Transportation Resilience, planning land use and mobility management for unpredictable events
Briefing
paper
contribu0ng
to
“Urban
Resilience
:
what
can
Urban
Governance
contribute
?”
superintended
by
Michaela
Hordijk,
Isa
Baud
Wawira
Njoka Emmanuel
Raoult 25/03/2009 - page 1
Introduction Clues of change : a connected economy and car dependency In
our
contemporary
society
based
on
informa0on
and
communica0on
technologies
(ICT),
individuals
are
s0ll
moving
more
and
more,
and
transporta0on
has
become
a
great
part
of
our
lives,
especially
as
the
number
of
megaci0es
increases.
The
globalisa0on
of
the
economy,
especially
outsourcing
or
goods
exporta0ons,
shows
how
companies
rely
on
the
transporta0on
system
globally
but
also
locally.
People
in
the
ci0es
are
coming
from
distant
places,
oNen
far
suburbs,
to
work
or
to
use
recrea0onal
facili0es.
The
lack
of
proper
transporta0on
services
in
these
giant
ci0es
in
turn
makes
urban
areas
vulnerable
to
shocks
in
the
system,
reducing
the
city’s
resilience.
The
transporta0on
system
is
then
a
basic
infrastructure
for
a
dynamic
city
and
has
to
be
protected
from
hazards
like
riots,
strikes,
network
accident,
oil
shortage,
earthquake,
storms
or
floods.
Due
to
the
past
50
years
of
planning,
the
car
dependency
is
threatening
the
transporta0on
system
resilience
by
increasing
isola0on
and
vulnerability
of
people
not
owning
a
car
and
by
crea0ng
huge
conges0on,
which
has
proved
to
be
dangerous
during
the
Rita
hurricane
for
example.
Delhi
(India)
is
inves0ng
in
an
electric
rail
system
which
will
enable
60%
of
the
city
to
be
within
15
minutes
walking
distance
from
a
sta0on
(Newman,
2009),
to
enhance
accessibility.
This
shows
the
shiN
in
transporta0on
policies
in
order
to
promote
its
resilience
by
improving
the
public
transport,
road
usages
and
eventually
reducing
car
reliance.
This
would
also
reduce
the
energy
dependence
in
terms
of
fossil
fuel.
Doing
so,
the
environmental
footprint
of
the
system
will
decrease
and
help
reduce
vulnerability
to
climate
change
hazards
at
a
global
scale.
Transportation Resilience definition from articles Foster
says
that
the
Resilience
in
an
urban
transport
context
could
be
described
as
“the
capacity
to
absorb
shocks
gracefully”
(Foster,
1993).
From
this
cita0on
and
according
to
Bertolini,
we
will
understand
Transporta0on
Resilience
as
resilience
(capacity
to
absorb
shocks)
and
adaptability
(capacity
of
change,
facing
the
unpredictable
even). According
to
Murray‐Tuite’s
ar0cle
(Murray‐Tuite,
2006),
the
transporta0on
resilience
can
be
understood
through
ten
dimensions:
mul0ple
components
serve
the
same
func0on • Redundancy
:
components
are
func0onally
different
example:
mul0plicity
of
road
• Diversity:
use
(Newman,2009)
input/output
ra0o
op0misa0on • Efficiency
:
• Autonomous
components:
ability
to
operate
separately
ability
to
withstand
an
event • Strength
:
Collabora0on
:
informa0on
and
resources
shared
among
components •
flexible
system,
capable
of
learning
from
past
experiences • Adaptability:
reach
a
chosen
des0na0on
with
an
acceptable
level
of
service • Mobility
:
expose
less
users
to
hazards • Safety
:
Ability
to
recover
quickly:
level
of
service
restored
quickly •
25/03/2009 - page 2
Another
ar0cle
links
the
transport
resilience
to
our
inability
to
predict
future
and
addi0onally
defines
it
by
these
fields
(Online
TDM
Encyclopaedia,
2008)
: • The
connec0vity
of
the
system • Improvising Catering
for
vulnerable
people • • resource
management,
priori0zing • Evalua0on,
feedback
and
early
detec0on • mobility
• Timeliness This
mobility
is
underlined
as
seen
as
the
community’s
overall
resilience
and
is
then
a
key
element
of
transporta0on
resilience. Addi0onally,
when
evalua0ng
transport
resilience
several
levels
could
be
iden0fied: everyday
day
decisions
we
make
on
the
mode
of
transport
to
use. • Individual
level:
basic
accessibility
and
choices
of
transport
to
members
of
a
community • Community
:
• Infrastructure
design
:
leaving
open
possibili0es
for
future
transport
alterna0ves how
are
funds
priori0sed
and
for
what
purpose. • Economic
level:
transporta0on
system
can
meet
long‐term
economic,
social
and
• Strategic
level:
environmental
goals
under
a
wide
range
of
unpredictable
future
condi0ons. This
last
strategic
level
is
developed
in
the
ar0cle
about
Amsterdam
(Bertolini,
2005)
the
author
characterises
an
urban
transport
system
as
evolu0onary
and
complex
as
it
alternates
quan0ta0ve
and
qualita0ve
changes,
it
is
path
dependent,
it
can
have
unpredictable
outcomes
during
change
phases
even
if
policies
can
strongly
influence
them.
Resilience
and
adaptability
have
then
to
be
increased
to
face
this
unpredictable
part,
by
proposing
a
specific
transporta0on
network
shape,
land
use
regula0on
or
mobility
management
measures.
*** This
paper
will
first
analyze
Transporta0on
Resilience
from
long
term
and
short
term
point
of
view.
This
will
give
us
an
overview.
Using
some
key
case
studies,
issues
and
outcomes
of
transporta0on
resilience
in
urban
areas
will
be
highlighted.
In
the
second
part,
we
will
propose
a
s e t
o f
m e a s u r e s
t o
e n h a n c e
t h e
Transporta0on
Resilience
by
Decision
Making
guidelines
and
evalua0ng
‐
forecas0ng
tools.
25/03/2009 - page 3
Analysis Long term resilience Due
to
rising
social
resistance
and
financial
and
fiscal
constraints
on
infrastructure
expansion,
the
“predict
and
provide”
approach
is
no
longer
an
op0on
for
transporta0on
systems.
These
uncertain0es
could
be
understood
as
risks,
structural
uncertain;es
or
unknowables
(Bertolini,
2005).
These
2
last
uncertain0es
become
predominant
in
the
long
term,
as
the
system
increases
in
complexity.
Because
of
these
unpredictable
parameters,
it
is
virtually
impossible
to
forecast
correctly
changes
that
will
occur
in
the
transporta0on
field
within
20
years.
However,
Land
Use
and
Transport
Interac0on
(LUTI)
models
and
Transporta0on
Planning
Models
(TPM)
will
be
discussed
later
as
forecas0ng
solu0ons
to
help
decisions
makers. Bertolini
proposes
the
evolu;onary
approach
t o
h e l p
c r e a t e
m e t h o d s
f o r
u r b a n
transporta0on
planning
to
improve
resilience.
Let’s
review
why
the
transporta0on
system
is
an
evolu0onary
system
and
then
how
resilience
policies
are
important
to
design
a
beier
transporta0on
system.
An
evolu0onary
approach
to
resilience
recognizes
the
complexity
of
social
systems
and
their
interdependency.
The
evolu0onary
economics
theory
is
then
quite
interes0ng
here,
as
firms
use
both
a
rou;ne,
that
is
redundant
organiza0on,
and
a
research
of
alterna;ve
methods
to
create
or
sell
new
products
and
services.
The
selec;on
environment
is
supposed
to
choose
the
most
efficient
solu0on,
rou0ne
or
alterna0ve.
This
could
be
seen
as
analogue
to
a
resilient
system,
which
consists
in
func0oning
in
the
face
of
changes,
and
to
adaptability,
which
defines
the
system's
capacity
to
change
itself
on
its
own.
“Because
of
this,
urban
transporta0on
policies
need
to
focus
on
enhancing
the
resilience
and
the
adaptability
of
the
system”
(Bertolini,
2005).
The
author
illustrates
these
hypothesis
by
analysing
the
post‐war
era
in
Amsterdam.
The
following
are
the
three
main
features
of
these
hypothesis. Quantitative change period and transition qualitative period The
qualita0ve
period
is
linked
to
the
nature
of
the
development
and
not
to
its
amount.
These
transi0ons
can
have
different
origins: • Social‐demographic
transi0ons:
the
decline
then
rise
of
the
popula0on
in
Amsterdam
city
centre. • Economic
transi0on
:
from
an
industry
economy
to
a
services
based
economy • Land
use
policy
transi0on
:
planning
of
the
historic
centre,
development
failure
of
a
misplaced
Central
Business
Centre,
suburbs
growth
and
appari0on
of
new
city
centers • Transport
transi0on
:
from
a
motor‐way
policy
to
accessible
local
alterna0ves Path dependency Social
resistance
and
market
preferences
can
help
preserving
historical
centers
or
building
new
or
renewed
urban
areas.
Several
land
reserva0ons
since
the
1900's
lead
to
new
transporta0on
system
alterna0ves
in
Amsterdam.
This
new
transports
impacted
the
global
urban
form.
Finally,
a
Na0onal
infrastructure
plan
also
influenced
the
transporta0on
planning
in
this
city.
This
different
elements
show
the
historical
background
and
local
culture
and
habits
are
25/03/2009 - page 4
highly
responsible
of
the
transporta0on
present
and
future
status. Unpredictability The
youth
community
which
fought
for
the
conserva0on
of
the
historic
urban
centre
in
the
1960's
and
economic
turbulence
eras
helped
planners
to
propose
qualita0ve
changes
in
Amsterdam.
The
conserva0on
of
the
historical
centre
finally
drove
the
emergence
of
tourism
and
leisure
economy,
to
the
crea0on
of
new
urban
development
areas
leading
to
new
city
centers.
These
great
outcomes
from
the
past
events
were
quite
unpredictable
at
the
0me
things
were
planned.
*** Planners
contributed
to
this
change
in
an
other
way:
by
freezing
the
main
urban
frame,
they
have
given
the
real
estate
market
the
freedom
of
reshaping
it
at
the
micro
level.
This
shows
how
we
can
imply
deep
changes
without
heavy
infra‐structural
changes.
However,
some
outcomes
are
s0ll
partly
unpredictable
and
highlight
the
need
of
resilience
and
adaptability
policies. The power of policy makers The
role
of
planners
and
relevant
technical
staff
in
urban
transport
planning
is
important.
The
varia0on
in
private
transport
and
fuel
usage
of
84
ci0es
studied
was
largely
due
to
physical
planning
decisions
made
by
those
ci0es
(Peter
Newman,
2009).
Planners
ability
to
facilitate
resilience
goals
should
be
used
and
improved.
There
needs
to
be
a
shiN
in
the
percep0on
of
their
role
from
being
a
facility
developer’s
to
a
community
developer’s
(Peter
Newman,
2009).
This
could
facilitate
the
par0cipa0on
of
the
Case
study
:
transporta0on
planning
processes
in
the
post‐war
Amsterdam The
major
turn
in
transporta0on
planning
is
located
between
1970‘s
and
the
1990‘s.
ANer
the
oil
crisis,
Amsterdam
is
experiencing
a
lost
of
20%
of
its
popula0on.
At
the
same
moment,
a
growing
suburbaniza0on
process
arise
and
the
highway
na0onal
plan
is
incremented.
Locally,
a
complex
debate
appeared
concerning
the
underground
and the infrastructure in the Amsterdam railway
and
urban
highways
projects.
Changes in the built-up area region, 1967 - 2001 This
unpredictable
opposi0on
for
the
transi0on
to
a
services
economy,
despite
preserva0on
of
the
historical
centre
lead
the
planners
effort
to
move
the
offices
at
the
IJ
urban
transporta0on
planners
to
redesign
their
banks,
these
were
sepng
up
in
the
south
of
the
projects.
In
1975,
a
local
circula0on
plan
set
city,
next
to
the
airport.
The
unexpected
the
first
elements
of
transporta0on
resilience,
outcome
was
the
crea0on
of
a
polycentric
city,
like
coarsening
the
network
and
building
with
many
centre
areas.
However,
the
bicycle
lanes. planners’
policy
on
land
use
also
helped
in
The
outcomes
of
this
new
transport
structure
plan,
like
a
raise
of
bike
use
and
tourism
economy,
came
much
later.
During
this
era
of
building
transporta0on
resilience
as
it
favored
micro
city
renewal
and
did
not
disturb
much
the
city’s
transporta0on
system.
25/03/2009 - page 5
community
in
transport
planning
in
the
early
stages
a
project.
Planners
and
policy
makers
can
benefit
from
this
informa0on
enabling
them
to
plan
from
par0cular
problems,
for
instance
isolated
areas,
while
keeping
their
general
plan
in
focus.
Furthermore,
the
urban
community
will
have
more
ownership
of
the
environment
they
live
in
and
this
could
help
in
future
maintenance
of
the
services
provided.
Addi0onally,
urban
community
par0cipa0on
has
the
possibility
of
fostering
cohesion
amongst
individuals
in
the
urban
area.
None
cohesive
communi0es
are
a
vulnerability
to
the
urban
area
and
are
prone
to
violence
and
internal
wars
amongst
its
members.
The
density
and
form
of
the
urban
area
needs
to
be
considered
when
planning
for
future
transports.
High
density
areas
are
easier
to
plan
mobility
around
public
transport,
pedestrian
and
cycling
paths.
This
is
also
feasible
for
low
density
areas
focused
along
corridors.
However,
for
low
density
areas
without
this
quality
(focused
along
corridors)
public
transport
cannot
compete
with
private
cars
as
a
means
of
mobility
(Peter
Newman,
2009).
The
form
of
the
urban
area
needs
to
be
seen
as
a
“public
space”
(Peter
Newman,
2009)
with
streets
as
the
most
social
part.
Streets
are
where
most
face
to
face
contact
in
urban
areas
takes
place.
This
is
a
hint
that
planners
need
to
take
a
border
picture
when
planning
for
transport.
There
is
a
tendency
for
planning
to
be
road
focused
mostly
designing
for
road
capacity
while
beau0fica0on
(incorpora0on
of
tree
plan0ng),
aesthe0cs
and
inclusions
of
streets
on
the
periphery
is
given
to
other
bodies.
Urban
transport
policy
needs
to
move
from
car
planning
to
people
planning.
The
concept
of
people
mobility
is
important.
Here
planners
and
policy
makers
alike
could
look
at
the
how
to
move
people
faster
and
safer
from
des0na0on
to
des0na0on.
This
would
bring
the
importance
of
public
transport
into
focus;
the
example
of
Delhi
given
earlier.
Excluded
or
isolated
urban
areas
area
a
source
of
vulnerabili0es
for
the
city.
In
0me
of
disaster
such
as
the
Hurricane
Katrina
there
were
logis0cal
problems
when
trying
to
evacuate
people
in
these
areas.
In
the
case
of
hurricane
Rita
evacua0on
was
made
worse
by
the
car
dependence
of
the
city.
Since
most
people
are
using
private
transport,
public
transport
is
leN
to
service
a
few
who
tend
to
live
on
the
isolated
areas
of
the
city
and
thus
it
makes
it
hard
for
to
jus0fy
the
public
service,
from
and
economic
view
point.
As
a
result
the
transport
networks
in
these
areas
were
not
well
developed
which
led
to
the
logis0cal
problems
of
evacua0on.
Apart
from
providing
good
transport,
crea0ng
accessibility
to
address
vulnerable
people
is
another
cri0cal
factor
for
considera0on.
Short term resilience As
men0oned
previously,
the
term
of
risk
has
to
be
linked
to
Short
Term
Resilience.
Transport
Demand
Management
(TDM
encyclopaedia,
2008)
is
an
interes0ng
tool
to
assess
the
transport
planning
effects
on
short
term
resilience.
Using
this
tool
transport
can
be
evaluated
at
several
levels. The
individual
level
TDM
accesses
the
everyday
day
decisions
urbani0es
make
on
the
mode
of
transport
to
use
or
if
they
have
access
to
transport
to
choose
from.
The
cri0cal
choice
here
is
between
public
and
private
transport
and
the
op0ons
within
the
variety
for
public
services
provided.
When
making
a
decision
between
private
and
public
transport
individuals
look
to
the
accessibility,
the
/me
it
takes
to
use
public
means,
as
opposed
to
private
transport,
and
the
quality
of
the
public
service. The
community
level
refers
to
the
basic
accessibility
of
transport
to
members
of
a
community,
the
transporta0on
choices
they
25/03/2009 - page 6
have
and
how
it
affects
their
lives
and
the
effect
of
their
collec/ve
decisions.
The
design
level
evaluates
if
the
urban
design
meets
current
needs
leaving
enough
manoeuvrability
for
future
designs.
The
strategic
level
of
the
transporta0on
system
is
assessed
on
its
poten0al
in
mee0ng
long‐ term
economic,
social
and
environmental
goals
under
a
wide
range
of
unpredictable
future
condi0ons
or
risks. Lastly,
the
economic
level
looks
at
priori0sa0on
and
purpose
of
funds
dedicated
to
transport.
The
TDM
concept
emphasises
the
need
to
generalise
risk
in
order
to
find
categories
of
vulnerabili0es
in
the
system
as
done
above.
An
important
aspect
of
TDM
is
con/ngency‐ based
planning.
It
is
a
planning
process
that
develops
solu0ons
on
a
needs
basis
and
enables
beier
change
over
0me
in
response
to
future
needs.
The
steps
in
evalua0ng
transport
resilience
using
this
method
include; • Define
the
system;
here
planners
or
policy
makers
can
define
what
type
of
density
the
urban
area
is
and
from
the
device
suitable
approaches
to
service
provision.
• Next
iden0fy
cri0cal
func0ons
of
the
transport
system
such
as
who
it
is
catering
for. The
vulnerabili0es
of
the
urban
• transport
are
also
assessed.
These
may
be
unique
for
each
urban
locus
while
others
as
global
or
regional
in
nature. • Finally,
ways
to
increase
resilience
and
security
are
iden0fied
aNer
evalua0ng
the
informa0on
in
the
previous
steps.
Case
study
Katrina
and
Rita
was
due
to
lack
of
transporta0on
and
unwillingness
to
leave
homes
and
property
and
lack
outbound
roadway
capacity.
This
showed
the
officials
and
planners
are
not
in
touch
with
the
community
they
serve
and
their
needs.
It
would
be
interes0ng
to
note
the
changes
that
the
city
will
make
to
correct
this
serious
laps
in
planning
for
the
vulnerable
and
needy.
Katrina
hit
the
Gulf
Coast
August
29th
2005,
which
lead
to
infrastructure
damage,
flooding,
civil
disorder,
fires,
toxic
chemical
dispersion,
disease
risk
and
thousands
of
people
isolated
without
food
or
medical
care.
The
evacua0on
plan
mainly
focused
on
users
with
motor
vehicles.
The
plan
involved
using
all
lanes
on
major
highways
to
accommodate
outbound
vehicle
traffic.
This
was
well
thought
out
and
published
(Wolshon,
2002).
Although
many
motorists
were
able
to
flee
the
city,
conges0on
resulted
in
very
slow
traffic
speeds
and
some
cars
run
out
of
fuel
or
developed
mechanical
problems.
However
no
effec0ve
plan
was
made
for
those
who
had
no
cars
and
were
public
transport
dependent
or
in
isolated
areas.
The
system
was
based
on
car
dependence
and
thus
only
planed
for
car
mobility.
Of
the
1.4
million
people
in
the
high‐ threat
areas,
it
was
assumed
only
approximately
6 0 %
o f
t h e
popula0on
will
want
or
be
able
to
leave
the
city.
T h e
r e a s o n s
were
numerous,
h o w e v e r
t h e
primary
reason
Hurricane
Rita
hit
the
Coast
September
24th
2005
and
had
the
opposite
problem.
Most
residents
of
Huston
fled
this
danger
zones
using
their
own
cars.
This
led
to
a
massive
conges0on
problem.
The
city
planners
did
not
make
use
of
the
high‐occupancy‐ vehicle
lanes
and
inbound
lanes
of
highways
un0l
very
late.
Harris
County
emergency
management
coordinator
Frank
E.
Gu0errez
explained
their
evacua0on
models
envisioned
0.8
to
1.2
million
people
but
more
than
2.5
million
fled
Rita.
This
is
only
a
small
part
of
what
can
go
wrong
when
a
city
is
not
planned
for
every
ci0zen
to
face
possible
threats
a n d
l a c k
o f
accoun0ng
for
the
vulnerable
people.
25/03/2009 - page 7
Resilience
for
transporta0on
is
basically
defined
as
the
capacity
to
adapt
to
hazard
in
order
to
“maintain
an
acceptable
level
of
service”.
The
TDM
focuses
on
4
of
the
10
dimensions
proposed
to
define
Transporta0on
Resilience: • mobility • safety
• adaptability • ability
to
recover
quickly Murray‐Tuite’s
ar0cle
proposes
to
measure
resilience
and
these
4
fields
through
the
impact
of
traffic
assignment. The
author
reviews
measurements
of
resilience,
especially
for
infrastructures
like
water,
communica0ons
or
electricity
grid.
C o n c e r n i n g
t ra n s p o r t a 0 o n
re s i l i e n c e
quan0fica0on,
the
ar0cle
uses
travel
0me
losses
and
capacity
varia0ons. The
evalua0on
of
the
resilience
quality
is
based
on
the
comparison
of
two
scenarios
:
the
System
Op0mum,
which
minimizes
travel
0me
for
all
vehicles,
and
the
User
Equilibrium,
which
minimize
travel
0me
for
individuals.
This
forecast
model
is
based
on
the
graph
theory,
and
assigns
capaci0es
and
speed
limits
parameters
as
arc
parameters
and
vehicle
flows
to
nodes
(see
page
9
of
this
ar0cle). However,
the
final
results
table
does
not
show
an
advantage
for
one
or
an
other
scenario
when
lis0ng
the
evalua0on
criterions.
This
could
show
then
the
importance
of
overall
planning
versus
local
traffic
assignments
to
increase
transporta0on
resilience.
Solutions Proposing land use policy, mobility management and community actions Here
are
some
ideas
that
policy
makers
and
planners
can
do
to
increase
their
resilience; Land use policy • The
popula0on
density
of
the
urban
area
should
be
a
cri0cal
factor
in
designing
transporta0on
systems. Mobility Management • Tr a n s i t
t r a n s p o r t a 0 o n
s y s t e m s
especially
in
high
density
ci0es
should
be
addressed.
This
can
prove
very
useful
in
0mes
of
disasters
where
mass
people
mobility
from
areas
of
disaster
is
needed. • Timeliness
and
capacity
of
public
transport
is
another
cri0cal
factor
that
can
influence
the
decisions
individuals
make
when
choosing
between
public
and
private
transport.
• The
basic
accessibility
and
quality
of
the
public
transport
should
be
considered
in
planning. • Vulnerable
and
disabled
people
need
to
be
included.
They
tend
to
be
a
minority
in
the
popula0on
who
are
not
catered
for
in
the
design
and
accessibility
of
public
transport. Community planning • Planners
need
to
be
familiar
with
needs
of
the
people
they
are
providing
the
service
for.
Community
outreach
programmes
can
play
a
vital
role
here.
• Planners
and
policy
makers
need
to
listen
to
the
people
they
are
planning
for.
Strategic Planning • Access
to
informa0on
and
how
it
is
communicated
from
planners
to
the
urban
inhabitants
is
vital
especially
in
0mes
of
disaster.
• Development
of
effec0ve
ways
of
m a i n t a i n i n g
i n f o r m a 0 o n
a n d
communica0on
systems
amongst
the
various
actors
(Litman,
2006). • Cross‐train
staff
to
perform
cri0cal
25/03/2009 - page 8
management
and
repair
services
(Litman,
2006).
• ‘Op0miza0on’
as
a
goal
of
transport
planning
should
not
overcome
the
need
for
flexibility
and
adap0ve
capacity
of
the
system.
Seeking
op0miza0on
might
actually
erode
future
resilience
:
technology
op0misa0on
could
be
dangerous
as
technology
could
become
obsolete.
Land
use
op0misa0on
does
n o t
l e a v e
r o o m
f o r
a n y
n e w
transporta0on
alterna0ves.
Evaluate and forecast In
order
to
decide
if
a
policy
decision
made
above
is
“good”,
planners
have
at
their
disposal
some
quan0ta0ve
measures
and
forecas0ng
tools.
These
help
the
policy
maker
but
should
not
be
taken
as
an
exact
truth
or
means
to
an
end.
Quan0ta0ve
surveys
can
be
done
but
Resilience
issues
need
to
be
qualita0ve. Measures As
shown
in
one
ar0cle
[note
:
TDM
ar0cle],
one
of
the
easiest
way
to
measure
resilience
is
to
s0ck
a
measurement
to
each
dimension
which
characterises
the
transporta0on
resilience
: • Diversity
:
survey
how
many
kilometres
of
road
are
public
space
share
or
dedicated
to
cars,
bikes,
trains,
pedestrians... • redundancy
and
connec0vity
:
measure
the
quality
and
capacity
and
the
numbers
of
road
to
link
the
major
city
spots. • strength
:
meet
label
requirements
about
extreme
condi0ons
for
facili0es • adaptability
:
assess
the
system’s
ability
to
iden0fy
and
forecast
problems
(see
Morlok
and
Chang,
2004) • mobility
:
trip
0me,
level
of
service
(comfort,
clear
informa0on...) • safety
:
map,
using
Geographical
Informa0on
System
(GIS),
risk
areas
(floods,
classified
industrial
facility...) • ability
to
recover
quickly
:
stocks
of
buses,
of
fuel
;
quality
of
technical
procedures
and
staff
availability • social
accessibility
warranted
:
characterise
the
performance
of
the
local
or
state
program
which
has
to
insure
an
equal
access
to
resilient
networks • e v a l u a t e
t h e
s e t
o f
m e a n s
t o
communicate
on
long
and
short
term
basis
with
users. • Test
the
relevance
of
priori0sing
methods
for
transporta0on
system
resources As
a
star0ng
point
for
urban
planners,
an
example
of
transporta0on
indicators
can
be
found
at
www.whistler2020.ca,
using
the
“2020
Explorer”
tool. Forecasting transportation resilience programs For
short
term
concerns,
resilience
parameters
could
be
implemented
into
a
traffic
genera0on
model,
as
shown
in
the
Murray‐Tuite
ar0cle.
transportationʼs resilience evaluation : forecasting evacuation of a flooded area using a graph model
This
can
help
to
map
resilience
around
the
city.
This
models
are
based
on
the
“graphs
theory”
and
resilience
could
be
then
understood
as
a
set
of
different
constraints
on
arcs
or
nodes. This
will
not
be
an
exact,
precise
picture
of
what
could
happen
but
can
help
iden0fying
poten0al
hot
spots
and
conges0on
roads.
25/03/2009 - page 9
Then
forecas0ng
long
term
resilience
measures
is
much
more
difficult,
as
LUTI
models
men0oned
by
Luca
Bertolini
illustrate.
These
models
have
to
get
the
social
phenomena
and
very
complex
rela0ons.
The
basic
func0oning
scheme
of
the
“UrbanSim”
soNware
shows
this
difficulty
to
catch
long
term
outcomes...
“UrbanSim” LUTI model components and data flow
Conclusion and ideas Resilience
is
a
condi0on
for
adaptability.
These
two
elements
compose
the
Transporta0on
Resilience.
This
kind
of
resilience
relies
on
the
morphology
of
the
transport
system
frame
(radial/tangent,
road/rail)
which
has
to
move
from
monocentric
to
polycentric
city
changes.
Incremental
models
(history
of
the
city
had
influenced
the
planning)
and
ra0onal
models
(planning
by
forecas0ng
what
decision
imply
as
outcomes)
are
essen0al
issues
to
be
addressed
by
planners. The
next
goal
for
planners
who
want
to
increase
resilience
would
be
to
capture
the
transi0on
process
and
integrate
it
to
forecast
models.
According
to
Christensen
(Christensen,
1985),
this
involves
a
balance
between
the
over
looked
goals
and
the
means
or
technologies
to
achieve
them.
Then
the
system
can
gain
resilience
by
robust
measures
and
adaptability
by
keeping
op0ons
opened,
especially
for
technology
solu0ons.
However,
risk
taking
(e.g.
introducing
a
new
technology)
could
be
seen
as
a
leadership
ac0on
(From
the
poli0cal
point
of
view)
but
should
be
s0ll
kept
only
as
a
policy
experiment.
Following
the
spirit
of
the
Bruntland's
sustainability
report,
the
ques0on
is
“how
can
we
design
land
use
and
transport
policies
which
keep
open
mobility
choices
for
next
genera0ons
?
(Bertolini,
2005).
Currently,
Indian
Tata
company
is
launching
the
cheap
car
c a l l e d
N a n o
i n
M u m b a i
( B B B
n e w s ,
23/03/2009).
The
divergent
policies
about
mobility
are
highlighted
here
in
India
:
the
introduc0on
of
the
Nano
aims
to
increase
overall
car
ownership
in
already
crowded
ci0es
while
planners
are
promo0ng
mass
transit
in
Delhi.
Planners
and
the
private
sector
should
work
together
to
meet
the
long‐term
urban
communi0es
well
being...
and
resilience.
25/03/2009 - page 10
References BBC
news,
Is
the
Nano
good
for
India?,
(march
23,
2009),
hip://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/ thread.jspa?forumID=6250&edi0on=2&il=20090324161012 Edward
K.
Morlok
,
David
J.
Chang
(march
2004)
Measuring
capacity
flexibility
of
a
transporta0on
system,
Elsevier
:
Transporta0on
Research
Part
A
38
(2004)
405–420 K
S
Christensen,
1985,
``Coping
with
uncertainty
in
planning''
Journal
of
the
American
Planning
Associa0on
51
63
‐
73 Pamela
M.
Murray‐Tuite
(2006)
A
COMPARISON
OF
TRANSPORTATION
NETWORK
RESILIENCE
UNDER
SIMULATED
SYSTEM
OPTIMUM
AND
USER
EQUILIBRIUM
CONDITIONS,
page
1398,
Abstract
paragraph
one
line Peter
Newman
(March
12th
2009)
Island
press;
Solu0ons
that
inspire
change:
eco‐compass
blog,
Peter
Newman’s
Resilient
Ci0es:
The
Sustainable
Transport
City
[online]
Available
at:
hip:// blog.islandpress.org/325/peter‐newmans‐resilient‐ci0es‐the‐sustainable‐transport‐city [Accessed
20
March
2009] Todd
Litman
(April
13th
2006)
Lessons
From
Katrina
and
Rita:
What
Major
Disasters
Can
Teach
Transporta0on
Planners
[Online]
Available
at:
hip://www.vtpi.org/katrina.pdf
[Accessed
19
March
2009] Victoria
transport
policy
ins/tute
(Updated
22
July
2008),
Online
TDM
Encyclopaedia,
Evalua0ng
Transporta0on
Resilience;
Evalua0ng
the
Transporta0on
System’s
Ability
to
Accommodate
Diverse,
Variable
and
Unexpected
Demands
with
Minimal
Risk
[online]
Available
at:
hip://www.vtpi.org/ tdm/tdm88.htm
[Accessed
23
March
2009]
25/03/2009 - page 11
