*** Appendices ***

kneewastefulAI and Robotics

Oct 29, 2013 (3 years and 10 months ago)

102 views


L


***
Appendices

***




Low Mile
s
, Green Communities


Confidential Project Proposal




Prepared by



Cities21,

A Project of the San Francisco Foundation Community Initiative Funds

Palo Alto, CA



CUTR

Cente
r for Urban Transportation Research,

College of Engineering
,
University of South Florida

Tampa, Florida



RESOLVE

ESRC Research group on Lifestyles, Values and Environment

University of Surrey, Guildford

Surrey,
England



A
ugust 8
, 200
7











_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

1

LMC Appendices

Appendix A
. Key Personnel


Cities21


Drawing only a small annual budget, Cities21 produces more innovation than many large for
-
profit
consulting firms. Cities21's points of differentiation: a) outside
-
of
-
the
-
box problem solving methodology
utilizing an

international brainstorming network, b) broad, cross
-
disciplinary approach encompassing
marketing, management, software, and planning disciplines, c) social entrepreneurs' energy level, passion,
and persi
stence.

"I am especially impressed with the compreh
ensive approach to implementing an innovative
transportation system that has been devised by Cities21 people and think it represents a model
that should be emulated by others around the country who wish to participate in our needed
transportation revolutio
n. More and more cars, however green, are not the answer we need to
ward off a growing dependency on foreign oil and to help limit, perhaps reverse somewhat, the
degradation that has been imposed on our cities by the automobile. We can do much better but
w
e have to form large coalitions of like
-
minded people in order to overcome the tremendous
vested interests that wish only to maintain the status quo. Cities21 has shown us how this can be
done. One can hope it will be emulated across the land."

-

Jerry Sch
neider, Professor Emeritus,
University of Washington.


The "power of ideas" allows Cities21 to lead high
-
profile projects wit
h influential teaming partners:



Principal Investigator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's "Transforming Office Parks into
Tran
sit Villages Study," teamed with U.S. EPA, Oracle, MTC (Bay Area Metropolitan Transit
Commission), Bay Area Council, Cambridge Systematics (a large transportation consulting firm),
City of Pleasanton, California Center for Land Recycling, Alameda County Co
ngestion
Management Agency, and

East Bay Community Foundation.



Project Lead, "Walk to Work Housing and Upward Mobility Project," teamed with U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Urban Land Institute, Fannie Mae
Foundation, California Sta
te Department of Housing & Community Development, California
State Senate Transportation and Housing Committee, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, National
Association of Realtors, AIA Housing Policy Committee, National Housing Law Project, Sierra
Club Trans
portation & Land Use Commi
ttee, and Reconnecting America.



Project Manager, BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit District) Group Rapid Transit Investigative
Study, teamed with BART, Port of Oakland, City of Alameda, Kimley
-
Horn transportation
consulting, and PGH Wo
ng transportation consulting.


"Our current transportation policy path in the U. S. is clearly unsustainable. Traffic, its
environmental impacts and its impact on quality of life continue to get worse virtually everywhere in
the country. Innovative new ide
as and new approaches are badly needed. We need a portfolio of
innovative approaches spread across the United States, with each one pushing the envelope towards
a more sustainable future transportation system. Cities21 and its Suburban Silver Bullet should

be in
this portfolio. It is innovative; it is forward
-
looking; it addresses many key transportation challenges;
and the potential benefits
-

if widely disseminated
-

are large."

-

Stephen Offutt, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.


Cities21 delivers hi
gh quality results in the following areas
:



Policy development and economic analysis for transportation, land use, housing, a
nd
environmental sustainability



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

2

LMC Appendices



Market research and customer
-
centered new product de
sign



Geogr
aphic Information Systems (GIS)



3D ani
mation & transit simulation, with specialty in real
-
t
ime, interactive virtual worlds



Travel Demand Forecasting



“New mobility” system design



Advanced trans
it system design and alignments



Transportation Demand Management (T
DM) / automobile trip reduction



Int
elligent Transportation Systems Design, with specialty in train control systems, smart parking,
location tra
cking, RFID, fare box interface



Social networking design



Physical model design with specialty in lightweight, portable, full size replicas


Steve Ra
ney

is founder of Cities21.org, research
ing
advanced smart growth for suburban edge cities
including
Palo Alto, Emeryville, Pleasanton,
and
Redmond. He holds three masters: business, software,
and transportation from Columbia, RPI, and Berkeley. He is th
e Principal Investigator on the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency’s

Transforming Office Parks into Transit Villages


study of
Pleasanton’s Hacienda Business Park. He has
led product and project efforts
at Microsoft, Citigroup, and
Silicon Valley start
-
ups. He was project manager for BART's Group Rapid Transit study. He designed a
version of Cybertran's Group Rapid Transit train control system.
His "wireless carpool assistant,"
TrakRide, is patent pending.
He served as Training Coordinator for Habit
at for Humanity
for East Palo
Alto projects.
He first described
LMC in his 2002 transportation masters thesis.


He is
also
researching a workforce housing
plan for
Silicon Valley Leadership Group
in Coyote Valley.
The plan will reduce carbon dioxide pr
oduction by 100 million pounds per year for the new
25,000
home
development.
Th
e plan i
ncludes an affirmative jobs/housing program f
or

low
-
income Latino families.



RESOLVE


RESOLVE is a novel, cross
-
disciplinary research collaboration between four sepa
rate groups in the
University of Surrey: the Centre for Environmental Strategy, the Environmental Psychology Research
Group, the Surrey Energy Economics Centre and the Department of Sociology.


The overall aim of RESOLVE is to develop a robust understan
ding of the links between lifestyle, societal
values and environment. In particular, RESOLVE will work to provide robust, evidence
-
based advice to
policy
-
makers in the UK and elsewhere who are seeking to understand and to influence the behaviors and
pract
ices of 'energy consumers'.


Tim Jackson

is Professor of Sustainable Development at the University of Surrey and Director of
RESOLVE.

RESOLVE is f
unded under the TSEC (Towards a Sustainable Energy Economy) program
.

Tim sits on the UK Sustainable Developme
nt Commission and chairs their Economics Steering Group. In
addition to his academic work he is a professional playwright with numerous radio
-
writing credits for the
BBC.


Tim read Mathematics at Cambridge, and has postgraduate degrees in Philosophy and

in Physics. He
joined the University of Surrey in January 1995, after five years working as a senior researcher on energy
and environmental issues at the Stockholm Environment Institute. In April 2000, he was appointed
Professor of Sustainable Development

at Surrey, the first such chair to be created in the UK. Between
January 2003 and April 2005, Tim was awarded a professorial research fellowship on the social
psychology of sustainable consumption, supported by the ESRC's Sustainable Technologies Program.



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

3

LMC Appendices

Tim's recent research interests have focused on the relationship between lifestyle, wellbeing and the
environment. He has a particular interest in the energy and carbon impacts of lifestyle and has explored
both quantitative and qualitative dimensions of
this relationship. Tim has also pioneered the development
of 'adjusted' national accounts ('green GDP') and written extensively on the conceptual and empirical
dimensions of the relationship between wellbeing and sustainability.


In March 2004, Tim was

appointed to the UK Sustainable Development Commission as chair of the
Economics Steering Group. In November 2004, he was appointed as the sole academic representative on
the UK Sustainable Consumption Round Table. He also sits on the Whitehall Wellbeing
Working Group,
Defra's Sustainable Consumption and Production Evidence Base Advisory Group and Defra's Behaviour
Change Forum. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society for the Arts, an Associate of the New Economics
Foundation and sits on the advisory board of
the Sustainable Development Research Network.


Selected publications:


(2006) Earthscan Reader in Sustainable Consumption, London: Earthscan.


(2005) Motivating Sustainable Consumption: a review of the evidence on consumer behaviour and
behavioural ch
ange. A report to the Sustainable Development Research Network. London: Policy
Studies Institute.


(2004) Consuming Paradise? Unsustainable Consumption in Cultural and Social
-
Psychological Context,
in Hubacek, K, A Inaba and S Stagl (eds) Driving For
ces of and Barriers to Sustainable Consumption,
Proceedings of an International Conference, University of Leeds, 5 th
-
6 th March 2004.


Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)


Established in the U
niversity of South Florida

College of Engineerin
g in 1988 by the Florida Legislature
and the Florida Board of Regents, CUTR has become recognized nationally and serves as an important
resource for policymakers, transportation professionals, the education system, and the public. With
emphasis on developi
ng innovative, implementable solutions to transportation problems, CUTR provides
high quality, objective transportation expertise in the form of technical support, policy analysis, and
research support that translates directly into benefits for its project

sponsors.


A significant factor in CUTR’s success and a unique aspect of the Center is the responsiveness resulting
from its faculty of full
-
time employees dedicated to conducting research. The multidisciplinary research
staff includes experts in economic
s, planning, engineering, public policy, and geography who develop
comprehensive solutions for all modes of transportation while combining academic and

real world


experience.


CUTR conducts nearly $8 million in research annually for a variety of public a
nd private sector sponsors
in Florida and the United States, including federal, state and local governments, agencies, and
organizations. Areas of research include public transportation, transportation planning, mobility policy,
intelligent transportation
systems (ITS), transportation demand management (TDM), transportation
economics and finance, corridor planning, and ethnography and transportation systems, among others.


Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program


Philip L. Winters, Program Director



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

4

LMC Appendices


CUTR’s multidisciplinary TDM team is unique in its integration of technical skills and TDM knowledge,
blending transportation and land use planning education, analytical skills, and training. The team applies
its knowledge to address local or regional TDM

needs, including operations, policies, and procedures.
Specialties include TDM strategic planning, carpool/vanpool program design, high occupancy vehicle
facilities, teleworking, TDM program evaluation, transportation management associations/organizations
,
bicycle and pedestrian issues, and TDM training.


Relevant Research


Automating the Collection and Processing of Household Travel Patterns to Deliver Personalized
Feedback to Change Travel Behavior


The foundation of this current research effort was a 19
99 study conducted by CUTR for the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT),

Reducing Vehicle Trips and Vehicle Miles of Travel through
Customized Travel Options.


The study collected household travel data using paper activity diary and
patterned the b
ehavior of each household. The study analyzed these patterns and provided personalized
advice to participants to influence household travel habits and thus reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles
of travel. An analysis of covariance conducted on the avera
ge contributed vehicle miles of travel and
vehicle trips used the post
-
advice period’s travel patterns as the dependent variable. The provision of
suggestions had a statistically significant effect on vehicle miles and trips contributed. Overall, this
ex
periment showed that the provision of travel information would reduce vehicle miles of travel.
However, the labor and time
-
intensive post
-
processing costs hampered widespread application.


The expanded capabilities and falling prices of Personal Digital
Assistants (PDA) and cellular phones
when coupled with Global Positioning Systems (GPS) offer an opportunity to improve the quality of
collected data while reducing associated collection and processing costs and errors. CUTR’s current
research is based on

the development and testing of a system, TRAC
-
IT, which provides tailored travel
feedback based on actual household patterns to affect change in travel behavior for commuting and non
-
commuting purposes. Based on the hypothesis that such technology applic
ations will improve the
accuracy and costs of data collected, TRAC
-
IT was developed as an electronic travel diary with
capabilities to automatically return suggestions that can modify travel behavior.


The research also focuses on a personalized feedback

system that provides suggestions encouraging
participants to utilize other modes than the drive
-
alone option. These suggestions were sent to
participants after the trip data has been transferred from the TRAC
-
IT unit into a database developed to
pattern
travel behavior and generate appropriate feedback to participants. Tasks involved in the creation
of the TRAC
-
IT system included developing user
-
interface software, designing databases to hold the
collected data, creating algorithms to process and analyze

the data in order to provide advice.


Participating CUTR Faculty


Christopher Hagelin

is a Research Associate at the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the
University of South Florida and a Ph.D. candidate in applied anthropology.


As part

of the Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) Team at CUTR, he has worked on a variety of research topics, from
welfare
-
to
-
work vanpool systems to county
-
level long
-
range TDM projects. His primary research
interests are transportation demand management p
lanning and evaluation, alternative transportation, and
bicycle and pedestrian issues. He also has work extensively with the EPA’s COMMUTER Model to
measure the impacts of TDM programs and strategies.




_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

5

LMC Appendices

Nevine Labib Georggi

is a Research Associate at the C
enter for Urban Transportation Research at the
University of South Florida.

She received her M.S. in Civil Engineering from the University of South
Florida in 2000.

Employed at CUTR since 1993 conducting research in a variety of areas, she is currently
d
eveloping a methodology for measuring the impacts of employer
-
based transportation demand
management (TDM) programs on transit system ridership and transportation system performance, in
particular from the management and operations perspective.

She is inv
olved in researching the impacts of
employing new technologies in advanced public transportation systems, advanced traveler information
systems, and transportation safety and security.




Sean Barbeau

is a Research Associate at the Center for Urban Transpo
rtation Research and Ph.D.
student in the Department of Computer Science & Engineering at the University of South Florida.


He
graduated summa cum laude with a B.S. in Computer Science from USF in 2003. His research interests
are in the area of artificial

intelligence with a focus in mobile intelligent software systems and
applications utilizing Global Positioning Systems (GPS) for Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) and cell
phones.


Julie Bond

is the Director of the New North Transportation Alliance and

a Senior Research Associate for
the Center for Urban Transportation Research in Tampa. Her background includes nine years of creating
and establishing alternative transportation programs for private and public sectors while working as a
Marketing/Ridesha
re Manager for the Utah Transit Authority. During this post, she was appointed to
serve on the Salt Lake Mayor’s Transportation Advisory Committee and was a board member of the Rio
Grande Community Council. Her leadership includes serving as President of

the Rocky Mountain
Association for Commuter Transportation and the Utah International Telework Association and as a
Regional Director for the Association for Commuter Transportation. She received a B.S. in Business
Administration from Southern Utah Unive
rsity (1993).



Appendix B
. Community
T
heory


This
appendix
delves into some of the theory behind communities and what makes them work well.
It
covers ten supporting theories that contribute to
Low Mile
s

Community (
LMC
)

success. A summary
table follow
s:



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

6

LMC Appendices


Community theory appendix

Unique to
LMC? 'r'
for rare

LMC success characteristic

B1. Tipping Point

y

Forces 100% participation, a cultural/behavioral tipping point

B2. eBay Philosophy



Self
-
supporting, add meaning to lives, unleash goodness

B3. C
ommunity Bldg on the Web

r

Dual communities (on & off line) are uniquely powerful

B4. Textual Poachers



Unexpected creativity flows from single purpose communities

B5. Communities of Practice (COP)

r

Focused on a domain of knowledge. Builds up expertis
e.

B6. Different Drum



Inclusivity, commitment, safety, experimentation, etc.

B7. Social Marketing Persuasion

y

Uniquely strong combination of reciprocation, commitment,
consistency, social proof, liking, authoritative source, scarcity, and
norms



r

Friendly competition between LMCs will be fostered

B8. Augmented Social Network



Motivator: pride in contributing to an important idea





The expanding networks of LMCs will exhibit high trust





Smart Mobs / Reeds's law: Unbounded creativity & prob
lem solving

B9. Social entrepreneurship



Act local, think global: viral spread with mutation

B10. Tragedy of Commons

r

LMC cultural sub
-
world overcomes the tragedy

B1, B3, B5, B7 combined

y

LMC dual community is COP with tipping point and uses social
m
arketing persuasion


Compared to past efforts to apply community theory in an attempt to have a large, practical impact on
human behavior to address major world problems, LMCs have important advantages. LMCs represent a
unique combination of dual communi
ty, community of practice, Tipping Point, and social marketing
persuasion theories.



B1)
The Tipping Point


In
The Tipping Point
, Malcolm Gladwell describes how, all of a sudden, sufficient momentum
builds up
behind an idea to make it very popular
. LMC

goes one step further, by “forcing” a tipping point to occur,
by having all incoming residents in new housing development embrace green principles. Gladwell’s
basic theory works well for Cabbage Patch Dolls and toothpaste, but to change auto
-
centric subu
rban
culture in a restrictive public policy context, the tipping point needs a push. LMCs will create positive,
reinforcing peer pressure because all residents know that all other residents have made the same
commitment to reduce solo driving. With such a

shared purpose and with more available spare time
because of reduced commute time, LMCs will be very different from typical suburban residential
communities, and should experience very high demand as other like
-
minded people seek to join this
unique probl
em
-
solving community.


Reference:
http://www.gladwell.com/tippingpoint/index.html




B2) eBay philosophy


adding meaning to people’s lives


You're talking about changing travel behavior in

an auto
-
centric culture. This is very, very hard
to achieve. The one thing that does work to change behavior is to create a great community. At
e
Bay, we added meaning to people's lives. Some individuals previously had few friends, but, due
to their partic
ipation in
e
Bay on
-
line communities, they developed many friends. The Low Mile
s



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

7

LMC Appendices

Community has to become

real.


It should be very active. People working together should
create a community that is rewarding to participate in. At
e
Bay we rely on the goodn
ess in
people, and their latent desire to help others. Within the housing development, there should be
community activities (potlucks twice per year, etc.) that people can voluntarily attend. The
electronic chat board should become a repository of solution
s. People will develop expertise and
contribute their knowledge and experiences for the common good. At
e
Bay, our communities
become self
-
running. That's important. It's important to start the community with strong
leadership, but the training wheels event
ually need to come off. At
e
Bay, it's very inexpensive to
host thriving communities. Obviously, to make this work, there must be significant benefits
granted to real
-
estate developers to ensure their going along with this community concept.

-

Janis Hom,
e
Bay

Product Manager and wife of Cities21’s Steve Raney.


"The Perfect Store"
is the
"inside EBay" book
:



“If someone came on and said, ‘Please help me,’ there were 25 people who would rush to help.
… A core group of regulars emerged who functioned as a de
facto customer
-
service department.”


page 29. Example of self
-
running communities unleashing human goodness.



The [AuctionWeb] boards also developed an informal “neighborhood watch.” If someone was
being mistreated .. board regulars often too
k

matters int
o their own hands. “We used to band
together and find the bad guys and make their lives miserable.”

Twenty users dedicated
themselves to righting reputation feedback “wrongs,”
claiming the motto, “Only Do Good.”



page 52.


Reference:
The Perfect Stor
e
, by Adam Cohen
, 2003.



B3)
Community Building On the Web


Author Amy Jo Kim lists critical success factors for online communities:



There must be sharing of collective wisdom.



Electronic chat is useless unless a moderator keeps it, edits it, and publishe
s a transcript. IE a
moderator should collect the

gems


into a knowledge base / FAQ.



For specific personal challenges, the community should be able to share lots of information and
wisdom quickly. For instance, a person undergoing a job transition has t
hese needs (as does
someone switching from an single occupancy auto commute to a bicycle commute).



“Dual communities” (combined
online and offline communities
) are uniquely powerful
.

As
national online groups grow, many spawn local chapters and allow hum
an contact.


PlanetWork’s San Francisco, Seattle, and NYC chapters provide an example of dual communities.


Reference: Amy Jo Kim,
Community Building on the Web
. Her consultancy web can be found at
http://www.naima
.com/
. See also this article:
http://www.onlinecommunityreport.com/features/kim/
.




B4)
Textual Poachers


The author
explains phenomen
a
such as StarTrek fan culture.
When a community f
orms around a single
passion (such as StarTrek), creative and original work occurs
, such as fans writing their own StarTrek
novels. And, there are subtleties, such as StarTrek fans embracing the StarTrek governmental philosophy
as the ideal they hope the w
orld can attain
. Thus,
there are bits of political movements waiting to come
out of such cultures. As far as L
MCs

go,
Textual Poachers

provides examples of a) the unexpected


_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

8

LMC Appendices

creativity that flows from communities of people organized with a single focus, a
nd b) the power of
online communities.



Reference:
Textual Poachers; Television Fans and Participatory Culture (Studies in Culture and
Communication).

B
y Henry Jenkins
, 1992.



B5) Community of Practice (COP)


An LMC is a COP.
CUTR’s t
ransp
-
tdm
list
-
s
erv
is a COP. “Unlike other forms of group engagement,
COPs are organized around the achievement of specific objectives. COPs are focused on a domain of
knowledge and over time accumulate expertise in this domain. They develop their shared practice by
in
teracting around problems, solutions, and insights, and building a common store of knowledge.”

A COP is a group of people who share an interest in a domain and engage in a process of
collective learning that creates bonds between them: a tribe, a garage ba
nd, a group of engineers
working on similar problems.


PlanetWork is an
counter
-
example of a community with environmental goals that does not have the
domain focus of a COP.


There are a number of thriving on
-
line COPs featuring like
-
mined, well
-
educated p
rofessionals organized
by vocational discipline. Characteristics are as follows:



700+ members



3+ message posts per day



no commercial messages



non
-
competitive and supportive tone



willingness to bring newbies along and treat poorly conceived messages grace
fully



willingness to brainstorm solutions and provide links to helpful research



moderation by a senior member who culls posts into a permanent knowledge base



s
elf
-
monitored by a small
er

group of informal leaders who take ownership of the community

Successf
ul on
-
line forums are characterized by “g
ood
K
harma
.”



CUTR’s transp
-
tdm list serv is an exemplary COP.
There are 870 members from the traffic reduction
field, with primarily, but not exclusively, U.S. membership.
Many of these professionals are

commute

coordinators


working for a city or a corporation, and spending a portion of their time working on
commute trip reduction. There are also important contributions from consultants
, solution vendors,

and
academic researchers.
While it might seem that there
would be ample opportunity for disparaging remarks
about competitors from vendors and consultants, this does not occur, nor are blatantly promotional posts
made.
Newbies
find that their basic questions generate multiple, helpful
responses. Seasoned members

answer some questions with research reference lists, often having undertaken the research themselves.
Practical questions about how to implement and market programs are frequently asked, and these generate
helpful responses. Often, when one questioner sub
mits a question, others chime in that they would like to
see the answer as well. Thus transp
-
tdm serves as a national think tank and supportive place for people
working in the space.
RFPs (
requests for proposals) and job announcements

are also posted, as t
ransp
-
tdm
is a uniquely productive networking forum
. Cities21

has
use
d

th
is virtual think tank
to
collect ideas and
feedback on open
-
ended concepts such as LMC and “what are the best options for folks carting groceries
home without a car?”
Transp
-
tdm provi
des a very productive way to conduct
preliminary
research.


References:



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

9

LMC Appendices



Etienne Wenger,
Supporting Communities of Practice: A Survey of Community
-
Oriented
Technologies
, March, 2001.

http://www.ewenger.com/theory/communities_of_practice_intro.htm




http://cutrlist.eng.usf.edu/read/all_forums/

& select “transp
-
tdm.” A transp
-
tdm “grocery cart
message thread” led to
the following knowledge base:
http://www.cities21.org/tdm.htm#grocery




B6)
The Different Drum: Community
-
Making and Peace


This book has a strong reputation among psychology books about community
theory. The author lists

s
uccessful community characteristics: inclusivity, commitment, feeling of safety in all members, the
ability for members to experiment with new types of behaviors, the ability to fight gracefully, a place
where all members are lea
ders.

LMC relies heavily on these characteristics. The Low Mile
s

Pledge is
very important in establishing commitment by all LMC members. “
The process of community
-
building
begins with a commitment
-

a commitment of the members not to drop out, a comm
itment to hang in
there through thick and thin.
” Community support for experimentation is crucial for LMC to invent new
traffic reducing techniques. The author also provides an excellent definition of community: “
Community
is a group of two or more people

who, regardless of the diversity of their backgrounds, have been able to
accept and transcend their differences, enabling them to communicate openly and effectively, and to work
together towards common goals, while having a sense of unusual safety with on
e another.
” Finally, the
author warns against exclusivity, “
The great enemy of community is exclusivity. The boundaries between
students and teachers, young and old, etc., must be soft.



Reference:
The Different Drum: Community
-
Making and Peace
.
M. Sc
ott Peck (Simon & Shuster, 1987).




B7) Social Marketing Psychological Persuasion to Change Behavior


Seethaler lists six principles of psychological persuasion that will be applied to make LMCs successful.




Reciprocation

-

“people feel obligated to resp
ond to positive behavior received (gifts, favors, etc.)
with positive behavior in return.” Thus, LMCs are very different from a typical suburban
neighborhood, because of the high rate of back and forth giving between LMC neighbors.



Commitment and
C
onsi
stency



“once a freely chosen position” (such as the signing of a Low
Mile
s

Pledge) “has been taken by an individual, a tendency to act in line with the commitment
will guide further actions.” “This commitment
-
consistency mechanism has been reported to

be
self enforcing, especially when the commitments are written or made in public.” Once such a
position has been taken, such people are likely to embrace even stronger commitments when
asked.



Social Proof



“the willingness to comply with” low mile
s

behavior “is increased when supported
by evidence that similar peers” in the LMC “comply with it as well.”



Liking



“People are inclined to follow a request brought forward by someone they like.”



Authority



“the credibility of the source is an important

feature of persuasive communication.”
Thus for LMC pilot projects, we will require authoritative local influencers (city council, local
transit agencies, etc.) to provide written statements of support and active participation.



Scarcity



“the principle

of scarcity reflects the fact that as opportunities become scarce
r

they are
perceived as more valuable.” For the first few years before LMCs take off, such residential
communities will be quite scarce in the U.S.


McKenzie
-
Mohr adds some additional po
ints



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

10

LMC Appendices



Many well
-
intentioned social marketing campaigns fail. “A massive 1978 national home energy
conservation campaign failed because it did not pay adequate attention to the human side of
promoting more sustainable energy use.” Economic analysis showed t
hat home energy retrofits
paid for themselves, but the campaign “overlooked the rich mixture of cultural practices, social
interactions, and human feelings that influence the behavior of individuals, social groups, and
institutions.” Locally, the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District’s “Spare the Air” peak
smog
-
reduction campaign is an ongoing failed example.



Ad campaigns that attempt to foster sustainable behavior fail mainly because they underestimate
the difficulty of changing behavior. Advertising
is effective in altering our preference to purchase
one brand over another. But altering consumer preferences is not creating new behavior, rather
it involves altering an existing behavior. These small changes in behavior generally require little
expense
or effort and no dramatic change in lifestyle. In contrast, encouraging individuals to
engage in a new activity, such as walking or biking to work, is much more com
p
lex. A variety of
barriers
exist
to walking or biking to work, such as concerns over time,

safety, weather, and
convenience.



Behavior change is most effectively achieved through initiatives delivered at the community level,
which focus on removing barriers to an activity while simultaneously enhancing the activity’s
benefits.



More on commitment
-
consistency.
In a wide variety of settings people who have initially agreed
to a small request, such as to wear a button saying they support the purchase of products with
recycled
-
content, have subsequently been found to be far more likely to agree to a
larger request,
such as actually purchasing these products. When people go along with an initial request, it
often alters the way they perceive themselves.




Seek commitments in groups: If possible, seek commitments from groups of people that are highly
co
hesive, such as a church group. The close ties of these individuals, coupled with the
importance of being consistent, make it more likely that people will follow through with their
commitment.

LMCs provide an ongoing social group where being consistent a
bout
driving
low
mile
s

will be doubly important.



To date, few programs have emphasize
d

the development of community
norms

which support
people engaging in sustainable behavior.

(A “
Norm
” is a pattern or trait taken to be typical in the
behavior
of a social group.)

Norms should be made visible. The very act of taking recyclables to
the curbside communicates a community norm about the importance of recycling. Find ways to
publicize involvement in sustainable activities, such as providing ongoing

community feedback on
the amount of water that has been saved.

For the LMC project, CUTR’s TRAC
-
IT will be used
to provide ongoing performance measurement and feedback.
This feedback will help to set
expectations for green behavior.


Competition is a
great motivator. Friendly competition will be fostered between the five pilot LMCs. We
expect “one
-
upsmanship” to push each LMC to measure up well against other LMCs.



References:



Seethaler, R.K. and Rose, G. (2003).

Application of Psychological Prin
ciples to Promote Travel
Behaviour Change

. 26th Australasian Transport Research Forum, Wellington, NZ, October 1
-
3
.
http://www.tuti.com.au/Publications/2003/ATRF03
-
RG14.pdf

.



S
eethaler, R.K. and Rose, G. (2005).

Using the Six Principles of Persuasion to Promote Travel
Behaviour Change
-

Preliminary Findings of Two TravelSmart Field Experiments

. TUTI Report
44
-
2005, paper submitted for presentation at the 28th Australasian Tran
sport Research Forum,
Sydney, September 2005
.
http://www.tuti.com.au/Publications/2005/TR44
-
ATRF05
-
RKSPOP.pdf




_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

11

LMC Appendices



Doug McKenzie
-
Mohr and William Smith (1999).
Fostering Sustaina
ble Behavior, an
Introduction to Community
-
Based Social Marketing.
http://www.cbsm.com/




B8)
The Augmented Social Network


“Online community tools should be extended to more effectively advance the values of engaged

citizenship and democracy, facilitating: a) sharing relevant information and media with one another, b)
self
-
organizing, c) forming alliances to engage constructively with our neighbors and fellow citizens.
Self
-
organizing groups are increasingly apprec
iated for their central role in civil society. The next
generation of online community should be a manifestation of flourishing, innovative democracy that
encourages the active participation of its citizenry.”


In
The Future of Ideas
, Lessig argues that

the great motivator in creating the internet was pride in
contributing to a healthy public commons, not “getting rich.” Following this analogy, a thriving network
of LMC networks, though motivated in the public interest, may also be highly lucrative.


“The early Internet is an inspirational model for how a system with the appropriate initial conditions can
generate trust among its participants, providing fertile ground for collaboration that leads to extraordinary
innovation. Might the next
-
generation
Internet [or network of LMCs] be a locus of trust on a grand scale
that could reinvigorate society?”


A network of trusted LMCs will enable personal introductions across LMCs. Every LMC network
member will share a common objective and will have made a sim
ilar personal commitment. That allows
a unique level of trust between strangers.


Granovetter’s 1973
The Strength of Weak Ties

shows how trust is conveyed through third parties,
enabling individuals to gain access to needed information or resources that

support the achievement of
specific goals. LMCs will deliberately facilitate this process.


Reed’s Law claims the value of social networks grows exponentially through interconnectivity
.
C
onnectivity and various network properties create new and previou
sly unknown types of value. In
Smart Mobs
, Rheihgold speaks of the chance to do new things together, cooperating on scales and in
ways never before possible.


Norman Johnson studied “collective problem solving,” a la LMC. Johnson examined “how networked

communications improve collaboration among groups engaged in a task. They found that the greater the
range of appropriate knowledge available to the problem solvers, the more effective their work became.
They demonstrated the importance of having a dive
rse range of information sources available when
addressing complex tasks.”


Reference:
The Augmented Social Network: Building Identity and Trust into the Next
-
Generation
Internet
.
A Link Tank Report

by Ken Jordan, Jan Hauser, and Steven Foster
.
http://asn.planetwork.net/AugmentedSocialNetwork.pdf




B9)
How to Change the World

-

Social Entrepreneur Theory


The Skoll Foundation funded a book explaining their social entrepreneurship ph
ilosophy. They explain
how an “act local, think global” approach, with a small initial budget and a requirement that the model


_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

12

LMC Appendices

can be easily replicated works well. They cite successful examples of micro
-
credit, India street children
program, and AIDS pre
vention. Skoll emphasizes “viral program spread and mutation” as two important
factors for success. This LMC proposal follows that philosophy.


Reference:
How to Change the World, Social Entrepreneurs and the Power of New Ideas
,
By David
Bornstein



B
10) Tragedy of the Commons


One
specific issue of automobile dependence

is the

tragedy of the commons
:”


The tragedy of the commons is a metaphor used to illustrate the conflict between individual
interests and the common good. The term was popularized b
y Garrett Hardin in his 1968 Science
article "The Tragedy of the Commons." Where there is no clear ownership of rights to a public
resource (roads, clean air, etc), the users of the resource are likely to overexploit it. The cause
of any tragedy of the
commons is that when individuals use a public resource, they do not bear
the entire cost of their actions. If each seeks to maximize individual utility, she ignores the costs
borne by others.


Hardin uses the example of English Commons, shared plots of gra
ssland used in the past by all
livestock farmers in a village. Each farmer keeps adding more livestock to graze on the
Commons, because it costs her nothing to do so. In a few years, the soil is depleted by
overgrazing, the Commons becomes unusable, and th
e village perishes.



When people switch to greener transportation options, society benefits from less congestion and
pollution; when people stick with solo driving, society suffers more congestion and pollution.
Reductions
in c
ommons grazing and solo dri
ving are desirable, but difficult. If the sheep farmer stops grazing the
common, the benefit accrues to the other farmers. Likewise, individuals selecting greener transportation
incur a loss of time and flexibility while benefiting solo drivers who exper
ience less crowded freeways.
The tragedy may be restated as “do
-
gooders provide benefits to do
-
badders.” Do
-
gooders do not even
receive positive social feedback for their efforts; their sacrifices are often met with derision.


Individuals acting alon
e can’t have much of a
t
raffic
r
eduction impact, but a community of people can.
LMCs
will make it
socially desirable
to travel via greener means
. C
arsharing researcher Susan Shaheen
argues that a

supportive culture


is a prerequisite to bring about sign
ificant change in travel behavior.
By creating a small, self
-
contained suburban community with a localized low
-
miles

culture, do
-
gooders
will
receive the
positive social feedback and support from neighbors whose opinions matter,
and the
tragedy of
the commons can be overcome.
LMCs create a sub
-
world where doing good is valued.


Reference:
http://www.biocrawler.com/encyclopedia/Tragedy_of_the_commons
.



Appendix C. Ben
efits Detail



A) Two million new
Low Mile
s

Community (LMC)

members


The creation of large new residential developments in the U.S. is quite rapid.
According to the Brookings
Institution, b
y 2030
, 50 percent

of buildings will have been bu
ilt since 2003. In addition, a
50 percent


_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

13

LMC Appendices

population increase is expected in most major U.S. metropolitan areas in the next 30 years.
Thus many
new residential communities that are potential LMCs will form in the near future.


While t
he
post
-
pilot
targ
et market
emphasizes these
new residential developments
,
existing developments
will also join the Low Mile
s

movement over time.
Small,
adjacent residential developments will
agglomerate themselves into
LMCs. Even
single family home neighborhoods
with
strong neighborhood
associations
will eventually join.

For existing developments, a 75% vote in favor will be required for
Tipping Point

scale.

Even l
ater, we expect the model to
mutate and
spread from residential communities
to offices.


Forecasting bef
ore piloting is problematic, but is necessary for order
-
of
-
magnitude calculations to
quantify the potential impact of LMCs. Assuming a conservative ten
-
year LMC penetration in the “auto
-
centric” portions of the world (U.S., Canada, and Europe), then “only
” 5,000 LMCs will form. Assuming
an average of 400 drivers per LMC, these 5,000 LMCs will yield two million new
members.
Google/Yahoo!

will build deep, loyal relationships with
LMC members both individually and
collectively
.


Reference: “
Critica
l Analysis:
U.S.
Regional Visioning and Sustainability
”, by Cities21, November, 2005.



B) Significant
auto
driving
reduction


A number of community
-
based social marketing “trip reduction experiments” have been undertaken.
These programs emphasi
ze
one
-
on
-
one education to
persuade
individuals
to choose
green travel
alternatives.
In
-
Motion is a
Seattle
neighborhood
-
based program

to encourage residents to drive less and
travel more by bus, carpool, bicycling, and walking.



In one 2,800
-
person nei
ghborhood, marketing
efforts were successful in recruiting 280 participants, a ten percent participation rate. These participants
reported 33

percent
less driving alone, 22

percent
more bus

trips
, 38

percent
more walking, 46

percent
more carpooling and 76

percent m
ore bicycling.


Because of high marketing budgets to recruit participants, these innovative trip reduction programs are
not yet economically viable. In
-
Motion’s cost per “vehicle mile reduced” was a whopping $19 per mile.
In addition, observed

green behavior tends to taper off once program funding is over.


The LMC program represents a significant improvement over In
-
Motion because of:



LMCS have 100 percent participation instead of ten percent.



LMCs achieve a cultural tipping point



LMCs are

designed to be self
-
sustaining, so that green behavior doesn’t taper off over time.
Successful LMCs are expected to undertake new green endeavors once
travel

reduction is
stablized, such as: recycling, composting, solar, and green rooftops.



LMCs c
oncentrate trip starting points at a single physical location, thus solo driving alternatives
such as carpooling are much more effective than “dispersed trip starting point” programs such as
In
-
Motion.



In
-
Motion’s high costs stem from significant marketi
ng budget to recruit participants. LMCs
obtain members at no cost, because developers fund a substantial marketing program to attract
new residents (who all make Low Mile
s

Pledges)



LMC anthills generate and freely share new solutions whereas In
-
Motion
concentrates only on
existing solutions and experiences an information bottleneck because of one
-
on
-
one interaction
provided by a limited set of educators.




_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

14

LMC Appendices

Thus, we expect
to beat In Motion’s 33% solo driving reduction (per active participant) while ach
ieving
100 percent participation.


Reference: “In Motion
-

Neighborhood Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Pilots. Community
-
Based Social
Marketing for Trip Reduction
. Final Report.”

April 2005.

By the

G
reater Seattle King County Metro Transit age
ncy.



C) Significant
economic value from
auto
travel
reduction


Benefit calculations produced the following four areas of annual value:




Annual
value, $
MM

Reduced mitigation fees

500

Reduced CO2
-

trading value

120

Cost of living decrease

3,560

"Pay for performance"

400


Details of these calculations follow below, starting from an assumption of two million
LMC members:


Reduced
Developer
Mitigation
: Most large proposed residential real
-
estate projects meet some resistance
as
the proje
cts
move from early conceptualization to city approval, with traffic impact one of the major
points of discussion. T
raffic mitigation
, where new development
-
induced traffic is remedied in some
way, is always a critical part of the negotiation for approval

and
is
a
substantial cost item for new
residential construction
. Often incurred as “development impact fees,” the fee is typically applied per
new housing unit.

For Palo Alto, the fee is $2,200 for each new housing unit. Thus,
the low
-
cost
adoption of
a LMC can substitute for a substantial portion of the impact fees. Assuming a bottom
-
line
cost reduction to developers of $500 per housing unit, we have:

1 MM new LMC housing units * $500 savings per unit =

$500 MM mitigation fee savings to real
-
estate de
velopers.



CO2 reduction
: The
CO2 reductions trading

market is voluntary in the U.S. and currently has a low
$2
per ton
trading price. In Europe, CO2 trading is about to become mandatory, and the market price is
$30
per ton
. Assuming European pricing
spreads to the U.S. in five years, then we can calculate:



2 million
LMC members



Each driver averages 12,000 miles per year



LMCs produce a 33% mileage reduction, or 4,000 miles per year



Each vehicle mile generates one pound of CO2



4,000 miles per yea
r is equivalent to 2.0 tons CO2 reduced

Thus we have:

2,000,000 drivers * 2.0 tons CO2 reduced per driver per year * $30 per ton =

$120 MM per year value in reduced CO2.


Cost of Living Decrease
: At the new 2006 auto mileage expense rate of $0.445 per mi
le, the annual value
of the mileage savings in reduced cost of living to LMC residents is:

2,000,000 drivers * 4,000 miles per year saved per driver per year * $0.445 per mile =

$3.56 BB per year.




_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

15

LMC Appendices

Pay for performance programs
:

More rational cost/benefit a
nalysis
is beginning to
emerge
in U.S.
transportation
investment
planning. In the past, efforts were
only made to solve traffic congestion
via
new capacity (such as
Silicon Valley’s “
BART to San Jose


extension

or the Highway 85/101 flyover
interchange
).

Some
of these capacity increases cost more than a
new
BMW for each new
person
served.
Now, states such as Washington
and Virginia
are experimenting with

pay for performance,


where
proposals for either capacity expansion OR demand reduction

are accepted
. From the
responses
,
states
take the lowest bidder, paying a dollar value for each passenger mile
serviced
. Thus, once the demand
reduction benefits of L
MCs

are
proven
,
LMCs could qualify as a “pay for performance” program where a
state such as
Washingt
on may pay
a set fee
for each passenger mile of demand reduction. L
MC
traffic
reduction is
a tiny fraction of the cost of
capacity expansion.
Assuming $.05 for each passenger mile of
demand reduction, the “pay for performance” model yields:

2,000,000 dri
vers * 4,000 miles per year saved per driver per year * $0.05 per mile serviced =

$400 MM per year.


Additionally, the LMC online platform could generate significant advertising revenue. Trust
ed
, green
vendors could be granted favored access to LMC member
s.



D) Inspires more creative solutions


An anthill community pools the problem solving talents of many individuals, creating a task
-
oriented
virtual think tank capable of delivering original solutions. For
LMCs
, our anthill benefits from the
talents

o
f well
-
educated
knowledge

workers
. Often a task solution will require contributions from multiple
knowledge domains, something much more natural for a super
-
capable anthill, rather than an individual,
to provide.


In contrast, public sector transportati
on task
-
oriented problem solving relies on only a few
individuals

at a
time. For specific task
s

such as obtaining groceries, the anthill has no limit on the range of possible
solutions.
Within the public sector, there is

balkanization


of roles arranged

by technology
, rather than
by customer. Thus,
public sector problem solving
often
lacks customer orientation
:


"Unlike private sector companies, transit agencies avoid modern market research techniques.
Transit agencies commonly conduct only on
-
board
bu
s/rail
surveys and use the results to refine
services. Yet the vast pool of potential riders are those not riding, and it is their needs that are
not being served by the current transit service."

Cambridge Systematics, transportation
consultants, from thei
r Metropolitan San Diego Transportation Plan.


It is expected that communities will develop their own

home
-
grown


traffic reduction expertise. The fact
that many trips share the same trip origination creates a distinct advantage.
Commonsense
innovations

such as

carpooling to the grocery store


and
“school
-
pools” (
carpooling to school to drop multiple kids
off
)

will
arise. Group scheduling of common activities
will
naturally arise
. LMCs
will have sufficient
scale to negotiate specialized services with o
utside vendors. For instance, a community might choose to
arrange for weekly

house calls


by a bicycle repair shop. It may even become a badge of prestige for
outside vendors to be associated with a
LMC
.



E) Unleashes human goodness


Two transportation l
eaders believe there is an untapped resource,

human goodness,


to help solve
transportation problems. Ken Schmier is an Emeryville
-
based innovator in GPS bus
-
tracking
(NextBus)
who describes latent

Good Samaritan
-
ism


that is waiting to be tapped for si
mple solutions such as


_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

16

LMC Appendices

neighborhood ad
-
hoc carpooling.
Carsharing researcher
Susan Shaheen describes a

latent psychic
benefit


for reducing pollution and traffic cong
estion.


Cities21 i
nterview

research

with Silicon Valley and Seattle tech workers furth
er underscore
s

this point.
Very
consistently, tech workers are willing to spend a few minutes a day to help other commuters
(
or
even
to
voluntarily
spend hours writing interesting software that does good
)
.
In addition, the eBay
community model is a great

example where good people voluntarily help others.


A key part of unleashing human goodness is to make it easy. LMC groupware and physical proximity
will make it easy for the entire residential community to spend just a few minutes per day to make a
di
fference. No tech worker is offering to drive their neighbor around on errands for 45 minutes, but
six

minutes? That’s no problem. LMCs will be a very efficient way to share task
-
oriented expertise, and
once a few residents develop expertise within a pa
rticular knowledge sub
-
domain (such as safe biking
routes in Silicon Valley) their pride as self
-
taught experts leads them to very generously share their
knowledge (while subtly conveying their superior knowledge and environmental commitment). In
addition
, LMC members can expect to get back more than they put in, because their contributions and the
contributions of others feed right back into the community. The giving benefit is local.


I don't mind stopping for a moment to give a ride to a M
icrosoft

em
ployee (or Honeywell, or
whoever will be there) along the way, as long as I have some indication of who they are (i.e. MS
employee badge initially, or just personal knowledge later). Sharing the ride with other MS
employees will be great: we can exchange i
deas about the products we are working on, as well as
find other mutual interests, or just to have a casual conversation. I don't expect to get paid for it
in any way, and would expect to see other Microsofties doing the same.


from a
Cities21
tech
worker

interview
.


If we value LMC member time at $10 per hour, and if we assume each member provides six minutes of
good deeds per day, then we have:

2 million members * 1/10 hour per day * $10 per hour * 365 days per year =

$730 MM in human goodness enabled p
er year.



F
) Creates a unique new housing choice


A Low Mile
s

Community provides a new housing option, a new type of residential community where all
have a shared,

green


vision. This housing choice allows residents to cho
o
se to join a new type of l
ocal
culture
-

thus it's a housing choice combined with a cultural choice. The nation's top housing policy
analysts lament the lack of innovative housing choices, pointing the blame at what they characterize as
the

stodgy


real
-
estate industry:



The home

industry is now led by a few lumbering giants that provide housing 'value' measured
by size and novelty. Genuine housing innovations have been mostly limited to the areas of
production efficiency and risk management, rather than any meaningful improvement

of the
product offered to the consumer.




F
annie Mae's
journal entitled:
Housing Policy Debate
.

and


Homes are treated as generic commodities like pork bellies, which are all essentially the same,
rather than as consumer products like cars or clothing, w
hich vary greatly according to people's
preferences. This tired approach tends to determine how many homes people want, but not what
kind of homes or what type of residential neighborhoods people would select if given a choice.



Smart Growth America.



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

17

LMC Appendices


Wil
l
many
people want to live in
an LMC
of green
-
minded do
-
gooders?

Yes, surely, if only there was
such a choice!
Many people look back fondly on their college days, remembering the unique
friendly,
enthusiastic, energetic, and intellectually curious
cultur
e they participated in.

LMCs will also provide a
unique, friendly, supportive, enthusiastic, and desirable culture.


In the book
Bowling Alone
, the author laments the recent reduction in suburban

neighborliness


in the
U.S. and argues that this reducti
on is harmful. He paints a picture of suburbanites who enter their single
occupancy vehicle inside their garage in the morning, and return home to their garage cocoon, never
setting foot in their front yard and never making eye
-
contact with neighbors. LM
C brings back social
cohesion within neighborhoods.


Reference:
Bowling Alone
, by Robert Putnam,
http://www.bowlingalone.com/



G
) Changes citizen apathy to
grassroots action


The world faces a growing number

of serious problems that are growing worse and seem to be unsolvable
via standard public sector
-
led

methods.
Individual citizens feel frustrated and impotent at their inability
to help the situation.


Cities21 tech worker interviews exposed untapped en
thusiasm for grassroots solutions, where individuals
are empowered to contribute to clever solutions where the public sector has failed. A smile always breaks
out on the face of interview respondents who imagine this scenario. There is a special satisfac
tion related
to solving frustratingly hard problems and providing proof of untapped human capability. Once proof of
clever grassroots solutions is shown, positive word
-
of
-
mouth will accelerate LMC viral spread.



Appendix D. Detailed Pilot Project Task

List


A)
Project Formation



Optional a
dditional
research:

o

Brainstorm with
potential core team members.

o

Conduct
market research
on behalf of
real
-
estate developers to assist in the marketing of
these unique LMC commun
ities.
Dissect some of the methods used by developers for
Ladera Ranch, Brambleton, Dominion Valley, and Takoma Park.
(
http://www.planetizen.com/node/19397
)


o

Augment the
literature review (
Appendix B
is
thorough,
but
there are
still
a few
additional items to be read.)

o

Ascertain characteristics of successful cohousing communities.



Content development

o

Develop
supporting web pages to explain LM
C
.


o

Develop pilot LMC marketing concepts for progressive real
-
estate developers to attract
new residents

o

Create a “Low Mile
s

Pledge” Template as a starting point for each unique LMC pilot
(See Appendix
F
)

o

C
reate
some preliminary
generic
content
for the pilot LMCs
(

how to be a
helpful

community member,


“safe
biking,


etc.)

o

Our communication strategy will emphasize principles of positive persuasion.



Create PR material





_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

18

LMC Appendices

o

Secure article placements in national periodicals

and web sites
. Target relevant
professional magazines such as ACT’s TDM Review and the Home Builder’s Industry
Association. Goal is to draw significant web traffic and interest.

o

Develop a pre
ss kit.

o

Create easily
-
read supporting web pages to explain the LMC concept to the general
public. “It’s myspace + meetup for traffic reduction.”



B
) Watch
L
MC housing project

construction move to completion



While residential developers are under construction, some developers allow buyers to place
deposits on housing units. At this point, the buyers will also sign Low Mile
s

P
ledges.



Launch
LMC
s

with a thorough PR campaign.



Measure “before” (and control group) trip making behavior with GPS tracking. CUTRs
GPS
tracking
can
algorithmically detect whe
ther a phone wearer is walking, biking, taking transit, or
driving.
This information is stored in a “trip log.” LMC members may modify the trip log.
We
envision Nextel/Sprint GPS phones as the preferred tracking device.
(See Appendix
E



TRAC
-
IT).

o

Tra
in residents on trip logging and provide customer support.

o

Promote individual LMC member GPS phone procurement as a means to obtaining more
data. We expect that some knowledge workers will be enthusiastic about long
-
term,
consistent personal mileage tra
cking. Some folks just want to watch their own trend.



C
) Manage LMC
s



Measure “after” trip making behavior with TRAC
-
IT GPS trip logging. Provide this “hard data”
to LMC members to spur further mileage reduction.
(Feedback is persuasiv
e.)



Monitor and participate in the LMCs

o

Schedule educational interactive web trainings. Provide content on tips for community
success. Create training webcasts for on
-
demand training
. M
aintain chat related to these
webcasts.

o

Ensure that local LMC
core

team members
promote community interaction. Facilitate

talks
and
ideas for bringing about low mile
s
.
Non
-
core r
esidents
will

also share their own
techniques and successes from past ex
perience. Use personal contact to model low mile
s

behavior.

o

Facilitate potlucks, but be wary of the green bean casserole.

o

Create knowledge base of new trip reduction inventions
,
disseminate these techniques
nationally
,
and adjust them to fit local co
nditions. Compile best practices
in

LMC
knowledge base

o

Visit pilot communities and conduct interviews, IE collect feedback to then use to
improve both the
GSP

platform and the LMC implementation.



After LMCs are “up and running” for 3 months, facilitate th
eir creation of “green plans,” where
the communities map out their own goals/strategy for further reducing mileage. (We will
promote competition between the five pilots while also sharing the plans back and forth.)



Publicize the pilot project at differen
t stages



Provide regular project status reports



D
) Wrap up



Re
-
measure “after” trip making behavior to observe an
y

tapering off of mileage reduction.



Author academic research on the pilot project



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

19

LMC Appendices



Assist the pilot LMCs in becoming self
-
suffi
cient



Develop plan to facilitate the exponential growth of
self
-
sufficient
LMCs

both nationally and
internationally




Appendix E. TRAC
-
IT Electronic Trip Diary


TRAC
-
IT is CUTR’s patent
-
pending “smart, electronic trip diary.” TRAC
-
IT automates the c
ollection
and
p
roces
sing of
h
ousehold
t
ravel
p
atterns to
allow for quantifiable analysis of new techniques to change
travel behavior.


Benefits:



Replacement for
error
-
prone
paper trip
-
diaries



More accurate



Automates much of the data collection process



Collects route inform
ation



Increases quality and quantity of collected information



Results can easily be plotted on map




TRAC
-
IT control flow from startup to data upload



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

20

LMC Appendices


TRAC
-
IT a
utomatically
c
aptures:

t
ime
, d
istance
, speed, and route. User enters trip purpose and vehicle

occupancy. TRAC
-
IT algorithmically guesses the user’s travel mode (car, bus, bike, or walk) and user
may update the guess.



Appendix F. Low Mile
s

Pledge


This is a very early draft of a pledge template. This pledge does not have to be “overly aggre
ssive,” as
pledge signers will grow greener over time because of Social Marketing Persuasion (Appendix B7).





I have read and understand the material on the LMC philosophy



I am enthusiastic about moving into a very unique, pioneering community where everyo
ne has
signed the
Low Mile
s

Pledge
and where everyone is actively united behind a vision for a) better
work/life balance
, b) less time spent stuck in traffic, and c)
reduced greenhouse gas and airborne
pollutants to make the world a better place for fut
ure generations.



I care enough to take on a very serious problem that appears to be growing worse. We LMC
members will use our own power to make good things happen.



I
am willing to spend time to help myself and others develop an understanding of altern
atives to
driving alone.



I will attend fun LMC events and potlucks. Compared to typical communities, I understand that a
LMC requires more friendly socializing with neighbors.



I will spend a minimum of six minutes per day doing good. I’m enthusiasti
c about reciprocating
the good deeds done to me by other LMC community members.



I will frequently login to
on
-
line
LMC

groupware
. All members will share our experience and
collective brainpower to reduce solo driving. We will experiment and bra
instorm and support
everyone’s collective attempts. We’ll try some crazy things, some of which will work very well.



I
will undertake "adventures in driving alternatives," to experience how well alternatives work to
accomplish certain trips, trying out c
arpooling, transit, biking, scootering, walking, etc. I
understand that for some trips, driving alone may end up being the best option.

However, I am
willing to undertake some inconvenience, provided my personal sacrifice is not too great.

I will
share m
y experiences with others.



I will stay positive about
LMC
attempts to reduce driving. I will not denigrate other residents for
their choices, even if I would personally choose differently.

I’ll listen and help facilitate
situations when human tensions a
rise. I’ll work to discover the uniquely valuable characteristics
in everyone.



I’m happy to join Mayor
Johnson,
Google / Yahoo!,
the real
-
estate developer
, the
local
Sierra
Club
c
hapter,
th
e local
Bicycle Alliance,
the
Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance,
the powerful
employer lobby,
and the
Transit Authority in this important endeavor.



Signature: ___________
_________________ , Date: ______________________



Appendix
G
: LMC Chat Detail


Five example cities were chosen to show some national geographic distribution.


The table below is provided to
categorize
LMC
chat
content.
For

each row/column

in the table, there is
is
groupware chatter.



_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cities21 / CUTR

1

LMC Appendices