# Presentation: 584878

## CO2 Reduction through Better Urban Design: Portland's Story

**CO****2**** Reduction through Better Urban Design: Portland's Story**

- Metro Councilor Rex Burkholder
- April 8, 2008
- 2008 National Air Quality Conference
- Portland, Oregon

## Technology Alone Cannot Save Us

- Source: Ewing, Reid *et al.*, *Growing Cooler, *2007.

**Notes:**
This graph assumes a 10% reduction in carbon content of fuel and an average fuel economy standard of 35 mpg by 2020.  Under this scenario, overall CO2 emissions rise by 12%, to roughly 140% of 1990 levels.  The blue “1990 CO2” line does not represent where we need to be; in order to reach climate-stabilizing reductions of 60-80% below 1990 levels by 2050 we need 15-30% reductions by 2030.

## Is Trend Destiny?

## Portland residents drive less...

- While per capita vehicle miles traveled is increasing nationally at an average of 2.3% per year, VMT per capita in the Portland area is now declining thanks to reliable transit service, smart land-use planning, and public outreach programs.

**Notes:**
After climbing in 2004 due to the annexation of Damascus, VMT/capita in the Portland area is currently on the decline.  In 2005, VMT/capita/day in the Portland-Vancouver area was 20.3, vs. a national average of 23.8.  A Smart Growth USA study showed that residents of the 10 most sprawling cities average 27 VMT/day, while residents of the 10 least sprawling cities average 21 VMT/day, a 22% reduction.

## ...bike more...

- Bicycles’ mode share almost tripled between 1990 and 2005, and Portland has the most bike commuters of any city in the nation.

## ...and take more transit.

- Per Capita Transit Trips, 2005

- Source: National Transit Database, www.ntdprogram.gov

- Only 6 U.S. metropolitan areas have higher per capita transit ridership than Portland, and all are older cities with substantially larger populations.

**Notes:**
Older cities either have better transit systems or more of their physical plant dating from the streetcar era, which makes them easier to serve with public transit in the modern day.

## Why? Because we sprawl less.

- Source: Nelson and Sanchez, 2003.

**Growth by Density Category, 1990-2000**

**Notes:**
The Portland area is more compact than many metro regions with similar populations because it is surrounded by an urban growth boundary (UGB) that is backed by a strong statewide land-use planning program. San Antonio and Columbus do not have UGBs, and Charlotte and Orlando have UGBs that only apply to the regions’ central counties and/or are not backed by a statewide land-use planning system. Compared to the other four MSAs, the Portland region has more residents living in urban areas and more rural land surrounding the city.  While this graph comes from a 2003 study and only shows 1990-2000 growth, the trends depicted continue in the Portland area today.

## Portland’s per capita GHG emissions are falling.

- Metro has not yet conducted a region-wide GHG inventory, but the region’s most urban county lowered per capita GHG emissions due to transportation by 15%, and total per capita GHG emissions by 12.5%, and in between 1990 and 2004.

- Source: Portland Office of Sustainable Development, 2005.

## The 2040 Growth Concept

- Metro’s 2040 Growth Concept tightens the UGB slightly and designates centers, corridors, and transit lines along which to focus development and investment over the next three decades.

**Notes:**
Redirected investments amount to $1.5 billion, which is just 3.4 percent of $44 billion in projected public investment over the next three decades, and only 0.6 percent of the $260 billion estimate for total public and private investments.

## Reduced Land Consumption

- The 2040 Growth Concept reduces the amount of new land developed in suburban and exurban locations at the edge of the UGB.

**Notes:**
This map and the following 3 maps were produced by MetroScope, Metro’s data modeling software, which is a remarkably accurate tool for predicting the impacts of different planning scenarios.  The shading on these maps shows the change between the business-as-usual scenario and the 2040 Growth Concept, as well as the centers (circles) and UGBs (dotted line) for reference.  Reducing development on the fringes of the city preserves natural resources and ensures that people live in locations that are closer to jobs and services, reducing driving distances and VMT per capita.  The increases in zones at the western edge of the UGB reflects growth in the small portion of those areas that are within the UGB.   

## Single-Family Housing Demand

- The 2040 Growth Concept increases demand for single-family housing near mixed-use centers that are linked via transit to jobs and services around the region.

**Notes:**
Once again, growth in zones straddling the UGB reflects growth inside the UGB, not outside of it.

## Multi-Family Housing Demand

- Demand for multi-family housing increases even more dramatically near centers.

## Impacts on Equity

- Demand for housing among low-income, elderly, and single-occupant households increases in the central city and North Portland, areas that are particularly well-served by transit.

## Metro Travel Behavior Survey

**Notes:**
Bringing low-income residents into the central city and other locations well-served by transit is important for two reasons: it is especially effective in reducing auto use, and it moves the region toward equity by saving these residents money on transportation.  

## Smart Growth Saves Money

- Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2005.

**Notes:**
The average Portland resident already spends 7% less per year on transportation than the average resident of a metro area in the Western U.S.  Though Metro anticipates that the  2040 Growth Concept, this will be offset by continued reductions in transportation expenditures, particularly for low-income residents.  Furthermore, The average daily commute for a Portland area resident is four miles below the national average, and a 2007 study estimated that the resulting savings in time, gasoline, and maintenance costs amount to a total of $2.6 billion per year. Since the Portland area does not manufacture cars nor refine petroleum, and residents purchase 10 percent less gasoline than the national average, roughly $800 million dollars that would otherwise leave the region each year stay in the local economy. 

## Other Programs to Reduce Driving

- Metro’s **Bike There!** map informs cyclists of the best routes around the region.

**CarpoolMatchNW.org** is a free online service that matches commuters up with others who share the same routes.

**Drive less. Save more.** is a website providing transit and travel options information, promoting efficient driving, and helping users calculate the real cost of driving.

- Under the **Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)** investment program, Metro purchases land located near bus and light-rail stations and then sells the land back to developers at a reduced cost, provided that they agree to create high-density, mixed-use developments. Metro also allocates federal funding for TOD developers in proportion with the projected increases in transit ridership created by each project.

**Notes:**
These programs complement the 2040 Growth Concept by promoting transit options and by driving local development that meets the plan’s overall goals.

## The Regional Transportation Plan

- The latest update to the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) reinforces the 2040 Growth Concept  by ensuring that the transportation network allows residents, commuters, and freight easy access to regional centers.  The plan’s goals focus on livability, public heath, and protecting the environment:

- Foster Vibrant Communities and Efficient Urban Form
- Sustain Economic Competitiveness and Prosperity
- Expand Transportation Choices
- Emphasize Effective and Efficient Management of the Transportation System
- Enhance Safety and Security
- Promote Environmental Stewardship
- Enhance Human Health
- Ensure Equity
- Ensure Sustainability
- Deliver Accountability

## Overall Impacts

**Notes:**
The 2040 Growth Concept reduces travel distances by 5.1%, increases residential density by 8.3%, and lowers the amount of infrastructure needed to build a dwelling unit by 7.1%.  This not only reduces GHGs, but also saves citizens money, both because households spend less money on transportation and because governments spend less money on infrastructure, lowering taxes over time.  Furthermore, Metro’s future long-term plans will build upon the already-efficient development fostered by the 2040 Growth Concept, and as residents come to see firsthand the fiscal, social, and health benefits of smart growth there will be increased support in the region for even bolder efforts.

## Reduced CO2 Emissions

- In between 2005 and 2035, the shorter commutes created by the 2040 Growth Concept will prevent an average of 97,746 metric tons of CO2 from entering the atmosphere each year.  **We would have to plant Douglas Fir forests over 27% of the area inside the UGB to sequester that much carbon.**

**Notes:**
I calculated this using coefficients from the EPA, and I reproduced my calculations below in case you get any wonky questions from the audience on this one.  You may want to emphasize that these are only the reductions from shorter commutes, which are not a majority of all trips, and that the calculations use extremely optimistic projections for future fuel efficiency—33 mpg—which produces lower estimates about the total amount of CO2 sequestered.

2040 lowers commutes by half a mile, and the average commuter makes 620 trips to work and back a year, for a total of 310 less miles driven per worker.  The DRC calculates that the amount of jobs in the region in 2020 (the midpoint year between 2005 and 2035) will be 1.4 million, so the region’s commuters will drive 366.5 an average of million miles less per year.  Assuming a very optimistic average fuel efficiency of 33 mpg in 2020, that’s 11 million fewer gallons of gas per year, or since each gallon of gas burned produces 19.4 pounds of carbon, yielding reductions of 215.5 million lbs. CO2 per year, or 97,946 MT.  An acre of Doug Firs absorbs 1.4 MT per year, so it would take 70,000 acres of forest to absorb that much carbon, and the total area in the UGB is 254,000 square miles.

## Rex Burkholder

- Metro Councilor
- Portland, Oregon
- Burkholderr@metro.dst.or.us