TY - JOUR
T1 - “A little bit happy”
T2 - How performance metrics shortchange pedestrian infrastructure funding
AU - Makarewicz, Carrie
AU - Adkins, Arlie
AU - Frei, Charlotte
AU - Wennink, Audrey
N1 - Funding Information:
Chicago does not have a dedicated source of funding for pedestrian projects. However, in 2017 the transportation planning staff conducted public outreach in each of the city's 50 wards to identify ways that Aldermanic “menu” items 6 6 —funding granted annually to elected ward representatives to use at the discretion of their office—might be used use to address high pedestrian crash locations and other pedestrian-related issues. The process was time-consuming, but had positive outcomes: a majority of aldermen dedicated their discretionary budgets for pedestrian projects. Chicago has also shifted road rehabilitation funds to include sidewalk projects since losing a 2010 lawsuit for being out of compliance with ADA. 7 7 Some of the counties in the Chicago region are also creating new sources of funding or requirements for sidewalks. Cook County is setting aside a portion of its motor fuel tax revenue for a capital grant funding program and scores bicycle and pedestrian projects separately. McHenry County is including sidewalks in every road-widening project instead of or in addition to bike paths and multi-use trails and is prioritizing the building and repair of sidewalks near bus stops and commuter rail stations.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2018/12
Y1 - 2018/12
N2 - After decades of inattention to the issue, cities and regions increasingly recognize the role of pedestrian infrastructure to improve safety, public health, air quality, accessibility, travel choices, and economic development. But extraordinary gaps exist between pedestrian infrastructure needs and what is funded and built. To understand why this gap persists, even as attention to pedestrian issues grows, we conducted 50 interviews about pedestrian funding with transportation professionals from different levels of government in three regions that have prioritized active transportation: Chicago, Illinois; Denver, Colorado; and Portland, Oregon. We analyzed interviews along with each region's transportation plans, fiscally constrained budgets, and other policy and planning documents. Our analysis revealed three systemic barriers at the regional level that perpetuate the underfunding of pedestrian infrastructure: (1) overall transportation funding shortages made worse by the substantial and growing burden of operating and maintaining aging regional mobility systems; (2) performance and evaluation metrics used in funding decisions are biased toward regional mobility rather than accessibility; and (3) the relatively small scale of individual pedestrian projects often keeps them from being considered regionally significant or scoring highly on metrics related to regional impact. In addition to identifying the need for additional funding sources, the regions we studied used other strategies to address these challenges that may offer lessons for other regions. These include: collecting new data and establishing performance measures that better capture the benefits of active travel modes and their unique contributions to broad policy goals; coordinating across a region to bundle pedestrian projects into larger funding packages that can meet regional significance criteria; and creating regional pedestrian plans that demonstrate how smaller pedestrian projects contribute to regional goals.
AB - After decades of inattention to the issue, cities and regions increasingly recognize the role of pedestrian infrastructure to improve safety, public health, air quality, accessibility, travel choices, and economic development. But extraordinary gaps exist between pedestrian infrastructure needs and what is funded and built. To understand why this gap persists, even as attention to pedestrian issues grows, we conducted 50 interviews about pedestrian funding with transportation professionals from different levels of government in three regions that have prioritized active transportation: Chicago, Illinois; Denver, Colorado; and Portland, Oregon. We analyzed interviews along with each region's transportation plans, fiscally constrained budgets, and other policy and planning documents. Our analysis revealed three systemic barriers at the regional level that perpetuate the underfunding of pedestrian infrastructure: (1) overall transportation funding shortages made worse by the substantial and growing burden of operating and maintaining aging regional mobility systems; (2) performance and evaluation metrics used in funding decisions are biased toward regional mobility rather than accessibility; and (3) the relatively small scale of individual pedestrian projects often keeps them from being considered regionally significant or scoring highly on metrics related to regional impact. In addition to identifying the need for additional funding sources, the regions we studied used other strategies to address these challenges that may offer lessons for other regions. These include: collecting new data and establishing performance measures that better capture the benefits of active travel modes and their unique contributions to broad policy goals; coordinating across a region to bundle pedestrian projects into larger funding packages that can meet regional significance criteria; and creating regional pedestrian plans that demonstrate how smaller pedestrian projects contribute to regional goals.
KW - Active transportation
KW - Infrastructure funding
KW - Multimodal
KW - Pedestrian infrastructure
KW - Performance measures
KW - Sidewalks
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060078033&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060078033&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.rtbm.2019.01.002
DO - 10.1016/j.rtbm.2019.01.002
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85060078033
SN - 2210-5395
VL - 29
SP - 144
EP - 156
JO - Research in Transportation Business and Management
JF - Research in Transportation Business and Management
ER -