Considering land use as a transport policy tool: A London perspective Isabel Dedring, Transport for London IMPACTS Vienna, March 2006

1 Topics for discussion Context: Why consider land use? Land use as a transport policy tool Barriers? Questions for discussion

2 A highly congested road network… Saturday pm off-peakWeekday am peak ITIS graph Greater than – – 0.5 Less than 0.25 No data Key

3 …Low densities make public transport provision difficult… Residential density per person per hectare, 2001

4 …Half of all car trips in suburban London are under 2 km Total (millions trips) - 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 <200m 200m to 500m 500m to 1km 1km to 2km 2km to 5km 5km to 10km 10km to 20km 20km to 50km 50km or more CarBusUnderground/DLRRailWalkCycleOther Total journeys within Outer London by mode and distance

5 What policy tools can we use to address these challenges? Rail modes not appropriate for dispersed trips Limited additional road space for buses Limited room – and no political appetite – for road widening schemes London-wide road pricing not in place; earliest possible adoption 2012 Some scope for increasing walking and cycling  Can land use policy help respond to transport demand growth?

6 Topics for discussion Context: Why consider land use? Land use as a transport policy tool Barriers? Questions for discussion

7 Land use as a transport policy tool: 3 levels Macro: London-wide Local areas Micro: Specific developments

8 Land use as a transport policy tool: 3 levels Macro: London-wide Local areas Micro: Specific developments

9 What can be done at the macro level? Transport benefits 1.Ability to support growth 2.Catalyse development (and capture increase in land values!) 3.Make better use of the existing network and increase density to reduce trip length Actions 1.Add capacity to cater for population/jobs 2.New transport links help create new areas 3.Locate development where there is existing capacity

10 Align transport capacity to projected growth… Projected Employment Growth Projected Population Growth

11 … but also target growth where there is existing capacity Access to public transport Public Transport Accessibility Level Worst Best

12 Land use as a transport policy tool: 3 levels Macro: London-wide Local areas Micro: Specific developments

13 What can be done at the micro level? Transport benefits 1.Increase use of public transport/ walking & cycling to access that location Actions 1.Design of individual developments to facilitate access by all modes 2.‘Travel plans’ to integrate each development with the transport network

14 Example: Site layout

15 Land use as a transport policy tool: 3 levels Macro: London-wide Local areas Micro: Specific developments

16 What can be done at the local level? Transport benefits 1.Trips are shortened and combined 2.Trip distances are shorter 3.Shift motorised trips to non-motorised modes (But limited applicability for work trips) Actions 1.Co-locate services 2.Locate services closer to residential areas 3.Shift short trips to walking by improving the local environment

17 Case study shows impact of different development patterns Traffic levels Transit-based (mixed-use development around transport nodes) -30% Impact of land use patterns Base case Transit-based Short drive based Walking-based -25% Short drive based (assumes use of car, but trips are shorter) % Walking-based: Providing good walking routes in and around town centre

18 Example: Relocating a hospital National health service moves hospital to new site outside town centre Increase in number of bus routes to hospital from 1 to 7 Cost borne by TfL: ~£1m/year

19 Example: Managing consequences of local land use decisions Borough of Kingston - October 2003 delay, 8am to 9am, Monday to Friday High Medium Low Already engaged Schools – potential for congestion reduction Delay >2 mins per km Delay 1.5 to 2 mins per km Delay 1 to 1.5 mins per km Delay <1 min per km Borough boundary

20 Topics for discussion Context: Why consider land use? Land use as a transport policy tool Barriers? Questions for discussion

21 Barriers to joined-up land use and transport policy 1.Institutional barriers 2.Professional silos 3.Lack of data on land use/ transport relationship 4.Limited mechanisms for considering land use in transport appraisals (and vice versa) 5.Partial devolution only – central Government and local boroughs still retain many planning (and other) powers 6.Transport costs not borne by land-use decisionmakers

22 Topics for discussion Context: Why consider land use? Land use as a transport policy tool Barriers? Questions for discussion

23 Questions for discussion Are there other ways transport should be making use of land use policy? Other experiences regarding barriers and how to get around them? Any empirical evidence of these relationships from other cities?