AUTONEWS
Vehicle miles traveled: An improved, but imperfect, traffic metric
Opponents of new developments often argue that more construction will bring more traffic, frequently convincing developers to reduce the scale of their projects or seek out less densely populated areas to build. Although such compromises may lead to less congestion on the road, they don't necessarily reduce driving and driving's associated environmental effects. But what if how much a community actually drives provides a better measure of how a new development stands to affect a neighborhood?
Although it's not a silver bullet, research from Northeastern University published in the Transportation Research Record, finds that that new approach—called vehicle miles traveled (VMT)—is a better way to measure a development's environmental impacts related to transportation.
"We replaced something that was counterproductive with something that makes a lot more sense," said Serena Alexander, an associate professor in civil and environmental engineering and public policy and urban affairs at Northeastern. "But it doesn't mean that it's perfect."
Alexander explained that for years, developers and planners used a measure called "level of service" to evaluate the environmental impacts of a development on transportation infrastructure. The higher the congestion, or overcrowding, on railroads, streets or shipping lanes, for instance, the worse the level of service.
Planners and developers historically had two main solutions to improve worsening levels of service, Alexander said, widening and building new roads, and increasing construction in more remote places where there was less traffic.
Unfortunately, both make people drive even more, she said.
"As you widen the road, people think that, "Well, there's no traffic, so we can drive,'" Alexander said.
Meanwhile, reducing the level of service by building housing or retail in remote, low-density areas can lead to subdivisions that you can only get to and navigate by car, Alexander said.
"Every time that you build something, you potentially generate more driving," Alexander said. "But when you build something that's near transit or in a dense urban area, the extra driving that you generate is a lot less than when you build homes in a suburban or exurban area."
The metric sounded promising to planners and environmentalists. Instead of encouraging developers to build 15 miles (24 kilometers) beyond city limits to reduce traffic, projects were incentivized to build closer to transit infrastructure, municipal hubs and amenities to reduce driving.
The state of California implemented VMT in 2013. The state even proposed incentives where developers could mitigate higher levels of projected VMT by providing money for local transit projects, issuing public transportation vouchers and more, Alexander said.
Other states, including Washington and Oregon, now use VMT in transportation projects and to meet transportation goals, and Massachusetts is also considering using the metric.
But the metric has not been without critics, who worry that it punishes rural or suburban housing, or even personal mobility and freedom.
In her research, Alexander found a few challenges with VMT.
First, there is limited legal precedent and data that establishes VMT as a valid metric.
"Cities struggle to push for this because they are afraid that they'll be sued by developers and there's not enough evidence to back up what [planners] are saying," Alexander said.
For instance, if a builder is asked to mitigate the driving that their development produces by adding an expensive bike lane, they may challenge the use of VMT as an effective measure.
Similarly, there are many tools for measuring VMT, but few standards, Alexander said.
"Some cities have their own VMT tool. States have tried to develop their own metro-level tools," Alexander said. "So, they use different tools to see if they will get the same numbers, and the numbers don't match up."
These opposing numbers mean that VMT and mitigation efforts can be calculated differently for different projects depending on geographic location, leading to potential disagreements, distrust and uncertainty.
"You cannot require the developer to contribute to a VMT bank when you don't know how reliable your VMT estimations are," Alexander said. A VMT bank is a system where developers or project sponsors purchase VMT reduction credits to offset the environmental and traffic impacts of new construction projects. "You cannot also expect that the community will accept that this project will not increase driving tremendously if they cannot trust your tool."








