After attending the recent Transportation Planning Board conference in Washington, D.C. I came away mulling over how I might approach combining sustainability and livability in transportation planning. At first it might seem relatively simple to nest livability within sustainable planning efforts but as one examines how transportation planning fits within these two frameworks things quickly become complex.
To be clear, livability is generally a local concept, more fittingly applied to a city, neighborhood or community rather than a county, state, or country. A livable community always complies with some human-generated boundary and it is assumed that an abundance of available goods and services such as schools, groceries, libraries, trails, employment centers, safe housing, and parks are available within that boundary. Obviously, different groups prefer different sets of goods/services and sort among the available communities based upon what is perceived as desirable and affordable; but the underlying urge among all groups is a selfish desire to consume the maximum quantity of high quality resources.
In contrast sustainability’s focus centers the present value of existing ecosystem produced goods and services (as opposed to manufactured goods and services) to current and future generations. Efforts focusing on sustainability seek to maximize standards of living in a manner not encouraged by the free market model or human nature. They might be described as selfless. Furthermore, sustainability is not constrained by political/economic boundaries as livability might be. One might as easily focus on the sustainability of a small watershed as focus on a multi-state temperate forest, both of which sprawl over and totally ignore line on human maps.
Therefore, because livability is selfish and minds human-made rules it does not necessarily align with the selflessness of a sustainability ideal that respects a community larger than humanity.
Here is where transportation planning comes into the picture. From the point of view of some planners (and certainly the politicians), the transportation system is about providing access in support of economic growth. Roads, bike paths, sidewalks, bus lines, light rail, freight rail, ports, and airports all move people and goods to what the free market determines are their highest and best uses (assuming you blindly accept all the inherent assumptions built into the free market model). Cut to its essence, transportation planning supports consumption of natural resources and improves livability. And, it supports consumption without judgment or consideration of the eventual consequences to a sustainable planet. Or does it?
How much planning and forethought is now given to reducing the impact of impervious surfaces to non-point discharge limits in the Chesapeake Bay, to the stormwater retention requirements, the recycling of construction materials, the reduced idling of construction vehicles, the efforts to improve system efficiency without increasing roadway “capacity”, and efforts to support Transportation Oriented Developments (TODs) and Priority Funding Areas (PFAs)? I can tell you quite a bit of effort and discussion is ongoing at my job but nobody’s asked the biggest question. Is transportation planning inherently unsustainable given its current political/economic agenda? And if it is, what would an alternative look like?
