Skip to content U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway AdministrationU.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration

Office of Planning, Environment, & Realty (HEP)
Planning · Environment · Real Estate

HEP Events Guidance Publications Glossary Awards Contacts

Livability in the U.S. and Sweden Summary Report

The U.S. Webinar

The U.S. webinar took place on October 18, 2012. The following individuals participated:

Transport Analysis: Mathias Nilsen, Krister Sandberg
Royal Institute of Technology, KTH:Maria Borjesson
Swedish Transport Administration: Susanne Ingo, Catherine Kotake
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration:
Gabriel Rousseau, Kenneth Petty, Daphne Speaks, Connie Yew, Egan Smith, Sharlene Reed, Shana Baker, Robin Smith, Harlan Miller, Frederick Bowers, Peter Stephanos, Michael Nesbitt

The US presentation was divided into five distinctive sections, with five different presenters. As with the Swedish webinar, all presentations addressed the agreed questions, but with a wider scope.

2.1 Performance Management - Linking Performance and Accountability International Scan

Context of 2009 Scan
In 2009, the review was conducted with three overarching issues in the USA:

Scan Team

Where We Went

This photo is of a screen capture that provides a desciption of MAP-21 - Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century.MAP-21 was signed into law by President Obama on July 6, 2012. Funding surface transportation programs at over $105 billion for fiscal years (FY) 2013 and 2014, MAP-21 is the first long-term highway authorization enacted since 2005.MAP-21 is a milestone for the U.S. economy and the Nation's surface transportation program. By transforming the policy and programmatic framework for investments to guide the system's growth and development, MAP-21 creates a streamlined and performance-based surface transportation program and builds many of the highway transit, bike, and pedestrian programs and policies established in 1991.

27 months of stable funding

$37.7 billion/year in formula funding

Performance Elements

Key Findings

1. Less is more

National Goals
Focus the Federal-aid program on the following national goals:

  1. SAFETY
  2. INFRASTRUCTURE CONDITION
  3. CONGESTION REDUCTION
  4. SYSTEM RELIABILITY
  5. FREIGHT MOVEMENT AND ECONOMIC VITALITY
  6. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
  7. REDUCED PROJECT DELIVERY DELAYS

Performance Measures

2. Agencies responsible for Assets set Targets

Performance Targets

3. Carrot vs. Stick

Target Achievement

4. Means not an End

Asset Management Plan

5. Do it with them and not to them

Stakeholder Input

6. Collaborative Benchmarking

Significant changes to shorten project delivery

7. Communicating Results

Performance Reporting

2.2 Performance-Based Planning

Performance-Based Planning and Programming Elements

Strategic Direction
(Where do we want to go? )
  • Goals and objectives
  • Performance measure
Long- Range Planning
(How are we going to get there? )
  • Identity Targets and Trends
  • Identity Strategies
  • Strategy Evaluation
Programming
(What will it take? )
  • Investment Plan
  • Resource Constrained
  • Targets and Trends
  • Program of Projects
Implementation and Evaluation
(How will we do? )
  • Reporting and Monitoring
  • Evaluation

MPO Planning
New Visions for a Quality Region

Capital District

800,000 population

Capital District Transportation Committee

New Visions Regional Plan

Performance Measures
Community Quality of Life:

 

Get public input into the trade-offs between performance measures.

Transit Priority

Institutional barrier: MPO Livability Approach:
Performance measures based chiefly on quantifiable measures of "recurring" traffic flow Develop performance measures with input from the public, such as reliability, bike/ped, transit, and quality of life measures - livability
Quantitative measures often put a priority on auto speed - the design process requires 85th percentile design speed and emphasizes auto level of service.
The desin process requires 85th percentile design and emphasizes auto level of service
When traveling through a community, reducing speeds supports livability goals
Institutional barrier: MPO Livability Approach:
Agencies are focused on capital projects; funding and staffing are set up for capital projects Improving operations has large benefits, and supports livability; set performance measures to recognize operations
Transit investments are given lower priority by focusing on auto level of service Regional planning context should set priorities for transit investment such as BRT, TSP

Performance-Based Planning

2.3 Health and Transportation Planning

FHWA Funded Research:
Metropolitan Area Transportation Planning for Healthy Communities White Paper

Four Case Studies

This illustration shows the steps and issues to consider for Health in Planning: Motivation (Why?) Incorporation into Planning Process (What and Where?) Early Actions (How?) Structural Changes (How?) Incorporation into Design Making.

2.4 Tools to Assist States and Local Agencies

Methods for Gauging Livability Improvements

Livability Performance Measures Database

Moving Goals into Action: Discovering Performance Measures that Fulfill a Community's Vision

Expanding Your Options When Developing Livable Communities

How will the Tool Be Used

Livability Area of Interest

Geographic Scale

Setting or Density

Methods of Transportation

Testing The Effectiveness of the Tool

Workshop #1

Workshop #2

Next Steps

2.5 Addressing Specific Questions from Sweden

Tracking/Measurement

Interagency Coordination

Health Considerations

Sustainable Transportation

Public Involvement

Encouraging Transportation Choices

Aligning Goals for Livability

Public Information

Updated: 01/03/2014
HEP Home Planning Environment Real Estate
Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000