FUTURE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LONG- AND SHORT-RANGE URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

During the last decade the urban transportation planning process has been forced to respond to new issues and policy questions within a political environment that is undergoing rapid change. The process is being compelled, through crisis and through federal mandate, to deal with both short-range (1 to 5 years) issues and long-range (20 years and beyond) issues. There is some concern about the validity of long-range planning activities that rely so heavily on the realization of an end-state and that cannot effectively cope with a dynamic policy environment. The imposition of new planning regulations in 1975, jointly written by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) gives rise to further concern. These regulations, which require a strong short-range planning element, have led the planning profession to inquire about the effects the shift in planning procedures will have on long-range urban transportation planning. What will planning agencies see as the relationship between the short-range Transportation Systems Management (TSM) element and the staged long-range Transportation Improvement Program? Will long-range planning survive at all? Finally, how will the change in emphasis affect the organization, policies, and procedures of each individual planning agency and its relationship with other agencies? The imperative need to plan over lengthy time horizons for urban transportation systems is because of the fact that major systems are generally capital intensive and have useful lives lasting well beyond the planning horizon. It follows that large public investments in such systems should be based on a full understanding of the anticipated levels of performance, cost, and impacts. Because of uncertainty inherent in predicting future costs, benefits, and revenues, however, and because of necessary simplifications made to arrive at future estimates, there can be no assurance that these investments are the most efficient.