THE TRANSDEF SMART GROWTH ALTERNATIVE
For the 2005 Regional Transportation Plan
(also known as Transportation 2030)
Is credible as a transportation plan.
- Significant increase in the accessibility of jobs by both transit and auto, even when compared to the fiscally unconstrained Project, which spent $18.6 billion more.
- Produces significant travel time savings --- over twice the per capita user benefits.
- Less congestion than the Fiscally Constrained alternative, which spent $6.2 billion more.
- saves nearly 60,000 acres of land from urbanization
- reduces VMT, VT and air emissions, including GHGs
- reduces energy consumption
- reduces dependence on fossil fuels
Benefits low-income communities and communities of color more than other alternatives
- more access to jobs by transit and auto for urban communities of concern
- more access to jobs by auto for both suburban communities of concern and suburban majority communities
- nearly three times the per capita user benefits
Would lead to a more sustainable future
- better meets the need for affordable housing
- households achieve mobility with fewer autos, saving an average of $692/year
- land use and transit support growth without harm
- higher gas prices will only make this alternative perform better
- less dependence on fossil fuels
Reduce the demand for auto travel rather than increase supply--3 mutually reinforcing strategies
- Smart Growth
- cost-effective transit
- pricing measures make transit cheaper and more convenient
Why go down this scary path? ("We've never done anything like this before....")
- enable growth without worsening the quality of life
- this plan leaves many existing neighborhoods untouched
- growth is concentrated in existing malls and strip centers
- be prepared for the End of Cheap Oil
Why it can work: Savings, the Secret Ingredient
By eliminating committed projects, the TRANSDEF Alternative saves $10.4 billion as compared to the adopted T2030 Plan. Even after adding back in $4.2 billion in additional transit service, the savings are still $6.2 billion.
What would have to happen?
- Regional consensus could decide to shift funds from highway widening projects to rehab (or other local priorities).
- This would free up $6.2 billion for other priorities.
- County voters could authorize sales tax expenditure plan amendments.
- This is a political issue, not a technical one.