NCHRP 08-36: Research for The AASHTO Standing Committee on Planning

2009-18

(NOTE: This project is being presented to the 08-36 Panel for their review and comments by Ben Orsbon, South Dakota DOT.

AASHTO STANDING COMMITTEE ON RESEARCH

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS

I. PROBLEM NUMBER

To be assigned by NCHRP staff.

II. PROBLEM TITLE

Developing a Methodology to Measure Customer Land Use Preferences to Better Understand the Market and Its Impact on Trip Frequency, Length, and Mode Choice

III. RESEARCH PROBLEM STATEMENT

A methodology to measure these market preferences needs to be developed to improve understanding of private and public land use preferences and their effect on transporation. A marketing methodology called conjoint analysis is a component of most MBA programs. It is used to analyze product features and their marketability. The technique could be used to understand consumer choices, like some of the factors mentioned above, and how they influence housing location and travel choices. Using this technique, various combinations of factors are shown to individuals and the respondents rank, rate, and choose among the combinations. Responses from a representative sample of potential customers are analyzed statistically to estimate the utility of each of the features. The most preferred features are incorporated in the new product. In this case that product would be urban form and land use locations. Statistical samples can be selected from different income levels, racial groups, neighborhoods, etc. to analyze if the consumer choices differ, allowing tradeoffs among various features to be better understood. The number of features compared must be limited because the permutations increase rapidly. Other methods may also be used and some may be more efficient. This research is intended to identify and apply the most appropriate methodology for measuring these private market preferences. Conjoint analysis is used as an example but it does not have to be the method selected. The main focus of the research would be evaluating various methods and selecting the method most useful and efficient in its application.

The research in measuring market preference s would have a high payoff. The appropriate level to apply the methodology—regionally—city—neighborhood--is a component of the needed research. Whether the methodology should be applied in a neighborhood and aggregated to the city, metropolitan, and regional level or vice versa and disaggregated is an important aspect of the research. Expensive investments are made by governments and developers with an incomplete understanding of consumer preferences for transportation and urban land uses. Understanding and measuring how individual choices affect community livability would be enlightening and help us to determine if there will be market resistance to land use and transportation plans.

Much of the current research regarding traffic congestion describes when trips occur, the length of trips, their purpose, their volume, the levels of congestion experienced, congestion’s costs, and the various transportation modes these trips take. There is some research regarding the effects of zoning, planning and urban form but the research does not substantiate if existing land use trends are preferred by the private market and how those market preferences are changing with rising fuel prices and impacts on GHG emissions. Public expenditures for transportation would be more effective if decision makers understood more clearly what consumers want in housing location, urban form and proximity to other community amenities. Also, land use planning and regulation and transportation might be more consistent and complementary to market desires. There would be less need for “heavy handed” land use regulation if regulations were more consistent and aligned with market preferences. Developer and consumer preferences are undoubtedly influenced by many factors. Many people talk about it but very few have actually tried to “measure” consumer preferences.

The location of adjacent land uses determines urban form and trip mode and length. So many trips are occurring at peak hours, the capacity of city and state transit, street, and road systems is strained. Ultimately, mobility, and the transportation infrastructure that supports it are becoming critical determinants of urban growth, quality of life, VMT and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Transportation affects urban form and vice versa. Answers to some of the questions below are critical to improve understanding.

• Are planning and zoning regulations, required lot sizes, exclusionary zoning, and multi-family housing bias inducing sprawl and urban congestion?

• Can we improve our understanding of consumer land use and housing location preferences that influence walking, biking, and linked trips to help us reduce roadway and transit congestion, VMT, and GHG emissions?

• Can the individual market decisions consumers and developers make be influenced by community, regional, and transportation planning in a way to complement and improve the economic efficiency of transportation expenditures and improve our quality of life?

• Why do homeowners choose to live and work where they do? Income levels? Job type and wages? Spousal employment? Housing cost and choices? Neighborhood aesthetics? School location and quality? Crime? Ethnic affinity? Fuel costs? Travel delay? Which of these factors or combinations of factors are most critical to their choice of residential location?

• How strong or weak are the links among consumer preferences, market availability of desirable housing and neighborhood features, housing prices, job location, smart growth, energy efficiency, modal choice, trip length, transportation costs, and traffic congestion?

• Can we make consumer preferences, market offerings, and transportation efficiency more complementary by making market offerings more consistent with land use regulation and land use and transportation planning?

• Can land use preferences that promote efficient transportation be served by a better understanding of market preferences and market driven land use policies and must the urban form preferred by planners and transportation providers be heavily regulated by land use ordinances and regulations?

Each one of these above factors and the balance among them should be understood. Otherwise developers can not build and planners can not plan urban form and transportation systems to respond to the natural market forces driving consumer decisions. Without knowledge of how to locate land uses to complement market forces, advancement and improvement of land use decisions and transportation systems will not be as rapid as it could be by aligning public and private development decisions, land use regulation, and land use and transportation planning with consumer preferences. Without improved understanding, the best opportunities to reduce trip length and VMT, change trip modes, improve health and environmental quality, and reduce traffic congestion and GHG emissions may escape us.

IV. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY

Jonathan Levine at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor and Daniel Rodriguez at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have done the closest research to this topic in the area of land use and transportation. Dr. Levine has uncovered that land use planning and exclusionary zoning may actually be creating an urban form which is inefficient from a transportation standpoint. Alan Pisarski, Anthony Downes, Clifford Winston, Terry Moore, Paul Thorsnes, Bruce Appleyard, and Winston Harrington have also done some investigation but most of their work addresses transportation congestion, pricing, air quality, and commuting.

Most of the current research is oriented toward public decisions affecting the land use, transportation, congestion, environment, health connection--not measuring private market preferences or developer decisions. More insight into measuring private market preferences regarding development types and locations would help determine if public and private decisions could be more complementary.

V. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

1. Propose and select criteria to evaluate market methodologies to measure land use preferences

1. Identify and evaluate methods and choose a preferred method to measure market preferences.

2. Measure and understand more about consumer preferences for critical housing location, commuting, and community amenity decisions and tradeoffs among these decisions for a specific location.

3. Evaluate how land use choices are be affected by factors like income, housing price, school quality, race, education, ethnicity and other factors in that area.

5. Determine how much of the private market in that area prefers compact development patterns and transist oriented development, the magnitude of the demand, and the characteristics of that market.

6. Create a repeatable methodology and identify the appropriate geographic level to apply it so it can be transferred to other areas.

Tasks:

1. Investigate research methodologies to measure market preferences for critical aspects of urban form that strongly affect transportation like housing location and density, job location, shopping location, school and recreation location, and the location of other important uses and prepare an analysis that evaluates the methods and documents the benefits, costs and tradoffs for each method

2. Choose a preferred, cost effective method to assess those preferences

3. Determine the appropriate level(s) to use the methodology, i.e., neighborhood, traffic analysis zone, city, region, metropolitan area and how it can be aggregated and disaggregated to make decisions for the appropriate government jurisdictions with authority for transportation and/or land use

4. Apply the methodology and calibrate it against actual market offerings and assess whether the consumer preferences, market availability, and public and private decisions regarding development are aligned or what changes might be useful

5. Document the how to apply it so that planners, developers, and others can use the methodology to determine the market preferences for land use patterns and their effect on trip length and mode and other transportation effects

6. Recommend how land use planning, zoning, transportation planning, and developer decisions and policy can be improved and aligned to complement the private market preferences measured.

VI. ESTIMATE OF PROBLEM FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD

Recommended Funding: $300,000

Research Period: 18 months

VII. URGENCY, PAYOFF POTENTIAL, AND IMPLEMENTATION

The US Department of Transportation estimates FY 2005 capital outlay for highways and transit to be $68.2 billion and $12.3 billion, respectively. Transportation needs are much greater than outlays. The FY 2002 cost to maintain highway and bridge condition is $74 billion. For transit it is $16 billion. Costs to improve the systems are much higher. By understanding how to more effectively invest just a portion of the billions spent every year on transportation would have a huge payoff. In addition, obesity, health, air quality and other features of the natural environment are strongly affected by urban form and its effect on walking, biking, and the use of other transportation modes.

VIII. PERSON(S) DEVELOPING THE PROBLEM

Ben Orsbon, AICP

Office of the Secretary

South Dakota Department of Transportation

700 East Broadway

Pierre, SD 57501

605 773-3156

IX. PROBLEM MONITOR

A statement of the specifics (name, title, affiliation, address, telephone number, e-mail address) of the person who will be assigned by the Administrator or Committee submitting this problem to monitor the research, if programmed, from inception to completion. The monitor's final responsibility will entail recommendations to the Standing Committee on Research as to how the research results could be implemented.

X. DATE AND SUBMITTED BY

Please submit completed problem statement to the following e-mail address:

Questions on the process can be directed to the same address or .

Page 2 of 4