dr. lawrence frank, ubc - the lung association 3-frank.pdf · 2016. 10. 4. · reducing travel time...
TRANSCRIPT
Community Design & Travel Choice Dr. Lawrence Frank, UBC
Just One Month Ago …
Built Environment Transportation Investments and Land Use
Human Behavior Travel Patterns and Physical Activity
Environmental Quality Air Quality and Greenspace
Quality
of Life
CONCEPTUAL MODEL
Transportation
Investments
Land Use
Patterns
Travel Choice
Physical
Activity &
Dietary
Patterns
Travel
Patterns
Body
Mass
Index
Vehicle
Emissions
Built
Environment
Chronic
Disease
Onset
Respiratory
Function
Path I - Behavioral
Path II - Exposure
Health
Care
Utilization
Patterns
&
Health
Care
Costs
Note: Diet and nutrition, age, gender, income, genetics, and other factors also impact
weight and chronic disease and to the extent possible are controlled in analyses.
Vehicle age and climate impacts emissions and air quality, and respiratory function
is also impacted by a variety of factors
Predicting Travel Behavior Micro-economic Theory – “Compensatory” / Tradeoffs
Personal Utility Maximization
Relative Utility and Benefit Across Modes
Consumer Science – A “Discrete Choice” Process
Non Pecuniary Cost
Time “Elasticity of demand” varies by demographic group
Comfort
Safety
Money (Pecuniary) Marginal Vs Sunk Costs
Some modes are synergistic Walk & Transit
Cycling & Transit
Many Pathways Demographic &
socioeconomic
covariates
Built
environment
variables
Physical
activity
outcomes
Health
outcomes
Obesity
outcomes
Design Mechanisms – The “How”
Proximity to destinations – Land Use Mix Distance > time > ability to walk or bike
Compactness / Density Consumers > Spending power > local shops and services
Trip ends > Transit ridership > Level of Service
Connectivity
Route directness > relative travel time
Comfort
Safety
. Proximity
Connect-
ivity
2 KM
1 KM
Pedestrian Environment Block faces
Sidewalk presence, buffering, quality, vegetation, lighting, seating, eyes on the street
Intersections Signal timing, distance across, # of vehicle lanes, turning movements, transit integration
Less studied Data becoming available
Results show significant relationships with objectively measured physical activity and travel patterns
Pedestrian environment Lighting
Street furnishings
Street trees
Bicycle facilities
Street width / total number of lanes
On-street parking
Connections to transit
Open/green space
Accessibility and affordability Low income
Elderly
Children/Youth
Disabled
Design Elements
Barrier-separated bikeway on the
Carrall St. Greenway. Photo: Kira
Baker
Regional Accessibility - the “where” Travel time to major destinations
By mode Transit, drive alone, carpool,
Role of walking and biking
By time of day (am & pm peak and off peak)
Can overpower walkability Where matters as much or more than “how” a place is designed
Derived from trip distribution model
Walk Score Senior destination weights
Walk Score component Weight
Banks .12
Books .04
Parks .24
Coffee .26
Entertainment .11
Grocery .08
Restaurants/bars .01
Shopping .08
Street connectivity .06
• Proximity of parks and coffee shops were most predictive of senior objectively measured physical activity:
Note: weights sum to 1.00
2011 Vancouver Walkability
Surface
Local Walkability – “How”
Reducing Travel Time
Increases Ridership
•Seattle - 10% reduction in travel time on transit was associated with a 3.9% increase in transit use and a 2.9% increase in walking (Frank et al. 2007).
•Walkable Neighborhoods
• Metro Vancouver – Residents of our most walkable transit supportive neighbourhoods were nearly twice as likely to make a public transit trip in a usual week
(Frank et al. 2014)
•Proposed investment in transit (currently being voted on here) will provide access to frequent transit for 70% of Metro Vancouver residents and save 20–30 minutes per day on some of the region’s most congested corridors.
Transit Investment A Montreal study found that transit users achieved 25% of the daily recommended level of physical activity from transit use (Morency et al. 2011).
A Salt Lake City study found a 19% increase in the number of participants who rode rail after the opening of a new rail line (Brown et al. 2007). Rail use was also associated with increased land use mix and residential density (Werner et al. 2010).
Transit, Driving, and Walking
A recent study in Los Angeles evaluated the impact of the new Exposition Line light rail stations on travel patterns, activity levels, and CO2 emissions (Boarnet et al. 2013). It found that people living within 1/2-mile of a rail station:
Reduced their daily vehicle travel by 10-12 miles
Reduced CO2 emissions by 30%
Experienced an 8-10 minute increase in physical activity after station opening (for those least physically active)
Transit Users Get
Needed Activity
Transit users accumulate anywhere between 12 to 18 minutes of additional walking per day compared to non-transit users (Freeland et al. 2013, Rissel et al. 2010, Saelens et al. 2014).
Transit users in Atlanta were 3.42 times more likely to meet physical activity recommendations by walking for transportation than non users (Lachapelle and Frank 2009).
Every additional hour per day in a car translates into a 6 percent increase in the likelihood of obesity Time spent driving increases as
walkability decreases
Every additional Kilometer (.6 miles) walked translates into 4.8 percent reduction in the likelihood of being obese Distances walked increases with
walkability
Frank, L., Andresen, M., and Schmid, T., Obesity Relationships With Community Design, Physical
Activity, and Time Spent in Cars. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. June 2004.
Less Chronic Disease
• Several studies have shown that compact,
walkable, and transit-oriented community design
is associated with improved health outcomes
including reduced blood pressure,
cardiovascular disease, and diabetes (Ewing et
al. 2014, Li et al. 2009, Hoehner et al. 2012).
• A San Diego study of 18,000 participants showed:
– 10 % reduction in Type II diabetes Risk
– 15 % reduction in cardiovascular disease Risk
from living in a more walkable transit supportive
environment (SANDAG, 2012).
Final Map of CO2
emissions from
transportation
Includes:
Local urban form (land use mix, intersection density, retail FAR)
Regional location (auto travel time
Transit accessibility & travel time
Demographics
CO2 & Neighbourhood Design
Source: LUTAQH final report, King County ORTP, 2005
10
10.5
11
11.5
12
12.5
0 - 4 4 - 7 7 - 10 10 -15 15+
Net Residential Density
(housing units per residential acre)
CO
2 (
KG
) --
mean
dail
y p
er
pers
on
8
9
10
11
12
13
0 - 0.1 0.1 - 0.2 0.2 - 0.3 0.3 - 0.4 0.4+
Intersections per acre
CO
2 (
KG
) --
mean
dail
y p
er
pers
on
9.5
10
10.5
11
11.5
12
12.5
0 1 - 2 3 - 9 10 - 29 30 - 165
# of Neighborhood Retail Parcels
CO
2 (
KG
) --
me
an
da
ily
pe
r
pe
rso
n
“The Hidden Health Costs of Transportation” Frank et al 2010
American Public Health Association
Physical Activity Case Study:
Estimated Costs Savings from
Walkable Urban Design
Saving Money Mortality – Living Longer
Over $5.5 billion wages (in 2012$) are lost in Canada annually due to premature death attributable to excess weight (overweight and obesity). An additional $3.8 billion is lost to premature death attributable to physical inactivity. (Krueger et al, 2014)
A recent report released by the American Public Health Association showed a potential savings of $23 million in adjusted life years through a tertile (33 Percent) increase in street connectivity (connected streets) for a community of appx 5000 inhabitants (UD4H, Inc. 2014).
Saving Money Morbidity – Staying Healthier
Approximately $6 billion (2006$) in healthcare costs in Canada are attributable to being overweight or obese. (Anis et al, 2010)
Canada spends $8.4 billion (2012$) annually on healthcare attributable to excess weight or physical inactivity.
Another $10.3 billion (2012$) of wages are lost annually from individuals on long and short-term disability due to disease attributable to obesity and physical inactivity. (Krueger et al, 2014)
Saving Money The same study by Krueger found that Vancouver Metro Region loses $2 billion annually to healthcare costs and lost wages combined from inactivity, obesity, and lost productivity (Krueger et al, 2014)
For every additional 1% of residents able to reach physical activity recommendations and healthier body weight, we would expect to see at least $20 million in annual economic benefits due to health impacts.
A 12 % increase = 240 Million = the referendum budget
$0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800
Direct Healthcare
Premature Death
Disability (Long and Short)
PhysicalInactivityOverweight &Obese
Annual Costs Attributable to Excess Weight and Physical
Inactivity for Vancouver Metro, based upon Krueger et al (2014)
Utilitarian
Walkability Made up of: Residential
density, retail Floor Area
Ratio, intersection density,
land use mix
Regional walkability distribution, by
block group
Case study 1 – Palomar Gateway
Built environment changes RESULTS ARE PRELIMINARY AND FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY
Name Base Scenario Change Scenario Units
Single Family DU 192 80 housing units
Multi-Family DU 155 1626 housing units
Total Population 884 3841 people
Residential Area 44.3 68.5 acres
Net Residential Density 7.8 24.9 units/acre
Retail Floorspace 370073 395221 square feet
Retail Area 15.7 7.3 acres
Retail FAR 0.5 1.3
Office Floorspace 0 41238 square feet
Office Area 0 1.2 acres
Office FAR 0 0.8
Civic and Education Floorspace 0 20035 square feet
Recreation and Entertainment Floorspace 0 68393 square feet
Park Area 1.2 1.2 acres
Number of Schools 0 0
Number of Transit Stops 3 3
Number of Grocery Stores 1 2
Total Road Centerline Miles 4.2 4.2 miles
Total Sidewalk Miles 4.5 5.5 miles
Sidewalk Coverage 53% 66%
Total Bike Miles 0.5 1.2 miles
Health metrics: Palomar Gateway
case study (San Diego)
Color Key
1-10% change - positive health impact 1-10% change - negative health impact
10-25% change - positive health impact 10-25% change - negative health impact
over 25% change - positive health impact over 25% change - negative health impact
HEALTH INDICATOR Regional
base Base
Scenario Change
Scenario Percent Change
Daily minutes in car – adults (age 16 and up) 55.81 49.04 44.89 -8.46%
Daily minutes transportation walking – adults (age 16 and up) 6.61 6.1 10.24 67.87%
Daily minutes leisure walking - adults (18 and up) 12.27 8.42 8.87 5.34%
Daily minutes leisure moderate activity (adults 18+; not incl. walking) 34.21 17.33 18.38 6.06%
Percent visiting park in last 30 days (adults 18 and up) 70.3 56.95 59.23 4.00%
Body Mass Index - Adults 18 and up 26.73 28 27.65 -1.25%
Percent of adults obese 21.7 32.73 31.66 -3.27%
Percent of adults overweight or obese 59 68.91 66.98 -2.80%
Percent of adults with high blood pressure 28.2 30.92 26.16 -15.39%
Percent of adults with Type 2 Diabetes 4.4 8.63 7.8 -9.62%
Percent of adults 18 and up with current asthma 10.8 5.69 5.43 -4.57%
Pedestrian and Bike Collision Risk Factor 1-100 (all age groups) 39.55 46.71 47.65 2.01%
Self-rated general health (5 = highest) per adult 18 and up 2.42 3.21 3.28 2.18%
Daily minutes transportation walking – youth (age 5 to 15) 5.82 4.39 5.16 17.54%
Percent walking to and from school – teens (age 12-17) 26.0 43.65 46.06 5.52%
Percent walking to or from school - children (age 5-11) 38.5 18.81 24.17 28.50%
Days per week of 60+ minutes moderate or vigorous physical activity, teens 12-17
4.33 3.87 3.91 1.03%
Percent visiting park in last 30 days (teens 12-17) 40.8 31.34 35.38 12.89%
Park visits, days per month (children age 1-11) 7.78 5.69 6.72 18.10%
Body Mass Index - children 11 and under 20.52 20.94 20.68 -1.24%
Body Mass Index – teen 12-17 21.59 23.19 23.05 -0.60%
Percent of teens obese 11.4 27.32 28.55 4.50%
Percent of teens overweight or obese 24.3 38.75 42.95 10.84%
Percent of teens 12-17 with current asthma 6.3 15.43 18.17 17.76%
Percent children 11 and under with current asthma 12.2 16.66 18.48 10.92%
Times eating fast food per week - children 2-11 1.12 1.43 0.83 -41.96%
Predicted daily min. physical
activity (blue = high, red = low) –
San Diego
Unmet Demand for Transit Supportive Communities
• A recent survey of 1,223 people found that
1 out of every 3 residents in auto-oriented
neighbourhoods in outer Metro Vancouver
would prefer to live in a transit supported
walkable environment (Frank et al. 2014).
• Sixty percent of survey participants stated
a willingness to trade off features of auto-
oriented environments for walkable
communities well-served by public transit.
Policy Recommendations • Researchers
– Develop projects with government and private sector end users
– Leverage investments in research and ownership of results across
disciplines where possible
– Translate results of work into concrete actionable strategies
– Be willing to take risks when needed and realize messengers do
get blamed at times
• Public Sector – Find ways to link performance at the local level with funding
– Integrate regional development aspirations with transportation funding
and development approval
– Use evidence to make case why walkability x regional accessibility is
beneficial using visualization tools
• Private Sector – Lenders and developers - Residential and travel patterns shifted
Aging & Place
“If I knew I was
going to live
This long I would
have taken
Better care of
myself”
THE END