If transportation equity is your goal, then it's time to confront land use policy
Public infrastructure is built for people of all ages and all abilities. Or at least that’s the claim. Public agency planners, I’ve got you on my mind.
The 21st-century planner finds themselves dealing with an inventory of streets that prohibit safe passage for some of the local population. Local land use policy drives infrastructure design and maintenance.
In America, policy segregates development so the only reasonable travel mode is a car. The houses themselves betray our mobility needs, with garages appearing as the primary feature. The not-so-subtle message is “move up in economic stature from a car-dependent apartment to a car-dependent house.”
The policies that drive this outcome get overlooked in conversations about social equity.
Land use & transportation policies are a clear and present danger to marginalized communities across the country.
Not everyone can afford to own their own car. And even if everyone could, they shouldn’t be forced to spend their money to own and operate a personal car.
Transportation equity isn’t about charity services that donate cars or offer free vanpool service in poor neighborhoods. It can be that, but free rides in automobiles doesn’t fix the root problem.
Transportation equity should be about giving people the same access to homes, jobs, food, and services.
If this is one of your soap box issues, it’s worth taking a little internet adventure researching new urbanism and human-scale design. You’ll find real life examples—not just theory—of how to make places that give people the ability to opt-out of car travel. And isn’t that your goal? You want to give people from all walks of life the same type of mobility choices: walking, bicycling, riding the bus, or sometimes driving a car.
The work of public agency engineers and planners has enormous social impact. All of these things listed below are ordinary projects for professionals. And every single one of them can be performed in a way that results in a happier, healthier community:
Corridor studies. When you measure “level of service,” which modes are rewarded?
Travel demand forecasting. How many vehicle trips could be reduced if exclusionary zoning was abolished?
Congestion management. How many vehicle trips could be reduced if you eliminated minimum parking requirements?
Performance measures. If safety is your top priority, how many traffic deaths are required before you reconsider street design?
Designated growth areas. How much affordable housing would be available if you legalized accessory dwelling units?
Functional classification. If walking and bicycling are the fundamental modes of transportation, how can you treat them as such in your street hierarchy?
Site plan review. Why don’t the engineering drawings include comfortable places for bicyclists to access and park?
Infill development. How much affordable housing could be added to under-used shopping mall parking lots?
Start with the outcomes in mind. I know you have a process, but there’s no point in fighting for social causes if you’re simply going to do what everyone before you has done.
If you’re one of the professionals who works on projects like these, think about how your agency’s ordinary work can become extraordinary. Reverse engineer the process that keeps residents of all ages and abilities trapped in a car-dependent lifestyle. And then work from the inside to reform or abolish the policies that are derailing transportation equity.