Todd Litman

@toddlitman.bsky.social

594 Followers 12 Following

I am a transport and land use policy analyst. I love doing research about ways to make communities healthier, wealthier and wiser at the Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org)

Since 1960, roadway spending per vehicle-mile declined by half and user revenues declined by two-thirds, so user fees now only fund about half of roadway spending. “Roadway Costs, User Revenues and Cost Recovery Trends” (www.vtpi.org/rcrt.pdf)
The most erotic human organ is our feet! The key to successful romance is a walkable neighborhood. Who would have thought? That is the conclusion of new research, "Planning for Love: Urban Form and its Impacts on Modern Dating," by Hannah Kosoff, described in her recent masters thesis (doi.org/10.7916/aab5-vt02), and three Planetizen new blogs (https://tinyurl.com/ktmc6bnf). Kosoff found that walkability tends to improve romance. Specifically, people seeking romantic partners tend to be more successful and satisfied if they live in compact, walkable neighborhoods. They are more likely to meet potential partners in public spaces, more likely to find community events to meet new people, more likely to report that the design of their neighborhood encourages social interaction, while those who live in sprawled, auto-dependent areas are more likely to be dissatisfied with their opportunities to meet potential partners in person and use on-line dating more than optimal. She concludes, “The most romantically alive cities in the world were likely not designed with dating as their primary goal, what many of them seem to have prioritized was walkability, placemaking, and vibrant public life, and it is precisely those qualities that appear to create the conditions from which romantic connection can grow.” This is consistent with other research showing that non-auto travel results in more positive social interactions (see attached graph) and more compact, mixed walkable neighborhoods have more community cohesion and less isolation. I incorporated this research into my reports, "Planning for Quality of Life: Considering Community Cohesion and Related Social Goals" (https://vtpi.org/cohesion.pdf).
Better planning = health and happiness! My recent research, described in "Live Long and Prosper: Local Policies for Improving Children’s Health, Success and Happiness" (www.vtpi.org/llp.pdf) shows that the U.S. is inefficient at delivering happiness; residents in other countries achieve more happiness per dollar of income. The research suggests that this results from a combination of high living costs, longer working hours, poor health outcomes, inadequate physical activity and social isolation, all problems New Urbanism helps reduce. This is particularly important for moderate income families with children. Conventional child-raising advice reflects a consumerist perspective which assumes that children’s health, success and happiness require costly goods such as homes with private yards in desirable neighborhoods, family-size vehicles, childcare, healthcare, college savings, and sometimes private schooling. Suburban families are even expected to purchase cars for their teenagers. This assumes that family income is the most important factor affecting children’s wellbeing. For example, an internet search for “what does it cost to raise a child/family in America?” finds various estimates including the MIT Living Wage Calculator's $80,000 for a family to “get by,” and an Urban Institute report that estimates a family needs to earn at least $132,400 to be economically secure. This, of course, implies that most parents are economic failures and must work even harder to provide for their children. The report's economic analysis indicates that multifamily housing with unbundled parking in compact, multimodal neighborhoods can reduce housing and transportation costs 20-50%, providing savings that can allow parent to reduce their working hours, childcare costs and tax burdens, and qualify families for lower healthcare costs, greatly reducing the costs of raising healthy, happy and successful children.
Better planning = health and happiness! My recent research, described in "Live Long and Prosper: Local Policies for Improving Children’s Health, Success and Happiness" (www.vtpi.org/llp.pdf) shows that the U.S. is inefficient at delivering happiness; residents in other countries achieve more happiness per dollar of income. The research suggests that this results from a combination of high living costs, longer working hours, poor health outcomes, inadequate physical activity and social isolation, all problems New Urbanism helps reduce. This is particularly important for moderate income families with children. Conventional child-raising advice reflects a consumerist perspective which assumes that children’s health, success and happiness require costly goods such as homes with private yards in desirable neighborhoods, family-size vehicles, childcare, healthcare, college savings, and sometimes private schooling. Suburban families are even expected to purchase cars for their teenagers. This assumes that family income is the most important factor affecting children’s wellbeing. For example, an internet search for “what does it cost to raise a child/family in America?” finds various estimates including the MIT Living Wage Calculator's $80,000 for a family to “get by,” and an Urban Institute report that estimates a family needs to earn at least $132,400 to be economically secure. This, of course, implies that most parents are economic failures and must work even harder to provide for their children. The report's economic analysis indicates that multifamily housing with unbundled parking in compact, multimodal neighborhoods can reduce housing and transportation costs 20-50%, providing savings that can allow parent to reduce their working hours, childcare costs and tax burdens, and qualify families for lower healthcare costs, greatly reducing the costs of raising healthy, happy and successful children.
This figure adjusts UMR and GST congestion cost estimates to reflect realistic baseline speeds, exposure and time values, averages costs per capita rather than per motorist, and adds non-commute delays. This indicates that those studies significantly overestimate congestion costs. Congestion Costing Best Practices (www.vtpi.org/ITED_congestion.pdf). This report identifies best practices for evaluating congestion costs and congestion reduction strategies. It examines key costing factors including metrics (how congestion is measured), baseline speeds, traffic data accuracy, congestion exposure, the treatment of off-peak speed changes, travel time valuation, accessibility analysis, additional impacts (fuel, crash and emission costs, plus walkability and economic development), congestion dynamics, social equity impacts, and research standards. It discusses how these factors influence cost estimates and describes best practices based on expert recommendations. It identifies common congestion cost study biases and discusses their impacts. This report is more comprehensive and current than most previous studies.
Governments only spend about $100 annually on sidewalks and bikeways. Public transit operating subsidies are small, although the government is currently making large investments in urban transit projects. Roads receive the most public spending: governments spend about $1,000 annually per capita on roads of which only $300 are funded by user fees.
My new research, summarized in the "Congestion Costing Research Slideshow: New Insights and Better Solutions" (https://vtpi.org/ccrs.pdf ) and detailed technical reports shows that most studies studies greatly exaggerate congestion costs and roadway expansion benefits. However, I don't want to dismiss these costs. I personally dislike driving in congestion and am frustrated when buses are delayed. This research identifies efficient, fair and effective solutions. If you dislike congestion, your best solution is to live in a small city, or in a compact, multimodal urban neighborhood where you can minimize urban-peak driving. Central neighborhood residents spend about half as much time commuting as workers in auto-dependent, urban fringe locations, as illustrated in the Commute Duration Dashboard map below. This is particularly true for people with caregiving responsibilities who would need to spend time chauffeuring non-drivers if they live in an auto-dependent, sprawled areas. Most congestion cost studies only compare urban regions rather than neighborhoods, so they provide no practical guidance for choosing a home or lifestyle that minimizes congestion exposure. This research (https://www.vtpi.org/cong_relief.pdf) indicates that multimodal planning, TDM incentives, and Smart Growth strategies can quickly and efficiently reduce congestion and provide other benefits. Their impacts tend to be synergistic; they become more effective if applied together. Roadways should not be expanded until all low-cost, high-benefit solutions have been fully implemented. Current evaluation practices, which only measure impacts on motorists, overlook the congestion costs avoided when travellers use non-auto modes, which tends to undervalue the quickest, cheapest and most beneficial congestion solutions. I'm tired of motorists complaining about traffic congestion; they are responsible for it. What do you think?
Here is information from my latest report: "Congestion Costing Critique: Critical Evaluation of Traffic Congestion Costing Studies" (www.vtpi.org/UMR_critique.pdf) The graph below compares Urban Mobility Report (UMR) and Global Traffic Scorecard (GTS) estimates with results using best practices. The “realistic” estimates reflect the analysis methods recommended by many experts which indicate that delay cost estimates are typically 4-8 times higher than deadweight loss cost estimates. Of course, congestion costs vary widely depending on individuals and trips. Some motorists would happily pay thousands of dollars in additional annual taxes to reduce congestion in their community, and many would happily pay tolls to avoid congestion on some trips, but these are exceptions; evidence indicates that for most trips motorists would rather save money than small amounts of travel time.
Low fuel prices are economically harmful overall; per capita economic productivity tends to increase with fuel prices, as illustrated here, because more expensive fuel increases transportation system efficiency. “The Mobility-Productivity Paradox” (www.vtpi.org/ITED_paradox.pdf). These issues are discussed in my report, “Appropriate Response to Rising Fuel Prices” “Appropriate Response to Rising Fuel Prices” (www.vtpi.org/fuelprice.pdf), Professor David Levinson’s recent blog, “Transport Solutions to the Energy Crisis” (https://transportist.org/2026/03/30/transport-solutions-to-the-energy-crisis) and a report I co-wrote for the New Zealand Transportation Agency a few years ago, “Managing Transport Challenges When Oil Prices Rise (www.nzta.govt.nz/assets/resources/research/reports/357/docs/357.pdf).
Graph from "Live Long and Prosper" (www.vtpi.org/llp.pdf) shows a negative relationship between life satisfaction and work hours. Americans have low satisfaction relative to income; we work more than optimal.
HELP LAUNCH THE PUBLIC TRANSIT ALLIANCE of BC! We’re excited to announce the Public Transit Alliance of BC (https://transitalliancebc.ca), a new coalition of advocacy groups to build better public transportation for everyone in British Columbia. The Alliance envisions a British Columbia where everyone can get where they need to go safely, reliably, affordably, and accessibly, with care, comfort, and connection. Join our launch event to hear from speakers, learn about the Alliance's goals, and be part of this determined new chapter for transportation equity in BC. You will also get a first look at our inaugural campaign — find out how your voice, skills, experience, and networks can help. Please help spread the word - share this invitation with your networks. We're looking for allies, advocates, and amplifiers at every level. Register: https://westcoastclimateaction.ca/launch-public-transit-alliance-bc-register
Montreal proves that North American cities can become affordable by encouraging middle-density infill. Its neighborhoods are compact, mixed and multimodal, making it easy to live car-free. This graph compares average asking rents for two-bedroom apartments in Canadian cities converted to U.S. dollars (data from https://lnkd.in/gWa7HR35). In Montreal, half of all apartments currently rent for less than US$1,200 per month. For guidance see, "Build the Middle Playbook" (https://lnkd.in/g_7AaFA7) by Zillow and the Casita Coalition. It is a snapshot of best practices and successful strategies collected from around the United States, Canada, and beyond for inspiration. My report, "Learning from Montreal: An Affordable and Inclusive City; Leçons de Montréal : Une Ville Abordable et Inclusive (https://lnkd.in/gyCyQxkp) provides more information.
The RMI Smarter MODES Calculator quantifies benefits of climate-friendly transportation options.
“Triple-Win Potential of Sustainable Mobility,” Cities (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2026.106917).
Per-mile traffic fatality rates are higher in rural than urban areas, and much higher for automobile than transit. Rail and bus passengers have very low risk, and transit imposes much less accident risk on other road users. As a result, total (all mode) crash rates tend to decline as transit travel increases in a community. (www.vtpi.org/safer.pdf)
CRD Non-Auto Travel Trends (www.vtpi.org/CRDts.pdf)
Since faster traffic requires more shy distance (separation) between vehicles, roadway capacity declines as speeds increase. Under optimal (dry, clear and level) conditions capacity typically peaks at 25-35 mph (40-60 kph) on urban arterials and 35-50 mph (60-80 kph) on grade-separated highways, reflecting LOS C-D. (www.vtpi.org/tsrc.pdf)
Although user fees once funded most highway expenses, local roadway spending, which represent about 27% of total road costs, are primarily funded by general taxes, and during the last six decades total inflation-adjusted roadway spending increased much more than user revenues so, user fees now finance less than half of total road spending. (https://vtpi.org/rcrt.pdf)
US Vehicles Per Capita Trends (https://www.vtpi.org/future.pdf)
Violent crime rates declined significantly during the last three decades, particularly in large cities, which has nearly eliminated what was previously a large disparity in crime rates between cities, suburbs and rural areas. Similar declines occurred with property crimes. Most people are unaware of these trends, resulting in excessive fear of city crime risk. (www.vtpi.org/safer.pdf)
This graph shows commute mode shares for Canadian urban regions. More than half of trips are by non-auto modes in Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Victoria. (https://tram.mcgill.ca/Research/Surveys/Access/AccessCanada.html)
A driveway typically displaces one on-street parking space. Curbs in front of houses with driveways can typically accommodate just one parked vehicle if under 40’ wide, and two if 50’ wide, one less than homes without driveways. In theory, driveways and garages can accommodate multiple vehicles but they seldom do; garages are often used for storage and driveways are often unoccupied much of the day. As a result, on urban residential streets off-street parking does not generally increase total parking supply, and by replacing public parking with private spaces that may only be used by building occupants, the number of parking spaces available to motorists generally declines. (https://www.vtpi.org/pavbust.pdf)
This graph compares the portion of children and youths who use active transportation to get to and from places (e.g., school, park, mall, friend’s house). Based on "Profiles of Active Transportation among Children and Adolescents in the Global Matrix" (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7460170)
Violent crime rates declined significantly during the last three decades, particularly in large cities, which has nearly eliminated what was previously a large disparity in crime rates between cities, suburbs and rural areas. Similar declines occurred with property crimes. Most people are unaware of these trends, resulting in excessive fear of city crime risk. Todd Litman (2025), Safer Than You Think! Revising the Transit Safety Narrative, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/safer.pdf.
Montreal housing prices are 20-40% lower than other large Canadian cities, and because it has compact, walkable neighborhoods with good public transit, residents can minimize their transportation costs. This makes Montreal very affordable, inclusive and livable, and minimizes homelessness.
https://vtpi.org/ITEJ-eta-Jun2025.pdf