An Economic and Life Cycle Analysis of Regional Land Use and Transportation Plans [Research Brief]

Climate Change Clearinghouse2012PDFTech ReportRodier, CarolineMartin, ElliotSpiller, MargotAbraham, JohnHunt, DougMineta Transportation InstituteCalifornia. Department of TransportationUnited States. Department of Transportation. Research and Innovative Technology AdministrationMineta Transportation InstituteCaliforniaTransportation planningLand useLand use modelsLand use planningRegional planningRegional developmentRegional analysisRegional economicsRegional transportationLife cycle analysisDesign methodsClimate changeLand use planningTransportation planningClimate changeLife cycle analysisLand use modelMTI Project 1008Research brief.Travel and emissions models are commonly applied to evaluate the change in passenger and commercial travel and associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from land use and transportation plans. Analyses conducted by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments predict a decline in such travel and emissions from their land use and transportation plan (the \u201cPreferred Blueprint\u201d or PRB scenario) relative to a \u201cBusiness-As-Usual\u201d scenario (BAU). However, the life cycle GHG effects due to changes in production and consumption associated with transportation and land use plans are rarely, if ever, conducted. An earlier study conducted by the authors, applied a spatial economic model (Sacramento PECAS) to the PRB plan and found that lower labor, transport, and rental costs increased producer and consumer surplus and production and consumption relative to the BAU. Life cycle GHG emissions from these upstream economic activities may increase while those associated with the manufacture of construction materials for housing may decline due to a shift to smaller multi-family homes. To explore the net impact of these opposing GHG impacts, economic production and consumption data from the PRB and BAU scenarios, as simulated with the Sacramento PECAS model, are used in and input-output life cycle assessment model to estimate change in life cycle GHG emissions. This study also builds on the findings from two previous studies, which suggest potential economic incentives for jurisdictional non-compliance with Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCSs) under Senate Bill 375 (also known as the \u201canti-sprawl\u201d bill). SB 375 does not require local governments to adopt general plans that are consistent with the land use plans included in SCSs, and thus such incentives could jeopardize implementation of SCSs and achievement of GHG goals. In this study, a set of scenarios is simulated with the Sacramento PECAS model, in which multiple jurisdictions partially pursue the BAU at differing rates.109