The initial challenge for any reviewer of this book is certainly the classification of the book itself and how to interpret the audience for which it is intended. The publisher describes the book on the back cover as a “unique guide to urban transportation planning, design and impact estimation,” indicating that it might well serve as “an ideal design textbook for all senior undergraduate and graduate students in civil engineering.” This seems like a rather conventional claim for the book, although its modest length might imply otherwise. However, it is only with a careful reading of the preface that the intentions of the author become much more apparent. Here, Schoon indicates that the “book aims at assisting the analyst to provide decision makers with a range of solutions by illustrating how service policies regarding quality of service, fares, investment levels, and environmental impacts affect and are affected by each other” (p. viii). This more clearly describes the uniqueness of the book, and does much to clarify the perceived dichotomy contained within the title, between “systems and policies” and the “project” basis for the book. Essentially, the author believes that the understanding of the trade-offs between transportation system performance and the external impacts of these systems is best promoted by review and analysis at the project level. The book is consistently directed to this central premise. It is important to note that John Schoon’s book only describes “the major features of the planning and design process of generating successful, pragmatic designs” (p. xi). In particular, he concentrates on sketch planning procedures, so that a broader range of options may be considered. In order to do all this within a length of less than 200 pages, the author provides very little material on techniques, relying instead on the available literature on transport theory and analysis. His references here are extensive and draw on several decades of development. The structure of the book is simple and direct, with three major sections relating to introductory concepts, long-range transportation planning, and short-range transportation planning. Each of the two sections on planning includes an extensive chapter on a selected case study, with the long-range example dealing with multi-modal technology and service options, and the short-range example dealing with transport demand management and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. These examples are elaborate in their detail, incorporate manual or spreadsheet formats, and certainly reflect the university teaching career of the author. Given this rather restrictive and directed purpose for the book, the central question is does it work in a meaningful way? There are certainly many occasions within the book where the reader is looking for more. Definitions for many basic terms are often missing (e.g., performance standards) or are incomplete and confusing (e.g., the difference between TSM and TDM), and the author often chooses to throw in a numerical example in lieu of a description of theory. The concept of elasticity is explained in a simple graph, and perhaps most disconcertingly, there is a lack of adequate background on evaluation procedures. Schoon would undoubtedly fall back on his caveat in the preface, where he carefully states that he will “avoid the use of techniques where assumptions and methods may not be readily discerned or understood” (p. ix). This will certainly leave many areas of potential dispute between the author and any given reader. In summary, the focus of Schoon’s book is both noble and innovative, and clearly demonstrates his central thesis that transport system, service, and external trade-offs best manifest themselves at the project evaluation level. The structure and format of the book classifies it strongly as a college textbook, but the lack of at least some “essential” substance means that it cannot stand on its own. In dispute here is only the degree of self-sufficiency. In my view an additional 25 pages would have done it, with more material particularly focussed on evaluation procedures, and this could have been done without any loss of conciseness. The argument is only one of judgement and in no way detracts from the uniqueness and sincerity of the work itself.
Read full abstract
Jun 1, 2008
A N Starovoitov 
Open Access