . . . 161
Urban Initiatives Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Section 504 Regulations on Accessibility
for the Handicapped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
National Transportation Policy Study Commission. . . . . . 166
Aspen Conference on Future Urban Transportation. . . . . . 167
Highway Performance Monitoring System. . . . . . . . . . . 169
10. DECENTRALIZATION OF DECISIONMAKING . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
President Reagan's Memorandum on Regulations . . . . . . . 171
Airlie House Conference on Urban Transportation Planning
in the 1980's . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
E.O. 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs. 174
Woods Hole Conference on Future Directions of Urban
Public Transportation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
viii
Easton Conference on Travel Analysis Methods
for the 1980's. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982. . . . . . . 179
Advent of Microcomputers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
New Urban Transportation Planning Regulations. . . . . . . 184
11. PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
Paratransit Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
Conferences on Goods Transportation in Urban Areas . . . . 189
Transportation Management Associations . . . . . . . . . . 190
Revised Major Transit Capital Investment Policy. . . . . . 191
Private Participation in the Transit Program . . . . . . . 195
National Transit Performance Reports . . . . . . . . . . . 196
Charter Bus Regulations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation
Assistance Act of 1987. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
National Conference on Transportation Planning
Applications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Smuggler's Notch Conference on Highway Finance . . . . . . 208
Revised FHWA/UMTA Environmental Regulation . . . . . . . . 209
National Council on Public Works Improvement . . . . . . . 210
12. STRATEGIC PLANNING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
Transportation 2020. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
Williamsburg Conference on Transportation
and Economic Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
National Transportation Strategic Planning Study. . . 217
Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . 220
Geographic Information Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
Transportation Demand Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
National Maglev Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. . . . . . . . . . . 229
Strategic Planning and Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
ix
Americans With Disabilities Act . . . . . . . . . . . 238
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency
Act of 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
13. CONCLUDING REMARKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
APPENDICES
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
List of Abbreviations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Almost thirty years have passed since the Federal-Aid Highway Act
of 1962 created the federal mandate for urban transportation
planning in the United States. The act was the capstone of two
decades of experimentation and development of urban transportation
procedures and institutions. It was passed at a time in which
urban areas were beginning to plan Interstate highway routes
through and around their areas. The 1962 Act combined with the
incentive of 90 percent federal funding for Interstate highway
projects caused urban transportation planning to spread quickly
throughout the United States. It also had a significant influence
on urban transportation planning in other parts of the world.
In some ways, the urban transportation planning process and
planning techniques have changed little over the thirty years.
Yet, in other ways, urban transportation has evolved over these
years in response to changing issues, conditions and values, and a
greater understanding of urban transportation phenomena. Current
urban transportation planning practice is considerably more
sophisticated, complex, and costly than its highway planning
predecessor.
Modifications in the planning process took many years to evolve.
As new concerns and issues arose, changes in planning techniques
and processes were introduced. These modifications sought to make
the planning process more responsive and sensitive to those areas
of concern. Urban areas that had the resources and technical
ability were the first to develop new concepts and techniques.
These new ideas were diffused by various means throughout the
nation, usually with the assistance of the federal government.
The rate at which the new concepts were accepted varied from area
1
to area. Consequently, the quality and depth of planning is highly
variable at any point in time.
Early highway planning concentrated on developing a network of all
weather highways and with connecting the various portions of the
nation. As this work was being accomplished, the problems of
serving increasing traffic grew. With the planning for urban areas
came additional problems of land development, dislocation of homes
and businesses, environmental degradation, citizen participation,
energy consumption, and social concerns such as providing
transportation for the disadvantaged. More recently have been the
concerns about deterioration of the transportation infrastructure
and traffic congestion.
Urban transportation planning in the United States has always been
conducted by state and local agencies. This is entirely
appropriate since highway and transit facilities and services are
owned and operated largely by the states and local agencies. The
role of the federal government has been to set national policy,
provide financial aid, supply technical assistance and training,
and conduct research. Over the years, the federal government has
attached requirements to its financial assistance. From a planning
perspective, the most important has been the requirement that
transportation projects in urbanized areas of 50,000 or more in
population be based on an urban transportation planning process.
This requirement was first incorporated into the Federal-Aid
Highway Act of 1962.
Other requirements have been incorporated into federal legislation
and regulations over the years. Many of these are chronicled in
this report. At times these requirements have been very exacting
in their detail. At, other times, greater flexibility was allowed
in responding to the requirements. Currently, there is underway a
devolution of federal involvement in and requirements on local
planning and decisionmaking processes. Greater emphasis is being
2
placed as well on involving the private sector in providing and
financing urban transportation facilities and services.
Over the years, a number of federal agencies have affected urban
transportation planning. (Table 1 ) The U.S. Bureau of Public Roads
(BPR) was part of the U.S. Department of Commerce when the 1962
Highway Act was passed. It became part of the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) upon its creation in 1966 and its name was
changed to the U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The
federal urban mass transportation program began in 1961 under the
U.S. Housing and Home Finance Administration, which became the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development in 1965. The federal
urban transit program was transferred to DOT in 1968 as the U.S.
Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA). The name was
changed to the U.S. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) by the
Federal Transit Act Amendments of 1991. The U.S. Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) was created at the same time as DOT. The
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 established
the National Traffic Safety Agency, and the Highway Safety Act of
1966 established the National Highway Safety Agency both in the
Department of Commerce. The two safety agencies were combined by
Executive Order 11357 in 1967 into the National Highway Safety
Bureau in the newly created DOT. In 1970 it became the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
Other federal agencies became involved in urban transportation
planning as new issues arose. The Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation was established in 1966 to administer national
historic preservation programs. The Bureau of the Budget (BOB),
later to become the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), issued
guidance in 1969 to improve coordination among programs funded by
the federal government. To address environmental concerns that
were increasing in the latter part of the 1960's, the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) was created in 1969 and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1970. The U.S.
3
Table 1
DATES SELECTED FEDERAL AGENCIES WERE ESTABLISHED
1849 Department of Interior
1913 Department of Commerce
1916 Bureau of Public Roads
1921 Bureau of the Budget
1947 Housing and Home Finance Agency
1953 Department of Health, Education and Welfare
1965 Department of Housing and Urban Development
1966 Department of Transportation
1966 Federal Highway Administration
1966 Federal Railroad Administration
1966 Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
1967 National Highway Safety Bureau
1968 Urban Mass Transportation Administration
1969 Council on Environmental Quality
1970 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
1970 Office of Management and Budget
1970 Environmental Protection Agency
1977 Department of Energy
1979 Department of Health and Human Services
1991 Federal Transit Administration
4
Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW), now the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), became involved in
urban transportation in 1973 as part of its function to eliminate
discrimination against handicapped persons in federal programs.
With the passage if the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the
Department of Interior and the Department of Commerce became
involved in some aspects of urban transportation planning. In
1977, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) was created to bring
together federal energy functions.
The involvement of these and other agencies at the federal, state
and local level created an increasing challenge to agencies
conducting urban transportation planning to meet all the
requirements that resulted. Local planners devoted substantial
resources to meeting requirements of higher level governments,
which often detracted from their ability to address local needs and
objectives. These requirements, however, were also used by local
agencies as the justification to carry out activities that they
desired but for which they could not obtain support at the local
level.
This report reviews the historical development of the urban
transportation planning process in the United States from its
beginnings in early highway and transit planning to its current
focus on strategic planning and privatization.
Chapter 2 discusses the early beginnings of highway planning.
Chapter 3 covers the formative years of urban transportation
planning during which many of the basic concepts were developed.
Chapter 4 focuses on the 1962 Federal-Aid Highway Act and the
sweeping changes it brought in urban transportation planning in the
United States. It also describes early federal involvement in
urban public transportation.
5
Chapter 5 discusses efforts at intergovernmental coordination, the
beginning of the federal highway and vehicle safety programs, a
deeper federal role in urban public transportation and the
evolution to "continuing" transportation planning.
Chapter 6 describes the environmental revolution of the late 1960's
and the increased involvement of citizens in the urban
transportation planning process.
Chapter 7 addresses the events that led to integrated planning for
urban public transportation and highways. These included major
increases in federal transit programs as well as increased
flexibility in the use of highway funds.
Chapter 8 focuses on the Arab oil embargo of 1973 which accelerated
the transition from long-term system planning to short-term,
smaller scale planning. It also discusses the concern for cost-
effectiveness in transportation decisions and the emphasis on
transportation system management techniques.
Chapter 9 highlights the concern for the revitalization of older
urban centers and the growing need for energy conservation. It
describes the expanding federal requirements on environmental
quality and transportation for special groups.
Chapter 10 describes the efforts to reverse federal intrusion into
local decisions and to scale back federal requirements.
Chapter 11 discusses the expanded interest in involving the private
sector in the provision of transportation services and the decline
in public resources to address transportation planning.
Chapter 12 focuses on strategic planning to the year 2000 and into
the next century, and the renewed interest in new technological
options. It also discusses the growing concern for traffic
6
congestion and air pollution and the efforts at transportation
demand management.
Chapter 13 provides a summary and concluding remarks.
7
Chapter 2
EARLY HIGHWAY PLANNING
Early highway planning grew out the need for information on the
rising tide of automobile and truck usage during the first quarter
of the twentieth century. From 190.4, when the first automobiles
ventured out of the cities, traffic grew at a steady and rapid
rate. After the initial period of highway construction which
connected many of the nation's cities, emphasis shifted to
improving the highway system to carry these increased traffic
loads. Early highway planning focused on the collection and
analysis of factual information and, on applying that information
to the growing highway problems in the period prior to World War II.
Need for Highway Planning
In the early years of highway construction, the automobile had been
regarded as a pleasure vehicle rather than an important means of
transportation. Consequently, highways consisted of comparatively
short sections that were built from the cities into the
countryside. There were significant gaps in many important
intercity routes. During this period, urban roads were considered
to be adequate, particularly in comparison to rural roads which
were generally not paved.
As the automobile was improved and ownership became more
widespread, the idea of a highway network gained in strength. The
concept of a continuous national system of highways was recognized
in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1925 with the adoption of a
United States numbered highway system composed of important through
routes extending entirely across the nation. This was not a formal
highway system but simply a basis for route marking as a
9
guide for motorists (Holmes and Lynch, 1957).
With the adoption of a Federal-aid system, in the Federal-Aid Act
of 1921, and the marking of through routes, the focus of highway
construction was on "closing the gaps." By the early 1930's, the
objective of constructing a system of two-lane roads connecting the
centers of population had largely been completed. It was then
possible to travel around the country on a smooth, all-weather
highway system (U.S. Federal Works Agency, 1949).
With the completion of this "pioneering period" of highway
construction, attention shifted to the more complex issues
resulting from the rapid growth in traffic and increasing vehicle
weights. Figure 1 shows the growth in vehicle registrations, motor
fuel consumption, highway expenditures and tax receipts during the
period (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1954). Early highways were
inadequate in width, grade and alignment to serve major traffic
loads, and highway pavements had not been designed to carry the
numbers and weights of the newer trucks.
It became clear that these growing problems necessitated the
collection and analysis of information on highways and their use on
a more comprehensive scale than had ever before been attempted
(Holmes and Lynch, 1957). A systematic approach to the planning of
highways was needed to respond to these problems.
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1934
Beginning with the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1934, the Congress
authorized that 1-1/2 percent of the amount apportioned to any
state annually for construction could be used for surveys, plans,
engineering, and economic analyses for future highway construction
projects. The act created the cooperative arrangement between the
U.S. Bureau of Public Roads (now the U.S. Federal Highway
Administration) and the state highway departments, known as the
10
Click HERE for graphic.
11
statewide highway planning surveys. By 1940, all states were
participating in this program (Holmes and Lynch, 1957).
As an initial activity, these highway planning surveys included a
complete inventory and mapping of the highway system and its
physical characteristics. Traffic surveys were undertaken to
determine the volume of traffic by vehicle type, weight, and
dimensions. Financial studies were made to determine the
relationship of highway finances to other financial operations
within each state, to assess the ability of the states to finance
the construction and operation of the highway system, and to
indicate how to allocate highway taxes among the users. Many of
the same types of activities are still being performed on a
continuing basis by highway agencies (Holmes, 1962).
Electric Railway Presidents, Conference Committee
Electric railway systems were the backbone of urban mass
transportation by World War I with over 1,000 street railway
companies carrying some 11 billion passengers by 1917 (Mills,
1975). After 1923, ridership on the nation's electric railways
began to decline as the motor bus, with its flexibility to change
routes and lower capital costs, quickly began replacing the
electric the electric streetcar (N.D. Lea Transportation Research
Corporation, 1975). With rising costs and the inability to raise
fares to cover costs, the financial condition of street railway
companies worsened.
In 1930, the heads of 25 electric railway companies formed Electric
Railway Presidents' Conference Committee (PCC). The goal of the
PCC was to develop a modern streetcar to match the comfort,
performance, and modern image of its competitors, and stem the
decline of the street railway industry. The effort took five years
and $750,000. It was one of the most thorough and efficiently
organized ventures in urban mass transit. The
12
product, known as the "PCC car," far surpassed its predecessors in
acceleration, braking, passenger comfort, and noise (Mills, 1975).
The first commercial application of the PCC car was in 1935 in
Brooklyn, New York. By 1940 more than 1100 vehicles had been
purchased. By 1952, when production was first halted, about 6,000
PCC cars had been produced. The PCC cars did improve the
competitive position of streetcars and slow the conversion to
buses. But without other improvements, such as exclusive rights of
way, it could not stop the long term decline in street railways.
By 1960, streetcars remained in only about a dozen cities in the
U.S. (Vuchic, 1981).
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
As the highway system was expanded and upgraded to meet the growth
in automobile traffic, the need for high uniform standards for
traffic control devices became obvious. These traffic control
devices included signs, traffic signals, markings and other devices
placed on, over, or adjacent to a street or highway by a public
body to guide, warn, or regulate traffic. In 1927, the American
Association of State Highway Officials published the Manual and
Specifications for the Manufacture, Display and Erection of U.S.
Standard Road Markers and Signs. The manual was developed for
application of rural highways. Then, in 1929, the National
Conference of Street and Highway Safety published a manual for use
on urban streets.
But the necessity for unification of the standards applicable to
different classes of road and street systems was obvious. To meet
that need, a joint committee of the AASHO and the National
Conference of Street and Highway Safety combined their efforts and
developed the first Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices which
was published by the BPR in 1935.
13
over the years since that first manual, the problems and needs of
traffic control changed. New solutions and devices were developed,
as well as the standards to guide their application. The original
joint committee continued its existence with occasional changes in
organization and personnel. In 1972, the Committee formally became
the National Advisory Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
to the FHWA. The Committee has been responsible for periodic
revisions to update and expand the manual in 1942, 1948, 1961,
1971, 1978 and 1988 (U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1978b; Upchurch,
1989).
AASHO Policy on Geometric Design of Rural Highways
As new knowledge became available on the performance of vehicles
and highway design features, there was a need to incorporate it
into practice. The Committee on Planning and Design Policies of
the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO) was
formed in 1937 for this purpose. The committee's mode of operation
was to outline a program of work which was performed by the BPR
under the supervision of the Committee Secretary. The BPR gathered
known information and developed draft guidance, known a policies,
which were revised by the committee. The policies were finally
approved by a two-thirds favorable vote of the States.
In the period 1938 to 1944 the Committee under Secretary Joseph
Barnett produced seven policies related to highway classification,
highway types, sight distance, signing, and intersection design for
at-grade, rotaries and grade separations. These policies were
reprinted without change and bound as a single volume in 1950
(American Association of State Highway Officials, 1950).
The policies were updated, expanded and rewritten as a single
cohesive document and issued as A Policy on Geometric Design of
Rural Highways in 1954 (American Association of State Highway
Officials, 1954). The policy contained design guidance on the
14
criteria determining highway design, vertical and horizontal
alignment, cross section elements, at-grade and grade
intersections, and interchanges. The volume, which became known as
the "Blue Book," went through seven printings by 1965. it received
wide acceptance as the standard guide for highway design. The
policy was again reissued in 1966 in revised and updated form to
reflect more current information (American Association of State
Highway Officials, 1966).
Much of the material in the 1954 Rural Policy applied both to urban
and rural highways. As new data and research results became
available on urban highways, the AASHO Committee decided to issued
a separate policy for the geometric design of urban highways
(American Association of State Highway Officials, 1957).
The development of these policies typified the approach to highways
standards. Research engineers collected data on the performance of
vehicles and highways. These data were brought together in the
form of design standards, generally by staff of the BPR under the
guidance of the AASHO. Eventually, they became part of highway
design practice through agreement of the States. As a result of
their factual basis and adoption through common agreement, the
policies had immense influence on the design of highways in the
United States and abroad.
Toll Road Study
By the mid 1930's, there was considerable sentiment for a few long-
distance, controlled-access highways connecting major cities.
Advocates of such a highway system assumed that the public would be
willing to finance much of its cost by tolls. The U.S. Bureau of
Public Roads was requested by President Roosevelt in 1937 to study
the idea, and two years later it published the report, Toll Roads
and Free Roads (U.S. Congress, 1939).
15
The study recommended the construction of a highway system to be
comprised of direct, interregional highways with all necessary
connections through and around cities. It concluded that this
nationwide highway system could not be financed solely through
tolls, even though certain sections could. It also recommended the
creation of a Federal Land Authority empowered to acquire, hold,
sell, and lease land. The report emphasized the problem of
transportation within major cities and used the city of Baltimore
as an example (Holmes, 1973).
Highway Capacity Manual
During the 1920's and early 1930's, a number of studies were
conducted to determine the capacity of highways to carry traffic.
Early efforts were theoretical but, gradually, fields studies using
observers, cameras and aerial surveys created a body of empirical
data on which to base capacity estimates. By 1934, it was clear
that a coordinated effort was needed to integrate the results of
the various studies and to collect and analyze additional data.
The BPR launched such an effort from 1934 to 1937 to collect a
large quantity of data on a wide variety of roads under different
conditions (Cron, 1975a).
In 1944, the Highway Research Board organized a Committee on
Highway Capacity to coordinate the work in this field. Its
chairman, O.K. Normann, was the foremost researcher on highway
capacity at that time. By 1949, the Committee had succeeded in
reducing the enormous volume of factual information on highway
capacity to a form that would be usable to highway designers and
traffic engineers. The results were first published in Public
Roads magazine, and then as a separate volume entitled, the Highway
Capacity Manual (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1950). The manual defined
capacity, and presented methods for calculating it for various
types of highways and elements under different conditions. This
manual quickly became the standard for highway
16
design and planning. More than 26,000 copies of the manual were
sold, and it was translated into nine other languages.
The Committee on Highway Capacity was reactivated in 1953, again
with O.K. Normann as chairman, to continue the study of highway
capacity and prepare a new edition of the manual. Much of the work
was done by the staff of the BPR. The new manual, which was issued
in 1965, placed new emphasis on freeways, ramps, and weaving
sections because they had come into widespread use. A chapter on
bus transit was also added. Other types of highways and streets
continued to receive complete coverage. This manual, like its
predecessor, was primarily a practical guide. it described methods
to estimate capacity, service volume, or level of service for a
specific highway design under specific conditions. Alternately,
the design to carry a given traffic demand could be determined
(Highway Research Board, 1965).
The third edition the Highway Capacity Manual was published by the
Transportation Research Board in 1985. It reflected over two
decades of empirical research by a number of research agencies
primarily under the sponsorship of the National Cooperative Highway
Research Program and the FHWA. The procedures and methodologies
were divided into three sections on freeways, rural highways, and
urban streets with detailed procedures and work sheets. The
material in the third edition offered significantly revised
procedures in many of the areas, and included entirely new sections
on pedestrians and bicycles (Transportation Research Board, 1985c).
Interregional Highway Report
In April 1941, President Roosevelt appointed the National
Interregional Highway Committee to investigate the need for a
limited system of national highways to improve the facilities
available for interregional transportation. The staff work was
17
done by the U.S. Public Roads Administration, which was the name of
the Bureau of Public Roads at that time, and in 1944 the findings
were published in the report, Interregional Highways (U.S.
Congress, 1944). A system of highways, designated as the "National
System of Interstate and Defense Highways," was recommended and
authorized in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1944. However, it was
not until the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 that any significant
work on the system began.
This study was unique in the annals of transportation planning and
the implementation of its findings has had profound effects on
American lifestyles and industry. The study brought planners,
engineers, and economists together with the highway officials
responsible for implementing highway programs. The final route
choices were influenced as much by strategic necessity and such
factors as population density, concentrations of manufacturing
activity, and agricultural production as by existing and future
traffic (Holmes, 1973).
The importance of the system within cities was recognized, but it
was not intended that these highways serve urban commuter travel
demands in the major cities. As stated in the report, "...it is
important, both locally and nationally, to recognize the
recommended system ... as that system and those routes which best
and most directly join region to region and major city to major
city" (U.S. Congress, 1944).
The report recognized the need to coordinate with other modes of
transportation and for cooperation at all levels of government. It
reiterated the need for a Federal Land Authority with the power of
excess condemnation and similar authorities at the state level.
18
Chapter 3
BEGINNINGS OF URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
During World War II, regular highway programs stopped. Highway
materials and personnel were used to build access roads for war
production and military needs. With rationing of gasoline and
tires, and no new automobiles being manufactured, the use of
transit mushroomed. Between 1941 and 1946, transit ridership grew
by 65 percent to an all-time high of 23.4 billion trips annually
(American Public Transit Association, 1981). (Figure 2)
When the war came to an end, the pent-up demand for homes and
automobiles ushered in the suburban boom era. Automobile
production jumped from a mere 70,000 in 1945 to 2.1 million in
1946, 3.5 million, and 3.5 million in 1947. Highway travel reached
its prewar peak by 1946 and began to climb at 6 percent per year
that was to continue for decades (Dept. of Transportation, 1979a).
Transit use, on the other hand, declined at about the same rate it
had increased during the war. By 1953, there were fewer than 14
billion transit trips annually (Transportation Research Board,
1987).
The nation's highways were in poor shape to handle this increasing
load of traffic. Little had been done during the war to improve
the highways and wartime traffic had exacerbated their condition.
Moreover, the growth of development in the suburbs occurred where
highways did not have the capacity to carry the resulting traffic.
Suburban traffic quickly overwhelmed the existing two-lane formerly
rural roads (Dept. of Transportation, 1979a). Transit facilities,
too, experienced significant wear and tear during the war from
extended use and deferred maintenance. This resulted in
deterioration in transit's physical plant by war's end. Pent-up
wage demands of transit employees were met causing nearly a 50
19
Click HERE for graphic.
20
percent in average fares by 1950. This further contributed to a
decline in ridership. These factors combined to cause serious
financial problems for many transit companies (Transportation
Research Board, 1987).
The postwar era concentrated on dealing with the problems resulting
from suburban growth and resulting from the return to a peacetime
economy. Many of the planning activities which had to be deferred
during the war resumed with renewed vigor.
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1944
The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1944 was passed in anticipation of
the transition to a postwar economy and to prepare for the expected
growth in traffic. The act significantly increased the funds
authorized for federal-aid highway programs from $137,500 in 1942
and 1943, no funds in 1944 and 1945, to $500,000 annually for 1946
through 1948. The act also recognized the growing complexity of
the highway program.
The original 7 percent federal-aid highway program was renamed the
Federal-aid Primary system, and selection by the States of a
Federal-aid Secondary system of farm-to-market and feeder roads was
authorized. Federal-aid funding was authorized in three parts,
known as the "ABC" program with 45 percent for the Primary system,
30 percent for the Secondary system, and 25 percent for urban
extensions of the Primary and Secondary systems.
The act continued the allocation of funds by means of formulas.
For the Primary system, funds were allocated using area, total
population, and postal route miles as factors. For the Secondary
system, the same formula was Used except that rural population was
substituted for total population. For the urban extensions, urban
population was the only factor. For the first time, federal-aid
funds up to one-third the cost could be used to
21
acquire right-of-way.
A National System of Interstate Highways of 40,000 miles was
authorized. The routes were selected by the States with BPR
approval. However, but no special funds were provided to build the
system beyond regular federal-aid authorizations.
Early Urban Travel Surveys
Most urban areas did not begin urban travel surveys until 1944. It
was during that year the Federal-Aid Highway Act authorized the
expenditure of funds on urban extensions of the federal-aid primary
and secondary highway systems. Until that time there was a lack of
information on urban travel which could be used for the planning of
highway facilities. In fact, no comprehensive survey methods had
been developed that could provide the required information.
Because of the complex nature of urban street systems and the
shifting of travel from route to route, traffic volumes were not a
satisfactory guide to needed improvements. A study of the origins
and destinations of trips and the basic factors affecting travel
was needed (Holmes and Lynch, 1957).
The method developed to meet this need was the home-interview
origin- destination survey. Household members were interviewed to
obtain information on the number, purpose, mode, origin, and
destination of all trips made on a particular day. These urban
travel surveys were used in the planning of highway facilities,
particularly expressway systems, and in determining design
features. The U.S. Bureau of Public Roads published the first,
Manual of Procedures for Home Interview Traffic Studies, in 1944
(U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1944). Figure 3 shows the internal trip
report form from a home interview survey. In 1944, the
interviewing technique was used in Tulsa, Little Rock, New Orleans,
Kansas City, Memphis, Savannah, and Lincoln.
22
Click HERE for graphic.
23
Other elements of the urban transportation planning process were
also being developed and applied in pioneering traffic planning
studies. New concepts and techniques were being generated and
refined in such areas as traffic counting, highway inventories and
classification, highway capacity, pavement condition studies, cost
estimating and system planning. The first attempt to meld many of
these elements into an urban transportation planning process was in
the Cleveland Regional Area Traffic Study in 1927, which was
sponsored by the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads. But, even in this
study, traffic forecasting was a crude art using basically linear
projections (Cron, 1975b).
In the Boston Transportation Study, a rudimentary form of the
gravity model was applied to forecast traffic in 1926 but the
technique was not used in other areas. In fact, the 1930's saw
little advancement in the techniques of urban transportation
planning. It was during this period that the methodology of
highway needs and financial studies was developed and expanded
(U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1979a).
By the 1940's it was apparent that if certain relationships between
land use and travel could be measured, these relationships could be
used as a means to project future travel. It remained for the
development of the computer, with its ability to process large
masses of data from these surveys, to permit estimation of these
relationships between travel, land use, and other factors. The
first major test using this approach to develop future highway
plans was during the early 1950's in San Juan, Puerto Rico, and in
Detroit (Silver and Stowers, 1964; Detroit Metropolitan Area
Traffic Study, 1955/6).
Early Transit Planning
During this period, transit planning was being carried out by
operators as part of the regular activities of operating a transit
24
system. Federal assistance was not available for planning or
construction, and little federal interest existed in transit.
However, financial problems increased as transit ridership declined
and there were no funds available to rehabilitate facilities and
equipment. In some urban areas, transit authorities were created
to take over and operate the transit system. The Chicago Transit
Authority and the Metropolitan Transit Authority in Boston were
created in 1947, and the New York City Transit Authority in 1955.
It was at this time that the San Francisco Bay area began planning
for a regional rapid transit system. In 1956, the Rapid Transit
Commission proposed a 123 mile system in a five-county area. As a
result of this study, the Bay Area Transit District (BARTD) was
formed within the five counties. BARTD completed the planning for
the transit system and conducted preliminary engineering and
financial studies. In November 1962, the voters approved a bond
issue to build a three-county, 75-mile system, totally with local
funds (Homburger, 1967).
Dawn of Analytical Methods
Prior to the early 1950's, the results of early origin-destination
studies were used primarily for describing existing travel
patterns, usually in the form of trip origins and destinations and
by "desire lines," indicating schematically the major spatial
distribution of trips. Future urban travel volumes were developed
by extending the past traffic growth rate into the future, merely
an extrapolation technique. Some transportation studies used no
projections of any sort and emphasized only the alleviation of
existing traffic problems (U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1967b).
Beginning in the early 1950's, new ideas and techniques were being
rapidly generated for application in urban transportation planning.
In 1950, the Highway Research Board published Route
25
Selection and Traffic Assignment (Campbell, 1950), which was a
compendium of correspondence summarizing practices in identifying
traffic desire lines and linking origin-destination pairs. By the
mid 1950's, Thomas Fratar at the Cleveland Transportation Study
developed a computer method for distributing future origin-
destination travel data using growth factors. In 1956 the Eno
Foundation for Highway Traffic Control published Highway Traffic
Estimation (Schmidt and Campbell, 1956), which documented the state
of the art and highlighted the Fratar technique.
During this period the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads (BPR) sponsored
a study on traffic generation at Columbia University, which was
conducted by Robert Mitchell and Chester Rapkin. It was directed
at improving the understanding of the relationship between travel
and land use through empirical methods and included both persons
and goods movement. Mitchell and Rapkin state as a major premise
of their study:
"Despite the considerable amount of attention given in various
countries to movement between place of residence and place of
work, the subject has not been given the special emphasis
suggested here; that is, to view trips between home and
workplace as a "system of movement," changes in which may be
related to land use change and to other changes in related
systems of urban action or in the social structure" (Mitchell
and Rapkin, 1954, Page 65).
They demonstrated an early understanding of many of the variables
that effect travel patterns and behavior; for example:
"Systems of round trips from places of residence vary with the
sex composition and age of the individual members of the
household. The travel patterns of single individuals, young
married couples, families with young children, and households
consisting of aging persons all show marked differences in
travel behavior" (Ibid., page 70).
26
They also anticipated the contribution of social science methods to
the understanding of travel behavior:
"However, inquiry into the motivations of travel and their
correspondence with both behavior and the actual events which
are consequences of travel would make great contributions to
understanding why this behavior occurs, and thus to increase
the possibility of predicting behavior" (Ibid., Page 54).
They concluded with a framework for analyzing travel patterns that
included developing analytical relationships for land use and
travel and then forecasting them as the basis for designing future
transportation requirements.
AASHO Manual on User Benefit Analysis
Toward the end of the 1940's, the AASHO Committee on Planning and
Design Policies, with the assistance of BPR, undertook the
development of generally applicable analytical techniques for
performing economic analysis of highway projects. The work grew
out of a survey of state highway departments on the use of economic
analysis which found a definite lack of similarity in the such
procedures and their use (American Association of State Highway
Officials, 1960).
Building upon earlier work on highway economic analysis, the
committee developed a manual for conducting benefit - cost analyses
(American Association of State Highway Officials, 1952b). The
basic tenet of the manual was ... that a profit should be returned
on an investment applies as well to highway projects as to general
business ventures." Unlike previous methods of analysis which only
measured construction, right of way, and maintenance costs, the
manual included the costs to the user of the highway as a necessary
and integral part of the economic analysis. Up to the publication,
no data existed to perform such
27
an analysis.
The manual defined the benefit to cost ratio as the difference in
road user costs (between alternate routes) divided by the
difference in costs. Road user costs included: fuel, other
operating costs (i.e. oil, tires, maintenance, depreciation), time
value, comfort and convenience, vehicle ownership costs, and
safety. The value of time was specified at $1.35 per vehicle hour
or $0.75 per person hour. The value of comfort and convenience was
included as an increasing cost for greater interference with the
trip and varying according to the type of road. It ranged from 0
cents per mile for the best conditions to 1.0 cents per mile for
the worst conditions. The manual included tables and charts
containing specific values for these components of costs and
benefits, and the procedures to conduct benefit - cost analyses.
The manual was updated in 1960 with the same analytical methodology
but new unit cost data (American Association of State Highway
Officials, 1960). A major update of the manual was issued in 1977
after a number of research efforts had been completed on analytical
techniques and unit cost data (American Association of State
Highway Officials, 1978). The manual was also expanded to address
bus transit improvements. The manual recognized that benefit-cost
analysis was only an element in the evaluation of transportation
projects and that it fit within the larger urban transportation
planning process.
Breakthroughs in Analytical Techniques
The first breakthrough in using an analytical technique for travel
forecasting came in 1955 with the publication of a paper entitled,
"A General Theory of Traffic Movement," by Alan M. Voorhees
(Voorhees, 1956). Voorhees advanced the gravity model as the means
to link land use with urban traffic flows. Research had been
proceeding for a number of years on a gravity theory for
28
human interaction. Previously, the gravity analogy had been
applied by sociologists and geographers to explain population
movements. Voorhees used origin-destination survey data with
driving time as the measure of spatial separation and estimated the
exponents for a three-trip purpose gravity model. Others conducting
similar studies soon corroborated these results (U.S. Dept. of
Commerce, 1963a).
Another breakthrough soon followed in the area of traffic
assignment. The primary difficulty in traffic assignment was
evaluating the driver's choice of route between the origin and
destination. Earl Campbell of the Highway Research Board proposed
an "S" curve, which related the percent usage of a particular
facility to a travel-time ratio. A number of empirical studies
were undertaken to evaluate the theory using diversion of traffic
to new expressways from arterial streets. From these studies, the
American Association of State Highway officials published a
standard traffic diversion curve in, "A Basis for Estimating
Traffic Diversion to New Highways in Urban Areas," in 1952. (Figure
4) However, traffic assignment was still largely a mechanical
process requiring judgment (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1964).
Then in 1957 two papers were presented that discussed a minimum
impedance algorithm for networks. One was titled, "The Shortest
Path Through a Maze," by Edward F. Moore, and the second was, "The
Shortest Route Problem," by George B. Danzig. With such an
algorithm, travel could then be assigned to minimum time paths
using newly developed computers. The staff of the Chicago Area
Transportation Study under Dr. J. Douglas Carroll, Jr. finally
developed and refined computer programs that allowed the assignment
of traffic for the entire Chicago region (U.S. Dept. of Commerce,
1964).
29
Click HERE for graphic.
30
National Committee on Urban Transportation
While highway departments were placing major emphasis on arterial
routes, city street congestion was steadily worsening. It was in
this atmosphere that the Committee on Urban Transportation was
created in 1954. Its purpose was, "to help cities do a better job
of transportation planning through systematic collection of basic
facts ... to afford the public the best possible transportation at
the least possible cost and aid in accomplishing desirable goals of
urban renewal and sound urban growth" (National Committee, 1958).
The committee was composed of experts in a wide range of fields,
representing federal, state, and city governments, transit, and
other interests. It developed a guidebook, Better Transportation
for Your City (National Committee, 1958), designed to help local
officials establish an orderly program of urban transportation
planning. It was supplemented by a series of 17 procedure manuals
describing techniques for planning highway, transit, and terminal
improvements. The guidebook and manuals received national
recognition. Even though the guidebook was primarily intended for
the attention of local officials, it stressed the need for
cooperative action, full communication between professionals and
decisionmakers, and the development of transportation systems in
keeping with the broad objectives of community development. It
provided, for the first time, fully documented procedures for
systematic transportation planning.
Housing Act of 1954
An important cornerstone of the federal policy concerning urban
planning was Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954. The act
demonstrated congressional concern with urban problems and
recognition of the urban planning process as an appropriate
approach to dealing with such problems. Section 701 authorized
31
the provision of federal planning assistance to state planning
agencies, cities, and other municipalities having a population of
less than 50,000 persons and, after further amendments, to
metropolitan and regional planning agencies (Washington Center,
1970).
The intent of the act was to encourage an orderly process of urban
planning to address the problems associated with urban growth and
the formulation of local plans and policies. The act indicated
that planning should occur on a region-wide basis within the
framework of comprehensive planning.
Pioneering Urban Transportation Studies
The developments in analytical methodology began to be applied in
pioneering urban transportation studies in the late 1940's and
during the 1950's. Before these studies, urban transportation
planning was based on existing travel demands or on travel
forecasts using uniform growth factors applied on an areawide
basis.
The San Juan, Puerto Rico, transportation study begun in 1948, was
one of the earliest to use a trip generation approach to forecast
trips. Trip generation rates were developed for a series of land-
use categories stratified by general location, crude intensity
measures and type of activity. These rates were applied, with some
modifications, to the projected land use plan (Silver and Stowers,
1964).
The Detroit Metropolitan Area Traffic Study (DMATS) put together
all the elements of an urban transportation study for the first
time. It was conducted from 1953 to 1955 under Executive Director
Dr. J. Douglas Carroll, Jr. The DMATS staff developed trip
generation rates by land use category for each zone. Future trips
were estimated from a land use forecast. The trip distribution
32
model was a variant of the gravity model with airline distance as
the factor to measure travel friction. Traffic assignment was
carried out with speed and distance ratio curves. Much of the work
was done by hand with the aid of tabulating machines for some of
the calculations. Benefit/cost ratios were used to evaluate the
major elements of the expressway network (Detroit Metropolitan Area
Traffic Study, 1955/1956; Silver and Stowers, 1964; Creighton,
1970).
In 1955 the Chicago Area Transportation Study (CATS) began under
the direction of Dr. J. Douglas Carroll, Jr. It set the standard
for future urban transportation studies. The lessons learned in
Detroit were applied in Chicago with greater sophistication. CATS
used the basic six-step procedure pioneered in Detroit: data
collection, forecasts, goal formulation, preparation of network
proposals, testing of proposals, and evaluation of proposals.
Transportation networks were developed to serve travel generated by
projected land-use patterns. They were tested using systems
analysis considering the effect of each facility on other
facilities in the network. Networks were evaluated based on
economic efficiency - the maximum amount of travel carried at the
least cost. CATS used trip generation, trip distribution, modal
split, and traffic assignment models for travel forecasting. A
simple land-use forecasting procedure was employed to forecast
future land-use and activity patterns. The CATS staff made major
advances in the use of the computer in travel forecasting (Chicago
Area Transportation Study, 1959/1962; Swerdloff and Stowers, 1966;
Wells, et. al., 1970).
Other transportation studies followed including the Washington Area
Traffic Study in 1955, the Baltimore Transportation Study in 1957,
the Pittsburgh Area Transportation Study (PATS) in 1958, the
Hartford Area Traffic Study in 1958, and the Penn-Jersey
(Philadelphia) Transportation Study in 1959. All of these studies
were transportation planning on a new scale. They were region-
33
wide, multi-disciplinary undertakings involving large full-time
staffs. Urban transportation studies were carried out by ad hoc
organizations with separate policy committees. They were not
directly connected to any unit of government. Generally, these
urban transportation studies were established for a limited time
period with the objective of producing a plan and reporting on it.
Such undertakings would have been impossible before the
availability of computers (Creighton, 1970).
The resulting plans were heavily oriented to regional highway
networks based primarily on the criteria of economic costs and
benefits. Transit was given secondary consideration. New
facilities were evaluated against traffic engineering improvements.
Little consideration was given to regulatory or pricing approaches,
or new technologies (Wells, et.al., 1970).
These pioneering urban transportation studies set the content and
tone for future studies. They provided the basis for the federal
guidelines that were issued in the following decade.
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956
During this early period in the development of urban transportation
planning came the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. The act launched
the largest public works program yet undertaken: construction of
the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. The act
was the culmination of two decades of studies and negotiation. As a
result of the Interregional Highways report, Congress had adopted a
National System of Interstate Highways not to exceed 40,000 miles
in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1944. However, money was not
authorized for construction of the system. Based on the
recommendations of the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads and the
Department of Defense, a 37,700-mile system was adopted in 1947.
This network consisted primarily of the most heavily traveled
routes of the Federal-Aid Primary System. The
34
remaining 2,300 miles were reserved for additional radials, bypass-
loops, and circumferential routes in and adjacent to urban areas.
Studies of urban area needs were made by the states with the
cooperation and aid of city officials. The urban connections were
formally designated in 1955 (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1957).
Funds were appropriated by then, but at very low levels: $25
million annually for 1952 and 1953 with a 50 percent federal share,
and $175 million annually for 1954 and beyond with a 60 percent
federal share. To secure a significant increase in funding, a
major national lobbying effort was launched in 1952 by the Highway
Users Conference under the title, "Project Adequate Roads."
President Eisenhower appointed a national advisory committee under
General Lucius D. Clay, which produced a report, A Ten-Year
National Highway Program, in 1955. It recommended building a
37,000-mile Interstate System using bonds to fund the $23 billion
cost (Kuehn, 1976).
Finally, with the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, construction of
the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways shifted into
high gear. The act increased the authorized system extent to
41,000 miles. This system was planned to link 90 percent of the
cities with populations of 50,000 or greater and many smaller
cities and towns. The act also authorized the expenditure of $24.8
billion in 13 fiscal years from 1957 to 1969 at a 90 percent
federal share. The act provided construction standards and maximum
sizes and weights of vehicles that could operate on the system.
The system was to be completed by 1972 (Kuehn, 1976).
The companion Highway Revenue Act of 1956 increased federal taxes
on gasoline and other motor fuels and excise taxes on tires and
established new taxes on retreaded tires and a weight tax on heavy
trucks and buses. It created the Highway Trust Fund to receive the
tax revenue which was dedicated solely for highway purposes. This
provision broke with a long-standing congressional precedent
35
not to earmark taxes for specific authorized purposes (U.S. Dept.
of Commerce, 1957).
These acts have had a profound effect on urban areas. They
established an assured funding source for highways, through user
charges, at a time when federal funds were not available for mass
transportation. They set a 90 percent federal share which was far
above the existing 50 percent share for other federal-aid highways.
About 20 percent of the system mileage was designated as urban to
provide alternative interstate service into, through, and around
urban areas. These provisions dominated urban transportation
planning for years to come and eventually caused the development of
countervailing forces to balance the urban highway program.
Sagamore Conference on Highways and Urban Development
The availability of large amounts of funds from the 1956 Act
brought immediate response to develop action programs. To
encourage the cooperative development of highway plans and
programs, a conference was held in 1958 in the Sagamore Center at
Syracuse University (Sagamore, 1958).
The conference focused on the need to conduct the planning of urban
transportation, including public transportation, on a region-wide,
comprehensive basis in a manner that supported the orderly
development of the urban areas. The conference report recognized
that urban transportation plans should be evaluated through a grand
accounting of benefits and costs that included both user and
nonuser impacts.
The conference recommendations were endorsed and their
implementation urged, but progress was slow. The larger urban
areas were carrying out pioneering urban transportation studies,
the most noteworthy being the CATS. But few of the smaller urban
36
areas had begun planning studies due to the lack of capable staff
to perform urban transportation planning.
To encourage smaller areas to begin planning efforts, the American
Municipal Association, the American Association of State Highway
Officials, and the National Association of County Officials jointly
launched a program in early 1962 to describe and explain how to
carry out urban transportation planning. This program was
initially directed at urban areas under 250,000 in population
(Holmes, 1973).
Housing Act of 1961
The first piece of federal legislation to deal explicitly with
urban mass transportation was the Housing Act of 1961. This act
was passed largely as a result of the growing financial
difficulties with commuter rail services. The act inaugurated a
small, low-interest loan program for acquisitions and capital
improvements for mass transit systems and a demonstration program
(Washington Center, 1970).
The act also contained a provision for making federal planning
assistance available for "preparation of comprehensive urban
transportation surveys, studies, and plans to aid in solving
problems of traffic congestion, facilitating the circulation of
people and goods on metropolitan and other urban areas and reducing
transportation needs." The act permitted federal aid to "facilitate
comprehensive planning for urban development, including coordinated
transportation systems, on a continuing basis." These provisions of
the act amended the Section 701 planning program that was created
by the Housing Act of 1954.
37
Chapter 4
URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMES OF AGE
Urban transportation planning came of age with the passage of the
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1962, which required that approval of
any federal-aid highway project in an urbanized area of 50,000 or
more in population be based on a continuing, comprehensive urban
transportation planning process carried out cooperatively by states
and local governments. This was the first legislative mandate
requiring planning as a condition to receiving federal capital
assistance funds. The U.S. Bureau of Public Roads (BPR) moved
quickly to issue technical guidance interpreting the act's
provisions.
Through the mid 1960's urban transportation planning went through
what some have called its "golden age." Most urban areas were
planning their regional highway system and urban transportation
planning methodology had been designed to address this issue. The
BPR carried out an extensive program of research, technical
assistance and training to foster the adoption of this process and
the new methodologies. These efforts completely transformed the
manner in which urban transportation planning was performed. By
the legislated deadline of July 1, 1965, all 224 then existing
urbanized areas that fell under the 1962 Act had a urban
transportation planning process underway.
This was also a period in which there was early recognition of the
need for a federal role in urban mass transportation. This role,
however, was to remain limited for a number of years to come.
Joint Report on Urban Mass Transportation
In March 1962 a joint report on urban mass transportation was
39
submitted to President Kennedy, at his request, by the Secretary of
Commerce and the Housing and Home Finance Administrator (U.S.
Congress, Senate, 1962). This report integrated the objectives for
highways and mass transit, which were comparatively independent up
to that point but growing closer through cooperative activities.
The report was in large part based on a study completed in 1961 by
the Institute of Public Administration (IPA) entitled Urban
Transportation and Public Policy (Fitch, 1964). The IPA report
strongly recommended that urban transportation was a federal
concern and supported the need for transportation planning.
The general thrust of the report to Congress, as it related to
planning, can be summarized by the following excerpt from the
transmittal letter:
"Transportation is one of the key factors in shaping our
cities. As our communities increasingly undertake deliberate
measures to guide their development and renewal, we must be
sure that transportation planning and construction are
integral parts of general development planning and
programming. One of our main recommendations is that federal
aid for urban transportation should be made available only
when urban communities have prepared or are actively preparing
up-to-date general plans for the entire urban area which
relate transportation plans to land-use and development plans.
"The major objectives of urban transportation policy are the
achievement of sound land-use patterns, the assurance of
transportation facilities for all segments of the population,
the improvement of overall traffic flow, and the meeting of
total transportation needs at minimum cost. Only a balanced
transportation system can attain these goals - and in many
urban areas this means an extensive mass transportation
network fully integrated with the highway and street system.
But mass
40
transportation in recent years experienced capital consumption
rather than expansion. A cycle of fare increases and service
cuts to offset loss of ridership followed by further declines
in use points clearly to the need for a substantial
contribution of public funds to support needed mass
transportation improvements. We therefore recommend a new
program of grants and loans for urban mass transportation"
(U.S. Congress, Senate, 1962).
President Kennedy's Transportation Message
In April 1962 President Kennedy delivered his first message to
Congress on the subject of transportation. Many of the ideas
related to urban transportation in the message drew upon the
previously mentioned joint report. The President's message
recognized the close relationship between the community development
and the need to properly balance the use of private automobiles and
mass transportation to help shape and serve urban areas. It also
recognized the need to promote economic efficiency and livability
of urban areas. It also recommended continued close cooperation
between the Department of Commerce and the Housing and Home Finance
Administration (HHFA) (Washington Center, 1970).
This transportation message opened a new era in urban
transportation and led to passage of two landmark pieces of
legislation: the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1962 and the Urban Mass
Transportation Act of 1964.
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1962
The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1962 was the first piece of federal
legislation to mandate urban transportation planning as a condition
for receiving federal funds in urbanized areas. It asserted that
federal concern in urban transportation was to be integrated with
land development and provided a major stimulus to
41
urban transportation planning. Section 9 of the act, which is now
Section 134 of Title 23 states:
"It is declared to be in the national interest to encourage
and promote the development of transportation systems
embracing various modes of transport in a manner that will
serve the states and local communities efficiently and
effectively" (U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1980a).
This statement of policy directly followed from the recommendations
of the Sagamore conference and President Kennedy's Transportation
Message. Moreover, the section directed the Secretary of Commerce
to cooperate with the states:
"...in the development of long-range highway plans and
programs which are properly coordinated with plans for
improvements in other affected forms of transportation and
which are formulated with due consideration to their probable
effect on the future development of the urban area..." (U.S.
Dept. of Transportation, 1980a).
The last sentence of the section which required that urban highway
construction projects be based upon a planning process, legislated
the planning requirement:
"After July 1, 1965, the Secretary shall not approve under
section 105 of this title any programs for projects in any
urban area of more than fifty thousand population unless he
finds that such projects are based on a continuing,
comprehensive transportation planning process carried out
cooperatively by states and local communities in conformance
with the objectives stated in this section" (U.S. Dept. of
Transportation, 1980a).
Two features of the act are particularly significant with respect
to the organizational arrangements for carrying out the planning
42
process. First, it called for a planning process in urban areas
rather than cities, which set the scale at the metropolitan or
regional level. Second, it called for the process to be carried on
cooperatively by the states and local communities. Because
qualified planning agencies to mount such a transportation planning
process were lacking in many urban areas, the BPR required the
creation of planning agencies or organizational arrangements that
would be capable of carrying out the required planning process.
These planning organizations quickly came into being because of the
growing momentum of the highway program and the cooperative
financing of the planning process by the HHFA and the BPR (Marple,
1969).
In addition, the act restricted the use of the 1-1/2 percent
planning and research funds to only those purposes. If not used
for planning and research, the state would lose the funds.
Previously, a state could request that these funds be used instead
for construction. This provision created a permanent, assured
funding source for planning and research activities. In addition,
the act provided that a state could spend another 1/2 percent at
their option for planning and research activities.
Hershey Conference on Urban Freeways
In response to the growing concern about freeway construction in
urban areas, the Hershey Conference on Freeways in the Urban
Setting was convened in June 1962 (Freeways, 1962). It concluded,
"Freeways cannot be planned independently of the areas through
which they pass. The planning concept should extend to the entire
sector of the city within the environs of the freeway. The
conference recommendations reinforced the need to integrate highway
planning and urban development.
The findings recognized that this planning should be done as a team
effort that draws upon the skills of engineers, architects,
43
city planners, and other specialists. Freeway planning must
integrate the freeway with its surroundings. When properly
planned, freeways provide an opportunity to shape and structure the
urban community in a manner that meets the needs of the people who
live, work, and travel in these areas. Further, the planning
effort should be carried out in a manner that involves
participation by the community (Freeways, 1962).
Implementation of the 1962 Federal-Aid Highway Act
The BPR moved quickly to implement the planning requirements of the
1962 Federal-Aid Highway Act. Instructional Memorandum 50-263,
published in March 1963 (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1963c) and later
superseded by Policy and Procedure Memorandum 50-9 (U.S. Dept. of
Transportation, 1967a), interpreted the act's provisions related to
a "continuing, comprehensive, and cooperative" (3C) planning
process. "Cooperative" was defined to include not only cooperation
between the federal, state, and local levels of government but also
among the various agencies within the same level of government.
"Continuing" referred to the need to periodically reevaluate and
update a transportation plan. "Comprehensive" was defined to
include the basic ten elements of a 3C planning process for which
inventories and analyses were required. (Table 2)
These memoranda and further refinements and expansions upon them
covered all aspects for organizing and carrying out the 3C planning
process.
Through its Urban Planning Division, under Garland E. Marple, the
BPR carried out a broad program to develop planning procedures and
computer programs, write procedural manuals and guides, teach
training courses, and provide technical assistance. The effort was
aimed at developing urbanized area planning organizations,
standardizing, computerizing and applying procedures largely
44
Table 2
TEN BASIC ELEMENTS OF A 3C PLANNING PROCESS
1. Economic factors affecting development
2. Population
3. Land use
4. Transportation facilities including those for mass
transportation
5. Travel patterns
6. Terminal and transfer facilities
7. Traffic control features
8. Zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes,
etc.
9. Financial resources
10. Social and community-value factors, such as preservation of
open space, parks and recreational facilities; preservation of
historical sites and buildings; environmental amenities; and
aesthetics.
45
created in the late 1950's, and disseminating knowledge of such
procedures.
The BPR defined the various steps in a 3C planning process. These
steps had been pioneered by the urban transportation planning
studies that were carried out during the 1950's. It was an
empirical approach which required a substantial amount of data and
several years to complete. The process consisted of: establishing
an organization to carry out the planning process; development of
local goals and objectives; surveys and inventories of existing
conditions and facilities; analyses of current conditions and
calibration of forecasting techniques; forecasting of future
activity and travel; evaluation of alternative transportation
networks resulting in a recommended transportation plan; staging of
the transportation plan; and identification of resources to
implement it. The product of these 3C planning studies was
generally an elaborate report(s) describing the procedures,
analyses, alternatives and recommended plans.
To foster the adoption of these technical procedures, the BPR
released a stream of procedural manuals that became the technical
standards for many years to come: Calibrating and Testing a Gravity
Model for Any Size Urban Area, (July 1963); Calibrating and Testing
a Gravity Model with a Small Computer, (October 1963); Traffic
Assignment Manual, (June 1964); Population Forecasting Methods,
(June 1964); Population, Economic, and Land Use Studies in Urban
Transportation Planning, (July 1964); The Standard Land Use Coding
Manual, (January 1965); The Role of Economic Studies in Urban
Transportation Planning, (August 1965); Traffic Assignment and
Distribution for Small Urban Areas, (September 1965), Modal Split-
Documentation of Nine Methods for Estimating Transit Usage,
(December 1966); and Guidelines for Trip Generation Analysis, (June
1967).
The BPR developed a two-week "Urban Transportation Planning
46
Course" that was directed at practicing planners and engineers. It
covered organizational issues and technical procedures for carrying
out a 3C planning process as it had been conceptualized by the BPR.
The course used the BPR manuals as textbooks and supplemented them
with lecture notes to keep the information current and to cover
material not in manual form. In addition, personnel from the BPR
provided hands-on technical assistance to state and local agencies
in the applying these new procedures to their own areas.
This effort to define the "3C planning process," to develop
techniques for performing the technical activities, and to provide
technical assistance completely transformed the manner in which
urban transportation planning was performed. By the legislated
deadline of July 1, 1965, all the 224 existing urbanized areas
which fell under the 1962 Act had an urban transportation planning
process underway (Holmes, 1973).
Conventional Urban Travel Forecasting Process
The 3C planning process included four technical phases: collection
of data, analysis of data, forecasts of activity and travel, and
evaluation of alternatives. Central to this approach was the urban
travel forecasting process. (Figure 5) The process used
mathematical models that allowed the simulation and forecasting of
current and future travel. This permitted the testing and
evaluation of alternative transportation networks.
The four-step urban travel forecasting process consisted of trip
generation, trip distribution, modal split, and traffic assignment.
These models were first calibrated to replicate existing travel
using actual survey data. These models were then used to forecast
future travel. The forecasting process began with an estimate of
the variables that determine travel patterns including the location
and intensity of land use, social and
47
Click HERE for graphic.
48
economic characteristics of the population, and the type and extent
of transportation facilities in the area. Next, these variables
were used to estimate the number of trip origins and destinations
in each subarea of a region (i.e. the traffic analysis zone), using
a trip generation procedure. A trip distribution model was used to
connect the trip ends into an origin-destination trip pattern.
This matrix of total vehicle trips was divided into highway and
transit trips using a modal split model. The matrices of highway
and transit trips were assigned to routes on the highway and
transit networks, respectively, by means of a traffic assignment
model (U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1977).
In using these models to analyze future transportation networks,
forecasts of input variables were used for the year for which the
networks were being tested. Travel forecasts were then prepared
for each transportation alternative to determine traffic volumes
and levels of service. Usually only the modal split and traffic
assignment models were rerun for additional networks after a future
year forecast had been made for the first network. But
occasionally the trip distribution model was also rerun.
Travel forecasting on a regionwide scale required a large computing
capability. The first generation of computers had become available
in the mid 1950's. The BPR had taken advantage of them and adapted
a telephone routing algorithm for traffic assignments purposes that
would operate on the IBM 704 computer. Additional programs were
developed to perform other functions. The second generation of
computers, circa 1962, provided increased capabilities. The
library of computer programs was rewritten for the IBM 709 computer
and then for the IBM 7090/94 system. The BPR worked with the
Bureau of Standards in developing, modifying, and testing these
programs. Some programs were also developed for the IBM 1401 and
1620 computers. This effort was carried out over a number of
years, and by 1967 the computer package contained about
49
60 programs (U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1977).
This approach to travel forecasting, which later became known as
the "conventional urban travel forecasting process," came quickly
into widespread use. The procedures had been specifically tailored
to the tasks of regionwide urban transportation planning and BPR
provided substantial assistance and oversight in applying them.
Moreover, there were no other procedures generally available and
urban transportation study groups that chose not to use them had to
develop their own procedures and computer programs.
Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission
In most urbanized areas, ad hoc organizational arrangements were
created to conduct the urban transportation planning process
required by the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1962 and the Bureau of
Public's guidelines. In some urbanized areas, however, the urban
transportation planning process was carried out by existing
regional planning agencies. This was the case for the urbanized
areas of Milwaukee, Racine and Kenosha in Southeastern Wisconsin.
The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC)
was created under State enabling legislation by Executive Order of
the Governor of Wisconsin in 1960 upon petition of the County
Boards of the seven constituent counties. It was directed to
prepare and adopt master plans for the physical development of the
Southeastern Wisconsin region on the basis of studies and analyses.
The Commission itself was formed with 21 citizen members, serving
for six years without pay, three from each county, with one member
from each county appointed by the County Board and the other two
members appointed by the Governor (Bauer, 1963).
The Regional Land Use-Transportation Study, which began in 1963,
50
was the Commission's first long-range planning effort. The staff
proceeded under the guidance of the Intergovernmental Coordinating
and the Technical Coordinating Committees. (Figure 6) The 3 1/2
year, $2 million study covered the development of goals and
objectives, inventory of existing conditions, preparation and
analysis of alternative plans, and selection and adoption of the
preferred plan (Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning
Commission, 1965-66). SEWRPC prepared three alternative land use
plans for the year 1990. The "controlled existing trend plan"
continued the low-density residential development trend with the
imposition of land use controls to minimize leap-frog development
and reduce encroachment on environmentally sensitive areas. The
"corridor plan" concentrated medium and high density residential
development along transportation corridors interlocked with
recreation and agriculture wedges. The "satellite city plan"
focused new residential development into existing outlying
communities in the region. A transportation plan was developed for
each of the land use plans which primarily consisted of the
existing plus committed highway and transit systems with additions,
including an extensive bus rapid transit system with an exclusive
busway.
The recommended "controlled existing trend plan" was adopted by the
full commission and eventually by most of the county boards and
local units of government. In 1966, SEWRPC began the continuing
phase of the land use-transportation study which provided support
to implement the plan, monitored changes in the region and progress
in implementing the adopted plan, and conducted periodic
reappraisals of the plan in light of the changes in the region.
In the ensuing years, SEWRPC conducted a wide range of planning
studies including those related to: watershed development and water
quality, air quality, highway functional classification, public
transportation, parks and open space, port development,
51
Click HERE for graphic.
52
libraries, airport use, and prepared many local plans in
cooperation with the local jurisdictions. Moreover, it provided
extensive technical assistance to local governments on a variety of
planning issues.
Highway Planning Program Manual
As part of its extensive efforts to provide technical guidance for
carrying out highway planning, the BPR developed the Highway
Planning Program Manual.. The manual was designed to consolidate
technical information on highway planning practice and make it
readily available. Much of that information on highway planning
practice and many of the manuals had been developed by the BPR.
The Highway Planning Program Manual was first issued in August 1963
(U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1963d). It was directed primarily at the
highway engineers in BPR's field offices who needed information to
administer highway planning activities that were being carried out
by State highway departments and by urban transportation planning
groups with Federal-aid highway planning funds. It also provided
valuable information to those performing the actual planning
activities in state and local agencies.
The manual covered the basic elements of a highway planning program
which included: administration and control, highway inventory,
mapping, traffic counting, classifying and weighing, travel
studies, motor vehicle registration and taxes, highway fiscal data,
road life expectancy and costs, and urban transportation planning.
The goal for the overall highway planning process was to develop a
master plan for highway development. This was to consist of a
functionally classified highway system, an estimate of highway
needs, a long range development program to meet the needs with
priorities and, a financial plan to pay for the development
program.
53
The section of the manual devoted urban transportation planning to
was equally detailed. It covered the various aspects of the urban
transportation planning process including: organization, use of
computers, origin destination studies, population studies, economic
studies, land use, street inventory and classification, evaluation
of traffic services, traffic engineering studies, public
transportation, terminal facilities, travel forecasting, traffic
assignment, developing the transportation plan, plan
implementation, and the continuing planning process.
The Federal Highway Administration continued to update the Highway
Planning Program Manual and add appendices, which included recent
version of relevant procedure manuals, until the early 1980's. The
manual was eventually rescinded by FHWA in 1985.
Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964
The first real effort to provide federal assistance for urban mass
transportation development was the passage of the Urban Mass
Transportation Act of 1964. The objective of the act, still in the
spirit of President Kennedy's Transportation Message, was "...to
encourage the planning and establishment of areawide urban mass
transportation systems needed for economical and desirable urban
development" (U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1979b).
The act authorized federal capital grants for up to two-thirds of
the net project cost of construction, reconstruction, or
acquisition of mass transportation facilities and equipment. Net
project cost was defined as that portion of the total project cost
that could not be financed readily from transit revenues. However,
the federal share was to be held to 50 percent in those areas that
had not completed their comprehensive planning process, that is,
had not produced a plan. All federal funds had to be channeled
through public agencies. Transit projects were to be initiated
locally.
54
A program of research, development, and demonstrations was also
authorized by the 1964 act. The objective of this program was to
"... assist in the reduction of transportation needs, the
improvement of mass transportation service, or the contribution of
such service toward meeting total urban transportation needs at
minimum cost" (U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1979b).
Congress, however, did not authorize much money to carry out this
legislation. Not more than $150 million per year was authorized
under the 1964 act and the actual appropriations fell short of even
that amount (Smerk, 1968).
Urban Development Simulation Models
With the growth of urban transportation planning came an increasing
interest in understanding urban phenomena and in constructing urban
development simulation models. Such models would enable planners
to evaluate alternative urban development patterns, and to produce
information on population, employment, and land use for use in
estimating travel and transportation requirements. Land use
simulation models developed in early urban transportation studies
were rudimentary and focused on the effect of transportation access
on the location of activities (Swerdloff and Stowers, 1966).
During this period many cities were actively engaged in developing
work plans to eliminate slums and urban blight through Community
Renewal Programs (CRPS) that were partially funded by the Housing
and Home Finance Agency (HHFA). These CRPs provided an additional
impetus for the development of urban simulation models. It was as
part of one of these CRPs that a significant breakthrough occurred.
Between 1962-63, Ira S. Lowry developed a land use allocation model
for the Pittsburgh Regional Planning Association as part of a
modeling system to generate alternatives and aid decisionmaking
(Lowry, 1964).
55
The "Lowry model," as it came to be known, was the first large
scale and complete urban simulation model to become operational.
The model was attractive because of the simplicity of its causal
structure, the opportunity to expand it, and its operationality
(Goldner, 1971). The underlying concept of the model used economic
base theory in which employment was divided into "basic" employment
that was devoted to goods and services exported outside the region,
and "retail" or "non-basic" employment that served local markets.
Basic employment was located outside the model, while non-basic
employment by the model on the basis of its accessibility to
households. Households were located on the basis of accessibility
to jobs and availability of vacant land. The model proceeded in an
iterative fashion until equilibrium was reached (Putman, 1979).
The conceptual framework developed by Lowry stimulated an era of
model development during the mid-1960's, much of which concentrated
on elaborations and enhancements of the original Lowry model
concepts (Goldner, 1971; Harris, 1965; Putman, 1979). The Lowry
model evolved through further development in Pittsburgh and the San
Francisco Bay Area Simulation Study, and other efforts by a number
of researchers. Most of this work, however, did not result in
models that did not become operational (Goldner, 1971). After a
period of dormancy, work began anew and resulted in the development
of the integrated transportation and land-use package (ITLUP).
This set of models performed lad use activity allocation
incorporated the effects of transportation and land use and the
feedback effects of land use on transportation (Putman, 1983).
Williamsburg Conference on Highways and Urban Development
By 1965 there was concern that planning processes were not
adequately evaluating social and community values. Few planning
studies had developed goal-based evaluation methodologies. A
second conference on Highways and Urban Development was held in
56
Williamsburg, Virginia, to discuss this problem (Highways and Urban
Development, 1965). The conference concluded that transportation
must be directed toward raising urban standards and enhancing
aggregate community values. Transportation values such as safety,
economy, and comfort are part of the total set of community values
and should be weighted appropriately.
The conference resolutions highlighted the need to identify urban
goals and objectives that should be used to evaluate urban
transportation plans. It emphasized that many values may not be
quantifiable but, nonetheless, should not be ignored. The
conference also endorsed the concept of making maximum use of
existing transportation facilities through traffic management and
land use controls.
57
58
Chapter 5
IMPROVED INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
As the number and scope of federal programs for urban development
and transportation projects expanded, there was increasing concern
over the uncoordinated manner in which these project were being
carried out. Each of these federal programs had separate grant
requirements which were often development with little regard to the
requirements of other programs. Projects proceeded through the
approval and implementation process uncoordinated with other
projects that were occurring in the same area.
During this period, several actions were taken to alleviate this
problem. First, was an attempt to better integrate urban
development and transportation programs at the federal level by
bringing them together in two new Cabinet level departments, HUD
and DOT. Second, was the creation of a project review process to
improve intergovernmental coordination at both the federal and
local levels. States and local governments also moved to address
this problem by consolidating functions and responsibilities. Many
states created their own departments of transportation. In
addition, states and local communities created broader, multi-
functional planning agencies to better coordinate and plan areawide
development.
The urban transportation planning process transitioned into the
"continuing" phase as most urban areas completed their first plans.
There was a new interest in low capital approaches to reducing
traffic congestion using techniques such as reserved bus lanes,
traffic engineering improvements, and fringe parking lots. It was
also during this time that national concern was focused upon the
problem of highway safety and the enormous cost of traffic
accidents. Environmental issues became more important
59
with legislation addressing the preservation of natural areas and
historic sites, and providing relocation assistance for households
and businesses.
Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965
The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965 created the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to better
coordinate urban programs at the federal level. In addition, the
act amended the Section 701 urban planning assistance program
established under the Housing Act of 1954 by authorizing grants to
be made to "...organizations composed of public officials whom he
(the Secretary of HUD) finds to be representative of the political
jurisdictions within a metropolitan area or urban region..." for
the purposes of comprehensive planning (Washington Center, 1970).
This provision encouraged the formation of regional planning
organizations controlled by elected rather than appointed
officials. It gave impetus to the formation of such organizations
as councils of governments (COGs). It also encouraged local
governments to cooperate in addressing their problems in a regional
context.
1966 Amendments to the Urban Mass Transportation Act
To fill several gaps in the 1964 Urban Mass Transportation Act, a
number of amendments were passed in 1966. One created the
technical studies program, which provided federal assistance up to
a two-thirds federal matching share for planning, engineering, and
designing of urban mass transportation projects or other similar
technical activities leading to application for a capital grant.
Another section authorized grants to be made for management
training. A third authorized a project to study and prepare a
program of research for developing new systems of urban
60
transportation. This section resulted in a report to Congress in
1968, Tomorrow's Transportation: New Systems for the Urban Future
(Cole, 1968), which recommended a long-range balanced program for
research on hardware, planning, and operational improvements. It
was this study that first brought to public attention many new
systems such as dial-a-bus, personal rapid transit, dual mode,
pallet systems, and tracked air-cushioned vehicle systems. This
study was the basis for numerous research efforts to develop and
refine new urban transportation technologies that would improve on
existing ones.
Highway and Motor Vehicle Safety Acts of 1966
In 1964, highway deaths amounted to 48,000 persons, 10 percent
above 1963, and the death rate was increasing. In March of 1965,
newly Senator Abraham Ribicoff, chairman of the Subcommittee on
Executive Reorganization of the Government Operations Committee,
held hearings on the issue of highway safety to focus national
concern on this national tragedy. Ralph Nader who was already
working on highway safety volunteered to assist Senator Ribicoff's
committee. He provided much material to the committee based on his
research and a book that he was writing on traffic safety
(Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 1986).
In the July hearings, General Motors" president admitted that his
company had only spent $1.25 million on safety in the previous
year. Following that disclosure, President Johnson ordered
Special Assistant Joseph Califano to develop a transportation
package. In November 1965, Nader's book, Unsafe at Any Speed, was
published with criticism of both the automobile industry and the
traffic safety establishment. In February 1966, President Johnson
told the American Trial Lawyers Association that highway deaths
were second only to the Vietnam War as the "gravest problem before
the nation." A month
61
later, the President's message requested the Congress to establish
a department of transportation. His message also outlined a
national traffic safety act to require the establishment of motor
vehicle standards, provide for state grants in aid for safety
programs, and fund traffic safety research. By August, both housed
unanimously passed a motor vehicle standards bill and, with only 3
dissenting votes in the Senate, passed state program legislation.
The final bills were signed by President Johnson on September 9,
1966.
The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966
established the National Traffic Safety Agency in the Department of
Commerce. It required the establishment of minimum safety
standards for motor vehicles and equipment, authorized research and
development, and expanded the National Driver Register of
individuals whose licenses had been denied, terminated, or
withdrawn. According to the act, each standard was required to be
practical, meet the need for motor vehicle safety, and stated in
objective terms. In prescribing standards, the Secretary was
required to consider: (1) relevant available motor vehicle safety
data, (2) whether the proposed standard in appropriate for the
particular motor vehicle or equipment for-which it is prescribed,
and (3) the extent to which the standard contributed to carrying
out the purposes of the act (Comptroller General, 1976).
The Highway Safety Act of 1966 established the National Highway
Safety Agency in the Department of Commerce. It was designed to
provide a coordinated national highway safety program through
financial assistance to the states. Under this act, states were
required to establish highway safety programs in accordance with
federal standards. Federal funds were made available under Section
402, to be allocated by population and highway mileage, to assist
in financing these programs with a 75 percent federal and 25
percent matching ratio (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety,
1986).
62
The two safety agencies were combined by Executive Order 11357 into
the National Highway Safety Bureau in the newly created DOT. By
1969, the Bureau, under Dr. William Haddon Jr., had established 29
motor vehicle standards and 13 highway safety standards and all
states had established highway safety programs. By the end of
1972, the agency had issued a total of 43 motor vehicle standards,
covering vehicle accident prevention and passenger protection, and
18 highway safety standards, covering vehicle inspection,
registration, motorcycle safety, driver education, traffic laws and
records, accident investigation and reporting, pupil transportation
and police traffic services (Insurance Institute for Highway
Safety, 1986).
These two safety acts provided the basis for a practical,
comprehensive national highway safety program to reduce deaths and
injuries caused by motor vehicles.
Department of Transportation Act of 1966
In 1966 the Department of Transportation (DOT) was created to
coordinate transportation programs and to facilitate development
and improvement of coordinated transportation service utilizing
private enterprise to the maximum extent feasible. The Department
of Transportation Act declared that the nation required fast, safe,
efficient, and convenient transportation at the lowest cost
consistent with other national objectives including the
conservation of natural resources. DOT was directed to provide
leadership in the identification of transportation problems and
solutions, stimulate new technological advances, encourage
cooperation among all interested parties, and recommend national
policies and programs to accomplish these objectives.
Section 4(f) of the act required the preservation of natural areas.
It prohibited the use of land for a transportation project from a
park, recreation area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or
63
historic site unless there was no feasible and prudent alternative
and the project was planned in such a manner as to minimize harm to
the area. This was the earliest statutory language directed at
minimizing the negative effects of transportation construction
projects on the natural environment.
The DOT Act left unclear, however, the division of responsibility
for urban mass transportation between DOT and HUD. It took more
than a year for DOT and HUD to come to an agreement on their
respective responsibilities. This agreement, known as
Reorganization Plan No. 2, took effect in July 1968. Under it, DOT
assumed responsibility for mass transportation capital grants,
technical studies, and managerial training grant programs subject
to HUD certification of the planning requirements for capital grant
applications. Research and development (R&D) was divided up. DOT
assumed R&D responsibility for improving the operation of
conventional transit systems and HUD assumed R&D responsibility for
urban transportation as it related to comprehensive planning.
Joint responsibility was assigned for R&D on advanced technology
systems. The Reorganization Plan also created the Urban Mass
Transportation Administration (UMTA) (Miller, 1972).
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
Through the 1950's and 1960's, while the federal government funded
numerous public works and urban renewal projects, federal
preservation law applied only to a handful of nationally
significant properties. As a result, federal projects destroyed or
damaged thousands of historic properties. Congress recognized that
new legislation was needed to protect the many other properties
that were being harmed by federal activities (Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation, 1986).
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 was passed to
address these concerns. The act established the Advisory Council
64
on Historic Preservation to provide advice on national preservation
policy. Section 106 of the act required federal agencies to take
into account the effects of their undertakings on historic
preservation, and to afford the Council the opportunity to comment
on such undertakings. Section 110 required federal agencies to
identify and protect historic properties under their control.
The Section 106 review process established by the Council required
a federal agency funding or otherwise involved in a proposed
project to identify historic properties that might be affected by
the project and find acceptable means to avoid or mitigate any
adverse impact. Federal agencies were to consult with the Council
and State Historic Preservation Officers, appointed by the
Governors, in carrying out this process.
Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966
With the growth in federal grant programs for urban renewal,
highways, transit, and other construction projects, there was a
need for a mechanism to coordinate these projects. The
Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 was
enacted to ensure that federal grants were not working at cross
purposes. Section 204 of that act was significant in asserting
federal interest in improving the coordination of public facility
construction projects to obtain maximum effectiveness of federal
spending and to relate such projects to areawide development plans.
Section 204 required that all applications for the planning and
construction of facilities be submitted to an areawide planning
agency for review and comment. The areawide agency was required to
be composed of local elected officials. The objective was to
encourage the coordination of planning and construction of physical
facilities in urban areas. Section 204 was also designed
65
to stimulate operating agencies with narrow functional
responsibilities to examine the relationship of their projects to
areawide plans for urban growth. Procedures to implement this act
were issued by the Bureau of the Budget in Circular No. 82,
"Coordination of Federal Aids in Metropolitan Areas Under Section
204 of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of
1966" (Bureau of the Budget, 1967).
In response to these review requirements, many urban areas
established new planning agencies or reorganized existing agencies
to include elected officials on their policy boards. By the end of
1969, only six metropolitan lacked an areawide review agency
(Washington Center, 1970).
Dartmouth Conference on Urban Development Models
Land-use planning models were developed as an adjunct to
transportation planning to provide forecasts of population,
employment, and land-use for transportation forecasting models.
From the mid 1950's there was rapid development in the field
stimulated by newly available computers and advances in operations
research and systems analysis (Putman, 1979). Developments were
discussed at a seminar at the University of Pennsylvania in October
1964 that was documented in a special issue of the journal of the
American Institute of Planners (Harris, 1965).
By 1967 the Land-Use Evaluation Committee of the Highway Research
Board determined that there was need for another assessment of work
in the field, which was progressing in an uncoordinated fashion. A
conference was held in Dartmouth, New Hampshire, in June 1967 to
identify the areas of research that were most needed (Hemmens,
1968).
The conferees recommended that agencies sponsoring research on land
use models, generally the federal government, expand the
66
capabilities of their in-house staff to handle these models. They
recommended steps to improve data acquisition and handling.
Further research on broader models that included social goals was
recommended. Conferees recommended that research on the behavioral
aspects of the individual decision units be conducted. Concern was
expressed about bridging the gap between modelers and
decisionmakers. Professional standards for design, calibration and
use of models was also encouraged (Hemmens, 1968).
The early optimism in the field faded as the land development
models did not perform up to the expectations of researchers and
decisionmakers, particularly at the small area level. Modelers had
underestimated the task of simulating complex urban phenomena.
Many of these modeling efforts were performed by planning agencies
that had to meet unreasonable time deadlines. (Putman, 1979) Models
had become more complex with larger data requirements as submodels
were added to encompass more aspects of the urban development
process. They were too costly to construct and operate, and many
still did not produce usable results. By the late 1960's land-use
modeling activity in the United States entered a period of dormancy
that continued until the mid 1970's.
Reserved Bus Lanes
As construction of the Interstate highway progressed, highway
engineers came under increasing criticism for providing underpriced
facilities that competed unfairly with transit service. Critics
were also concerned that the 3C planning process was not giving
sufficient attention to transit options in the development of long-
range urban transportation plans.
The first official response to this criticism came in April 1964 in
a speech by E. H. Holmes, Director of Planning for the Bureau of
Public Roads. Mr. Holmes stated, "Since over three-quarters of
transit patrons ride on rubber tires, not on steel rails, transit
67
has to be for highways, not against them. And vice versa, highways
have to be for transit, not against it, for the more that travelers
patronize transit the easier will be the highway engineer's job."
He went on to advocate the use of freeways by buses in express
service. This would increase bus operating speeds, reduce their
travel times, and thereby make bus service more competitive with
car travel. The BPR position was that the reservation of a lane
for buses was reasonable if its usage by bus passengers exceeded
the number of persons that would be moved in the same period in
cars, for example, 3,000 persons per hour for a lane of freeway
(Holmes, 1964).
This position was formalized in Instructional Memorandum (IM) 2113-
67, "Reserved Bus Lanes," issued by the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) in August 1967. In addition to reiterating
the warrant for reserving of lanes for buses, the IM stated the
warrant for preferential use of lanes by buses. Under preferential
use, other vehicles would be allowed to use the lane but only in
such numbers that they do not degrade the travel speeds of the
buses. The number of other vehicles would be controlled by
metering their flow onto the lane. The total number of persons
using the preferential lanes was to be greater than would be
accommodated by opening the lanes to general traffic.
The FHWA actively promoted the use of exclusive and preferential
bus treatments. Expenditures for bus priority projects on arterial
highways, including loading platforms and shelters, became eligible
for federal-aid highway funds under the Traffic Operations Program
to Improve Capacity and Safety (TOPICS), which was initiated as an
ex
