Transit-Oriented Development: Strategies to Promote Vibrant Communities

Elizabeth Ridlington Brad Heavner MaryPIRG Foundation

Winter 2005 Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the following people for their time and assistance in provid- ing information for this report: Corey McDaniel of MARTA, Jillian Detweiler of Tri- Met, Leon Vignes of the Arlington Department of Community Planning, Housing, and Development, Frank Turner of the City of Plano, Cheri Bush of DART, Rachel Kennedy of the Jersey City Planning Department, and Monica Etz of the New Jersey Transit Village Initiative.

The authors gratefully acknowledge Dru Schmidt-Perkins of 1000 Friends of Mary- land, Dan Pontious of the Citizens Planning and Housing Association, and George Maurer of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation for peer review of this project. Thanks also to Tony Dutzik for editorial support.

MaryPIRG Foundation thanks the Surdna Foundation, the Town Creek Foundation and the Clayton Baker Trust for their generous support of this report.

The authors alone bear responsibility for any factual errors. The recommendations are those of the MaryPIRG Foundation. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders.

© 2004 MaryPIRG Foundation

The Maryland Public Interest Research Foundation (MaryPIRG Foundation) is a non- profit, nonpartisan 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to protecting the environment, the rights of consumers, and good government in Maryland.

For additional copies of this report, send $10 (including shipping) to: MaryPIRG Foundation 3121 Saint Paul Street, #10 Baltimore, MD 21218

For more information about MaryPIRG and the MaryPIRG Foundation, please con- tact our office at 410-467-0439 or visit the MaryPIRG website at www.marypirg.org.

Insert cover photo credit(s) and design (Harriet Eckstein, Kathleen Krushas) credits Table of Contents

Executive Summary 4

Introduction 7

Benefits of Transit-Oriented Development 9 Higher Property Values and Tax Revenues 9 Increased Residential and Commercial Values 9 Increased Revenues 10 Reduced Driving and Air Pollution 10 Renewal of Older Neighborhoods 13

Successful Programs to Promote Transit-Oriented Development 14 Arlington, VA 14 Portland, OR 16 Dallas and Plano, TX 18 Atlanta, GA 21 Jersey City, NJ 22

TOD Potential in Maryland 25 Existing TOD 25 Untapped Potential at Existing Stations 26 Future Stations 27 Obstacles 27

Conclusion and Recommendations 29 Recommendations for Local Governments 29 Recommendations for Transit Agencies 31 Recommendations for the State 32

Notes 34 Executive Summary

aryland could strengthen its ef- of life, and an increased tax base. Cities forts to control sprawl and pro- across the country have tapped into the M vide a high quality of life for the potential of their rail systems by promot- state’s residents by encouraging more ing transit-oriented development. transit-oriented development near rail • Arlington, Virginia, seized the stations. opportunity presented by construc- Transit-oriented development (TOD)— tion of two Metro rail lines in 1980 characterized by residential units to revitalize commercial areas and alongside or above stores, restaurants, and neighborhoods. By locating rail offices and a design that allows residents stations in existing neighborhoods, to choose between walking, driving, or zoning the surrounding area for riding transit—offers an attractive alter- high-intensity use, and creating a native to sprawling residential suburbs separate identity for each station, and mega-malls that are accessible only Arlington has increased its popula- by car. tion by 26 percent countywide and TOD is valuable to individuals, devel- collects one-third of its property tax opers, and local governments. For ex- revenue from the 7 percent of its ample, a study that reviewed the value of land that is near rail stations. buildings solely by their proximity to rail stations found that office buildings in • Coordination by the transit agency Dallas located close to rail stations in- and state, county, and local govern- creased in taxable value by 25 percent ments in Portland, Oregon, to from 1997 to 2001, compared to a 12 promote TOD has led to $3 billion percent increase for comparable proper- in development next to both urban ties farther away. and suburban rail stations. Property Focusing shops, offices, parks and tax exemptions and low requirements homes within walking distance of rail sta- for providing parking have also tions provides significant returns, includ- helped to encourage TOD. ing urban revitalization, improved quality

4 Transit Oriented Development • Rail-oriented development in the • Include TOD visions and zoning in Dallas region has been spurred by tax all long-term growth plans and increment financing and impact fee establish programs to coordinate waivers offered by the city of Plano development and support TOD- and by an effort by Dallas Area serving improvements. Rapid Transit to simplify coordina- • Reach out to communities to help tion between the transit agency, local them recognize the many forms that governments, and developers. TOD can take to fit community characteristics and incorporate Maryland has many opportunities for neighborhood feedback about captur- constructing TOD in both urban and ing the greatest benefit from TOD. suburban settings. • Request, and take advantage of, • Prince George’s County has room to expertise and resources available accommodate new residents and from the Maryland Department of businesses: over 3,000 acres of land Transportation (MDOT), which has within a half mile of Metro stations a broad range of tools to support is currently undeveloped or under- growth in transit station areas and to developed. help communities achieve appropri- ate and beneficial development. • The Baltimore region has 46 rail MDOT’s tools range from support- stations, twenty of which currently ing streetscape improvements on offer parking. That space could be state highways to planning TOD and developed to some more intensive implementation strategies. use with parking incorporated into the project. Transit agencies should: • Adding rail lines or extending exist- • Facilitate acquisition of sufficient ing systems would add rail stations developable land around rail stops by around which to focus development. leasing transit agency-owned land, by In Baltimore, the proposed system helping developers consolidate small expansion would create over 60 more parcels or by creating a partnership of stations. The Inner Purple Line near all the property owners who would Washington, D.C. would add at least be involved in a development. seven stations, and the Corridor Cities Transitway could add more. • Minimize the impact of the parking constructed to serve a rail station. When parking structures are needed Taking advantage of the potential of to replace surface spaces lost to transit-oriented development in Maryland redevelopment, transit agencies will require focused effort by local govern- should ensure that parking facilities ments, the state, and transit agencies. are integrated into the overall TOD Local governments should begin by plan, support pedestrian access, and creating a TOD coordinator position, enhance the project’s value, and someone who will help direct the efforts should keep parking construction of the multiple agencies that are involved costs low by requiring the minimum in TOD projects and aid developers with number of spaces and promoting the many hurdles present in a mixed resi- shared use of parking space by dential and retail infill development. In commuters, residents, and shoppers. addition, local governments should:

Executive Summary 5 • Consider the TOD potential of within priority funding areas to station locations when planning the receive focused state attention and route of future rail lines. resources to spur development. In selecting Priority Places from The state should: candidate locations, the Maryland Department of Planning should • Build on MDOT’s demonstrated give priority to applications that capabilities in promoting local have TOD elements. TOD-supportive initiatives by expanding resources available to • Commit to locating all state offices, promote TOD at existing stations whether in leased or purchased and help communities build suc- buildings, at transit-accessible sites cessful projects. as existing leases expire. • Strongly support the Priority Places Strategy, which designates sites

6 Transit Oriented Development Introduction

aryland residents suffer from the shops—a grocery store, a dry cleaner, a effects of sprawl. Spread-out de- bookstore or flower shop—and restau- M velopments with homes far rants. In the next block, or even above removed from commercial areas mean the retail stores, are apartments and con- that residents must drive to complete dominiums. Beyond that are townhouses even the simplest errands—to go to work, or free-standing homes on small lots. In to pick up a child from school, or to buy the broader neighborhood beyond are a gallon of milk—losing time in traffic larger homes with bigger yards. that would otherwise be spent with fam- Living within walking distance of a ily or in some leisure activity. The shift train station provides innumerable small to widely dispersed, automobile-depen- benefits. Workers can read or relax dur- dent development has resulted in wors- ing their commute via train. Picking up ening air pollution, the loss of treasured the dry cleaning entails nothing more open space, and the decline in once-vi- than ducking into a shop on the way brant urban neighborhoods. home. Buying the one forgotten, but es- Thus it is not surprising that transit- sential, item for dinner requires walking oriented development and projects with to the store on the corner and permits similar traits are increasingly valued by chatting with the neighbors on the way. the public. Transit-oriented development The evening’s entertainment can be at a constructed near rail stations can include cultural event just blocks from home. residential, office, and retail space and has The popularity of transit-accessible a design that offers multiple travel op- neighborhoods with shops and services tions, including walking, driving, and within easy walking distance of homes is transit. Many older towns and neighbor- demonstrated through lower vacancy hoods that grew up around trolley lines, rates and increased home sale prices. A such as Bethesda and Chevy Chase, are widely respected forecast of real estate essentially transit-oriented development. investment predicts that “markets served Closest to the rail station are small with mass-transportation alternatives and

Introduction 7 attractive close-in neighborhoods” will be space rather than serving as centers of increasingly desirable “as people strive to neighborhood activity. Local and county make their lives more convenient.”1 governments can seize the opportunity Transit-oriented development benefits presented by these stations. Growth plans towns and cities, also. As the population that envision development near rail sta- has shifted to outlying developments, the tions, zoning to facilitate that vision, and tax base in older towns and cities has de- assistance for developers in creating a clined, making it harder for those places community with housing, offices, and to support schools, maintain parks and shops are among the relatively small steps libraries, and provide basic city services. than can lead to more than just parking Attractive urban places draw retailers and lots near rail stations. residents, increasing economic activity Residents’ desire to have the option of and boosting property values. not driving and to spend more time with Maryland already has rail transit—the family ensures the success of well- Metro in areas surrounding Washington, designed TOD projects. Because of D.C., the light rail and subway in Balti- TOD’s inherent attractiveness, a rela- more, and commuter rail between the two tively small investment by Maryland’s cities—but too many train stations are towns and counties in promoting TOD surrounded by parking lots and empty can earn significant returns.

8 Transit Oriented Development Benefits of Transit-Oriented Development

ransit-oriented development has far- accessible land by pursuing compact de- reaching benefits. Cities and coun- velopment with a strong commercial Tties benefit from higher property component. values, communities gain new life, indi- viduals spend less money on transporta- tion, and everyone benefits from reduced Increased Residential and air pollution. Development that enables Commercial Values people to arrive at work or at home on Residents value having the option of foot or by train as easily as by car offers riding transit and are willing to pay more the greatest benefits but even focused for housing that offers them that choice. commercial development around rail sta- Store owners find that locating their store tions provides more returns than sprawl- near transit increases the ease with which ing residential tracts. customers can stop by. And employers notice that employees have better morale if they do not have to drive on congested roads to get to work. For these reasons and others, residential and commercial Higher Property Values property close to rail tends to be more valuable than comparable parcels and and Tax Revenues buildings not reachable by rail. (In some Property within walking distance of rail cases, though, rail transit may have no stations generally is more desirable than impact or a negative impact on property similar property farther away. This values if nuisance factors such as noise or suggests that it is particularly impor- unsightly elevated railways outweigh the tant to make the fullest use of transit- transportation benefits.)

Benefits of Transit-Oriented Development 9 Increased residential property values • A study of joint developments— have been measured through higher sale projects undertaken by a transit prices and higher rents. agency and a private developer—in Atlanta and Washington, D.C. • Portland’s light rail system increased showed that they had both higher the value of homes by approximately rents and lower vacancy rates.8 10.6 percent when homes were within a 1,500-foot walk of the rail station.2 Increased Revenues • A study of residential property values Developing land near rail stations into near Chicago area rail stops found neighborhoods where homes, shops, and that homes 500 feet from a station offices are within walking distance of sold for 26 percent more than homes transit allows a community to capture 5,000 feet from a station.3 even more of the value of transit-acces- sible areas. The county of Arlington, VA, • Rental units within one quarter mile has pursued this approach, concentrating of the Pleasant Hill rail station in the the development of retail and office space San Francisco Bay area rented for near its Metro stops. As a result, nearly 10-15 percent more than units 4 one-third of the county’s property tax farther away. revenue comes from just 7.6 percent of its land area.9 Transit can increase the value of com- Development at rail stations can pro- mercial property also. vide additional income to support transit • After plans for construction of the services. If the project is built on transit Lafayette BART rail station in San agency-owned land, the developer will Francisco were confirmed, the value have to purchase or rent the land. A good of commercial land surrounding the TOD project should increase transit rid- station area increased by 13 percent ership, resulting in higher farebox in- annually from 1963-1968. In con- come. This additional revenue can fund trast, values in areas beyond the more frequent service, transit facility station’s reach increased by only 3.6 maintenance, system expansion, or lower percent annually.5 fares. Several developments have been built on property owned by MARTA, • More recently, in Dallas, office Atlanta’s transit authority. MARTA esti- buildings located close to rail stations mates that it will earn a 22 percent rate increased in taxable value by 24.7 of return on its $100 million investment percent from 1997 to 2001, com- at Lindbergh station through ground pared to an 11.5 percent increase for leases and increased ridership.10 comparable property farther away.6

Proximity to rail can increase occu- pancy rates. • Occupancy rose eight percent at Reduced Driving and high-end office space near Dallas’ Air Pollution light rail system versus just one Transit-oriented development also pro- percent for space more than a quar- vides less-tangible benefits. By placing ter mile from a rail station.7 more jobs and homes within reach of rail

10 Transit Oriented Development service, TOD reduces the need for indi- viduals to drive. Further, residents of neighborhoods that are designed to make walking and bicycling possible and driv- ing optional will drive less.11 TOD can reduce driving through two methods. Some residents live within walking distance of the station. They can walk to the train to commute to work or to go shopping. TOD projects offer multiple travel options, Second, and perhaps more significant, such as in this Plano, Texas, development is the effect of commercial development with its broad sidewalk and street serving around a rail stop, even if few or no homes homes and stores located next to a rail are nearby. A substantial share of car trips station. are not just for commuting but for com- pleting errands on the way to or from work.12 Many people are reluctant to take transit to work because they lose the abil- Though government may need to in- ity to make other stops. If more services crease spending on transit and pedestrian are available at or near train stops, riding amenities to meet increased demand for transit becomes more convenient. People these services once a TOD project is con- may drive to the train station in the morn- structed, this is more cost-effective than ing and complete errands on foot before building roads: it costs less per capita to driving home at the end of the day, re- build transit than to construct roads to ducing their total amount of driving. A move people equally well.15 survey of people’s travel choices in Port- For individuals, driving fewer miles can land, Oregon, demonstrates the impact translate to less spending on gas and re- of building homes, stores, and offices pairs and possibly to owning fewer cars. within walking distance of transit stations. Someone spending less on transportation People in neighborhoods with this mix is then able to spend more in restaurants, of uses near transit drove 26 percent less at neighborhood shops, or on housing. compared to those near transit locations This can have implications for the long- without this varied development.13 (See term financial resources of families, Table 1.) because money spent on housing pro-

Table 1. Building a Mix of Homes, Stores, and Offices Near Transit Reduces Driving14

Mode Share

VMT per Autos per Area Characteristics Auto Walk Transit Bike Other Capita Household

Good Transit & Mixed Use 58% 27% 12% 2% 2% 9.80 0.93 Good Transit Only 74% 15% 1% 1% 1% 13.28 1.50 Rest of Multnomah County 82% 10% 4% 2% 4% 17.34 1.74 Rest of Region 87% 6% 1% 1% 5% 21.79 1.93

Benefits of Transit-Oriented Development 11 vides greater equity than money spent on improve air quality. A short drive to a rail a vehicle. Spending $10,000 on a home stop can still produce significant pollu- yields a return of $4,730 over 10 years, tion because catalytic converters that trap whereas the same amount spent on a car air pollution from cars do not work well produces just $910.16 Thus paying for when the vehicle is cold.19 Thus, a de- housing rather than a vehicle adds more velopment pattern that allows a few more to residents’ long-term financial outlook. people to walk to the train station can Employers and private businesses also produce emissions reductions. benefit from transit-oriented develop- ment. By locating near a transit stop sur- rounded by housing and other amenities, businesses make it possible for their em- ployees to walk or ride transit to work. Employees who can ride transit to work may have shorter or easier commutes and thus have higher morale at work.17 Reduced driving has the important and widespread public benefit of cutting air pollution from vehicles, an especially important consideration in places like Maryland that struggle with severe health-threatening air pollution. One study estimates that widespread construc- tion of TOD can cut annual vehicle miles traveled by 13 percent.18 Even small de- creases in driving, made possible by in- creased residential density and better Walkability is a key characteristic of pedestrian access to transit stations, can TOD projects.

Table 2. Predicted Economic Benefits of Central Station Rehabilitation21

Increased Increased Increased Increased Household Property Value Property Tax City Size Employment Income (in millions) (in thousands)

< 50,000 45-325 $80-$435 $5-$60 $250-$300 50,000-100,000 115-825 $85-$460 $10-$65 $500-$3,250 100,000-250,000 170-975 $140-$575 $15-$90 $750-$4,500 250,000-500,000 190-1,025 $155-$870 $15-$150 $750-$7,500 500,000-2,000,000 260-1,435 $175-$1,055 $25-$205 $1,250-$10,250

12 Transit Oriented Development Renewal of Older an active street life and local evening events. Neighborhoods Even seemingly modest improvements Transit-oriented development can also such as rehabilitating a central rail sta- help revitalize older neighborhoods by tion can help rejuvenate a neighborhood. drawing new residents and investment. In one study, rehabilitation included im- The quality-of-life benefits of TOD proved public access, greater connectiv- can attract new residents who might not ity between modes of travel, and more otherwise consider living in an urban lo- visible transit options, changes that might cation. People who are tired of fighting be expected to occur with TOD also. traffic congestion to reach a suburban Such improvements were predicted to home and instead want to walk or ride boost employment in the community, the train to work find TOD appealing. raise household income, and increase Younger workers who seek an urban set- property values and tax revenue.20 (See ting may be drawn to neighborhoods with Table 2.)

Succesful Programs 13 Successful Programs to Promote Transit-Oriented Development

number of cities have pursued gration of new developments into exist- TOD at rail stations and have ex- ing neighborhoods. Crucial was a pre- A perienced substantial benefits construction decision to shift the Orange from their efforts. The following discus- line to the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor, sion reviews development projects and rather than aligning it with I-66.23 This highlights some of the policies that facili- placed five rail stations close to existing tated TOD. neighborhoods. The areas within one quarter mile of rail stations were zoned for greater de- velopment, which has helped draw devel- Arlington, VA opers by offering potentially greater Arlington, Virginia has made a concerted returns.24 The county created a sector effort to focus growth in the corridors plan for each station area, identifying one along the two Metro lines that have con- as a cultural area with a library and the- nected it to Washington, D.C. since 1980. ater and giving another a government The result is vibrant, thriving, popular focus centered around a courthouse with projects near each Metro stop that gen- office buildings. Sector plans have helped erate substantial property tax revenue for create the kind of urban village that Ar- the county. lington sought from transit-oriented de- When the Washington Metropolitan velopment. Though parking minimums Area Transit Authority (WMATA) began are relatively low because of the availabil- planning to extend two subway lines to ity of rail transit, developers generally Arlington, the area was comprised of un- have built more than required. attractive and declining commercial Neighborhoods beyond the station area strips.22 Arlington sought to use the new were zoned to remain residential and have lines to revitalize commercial areas and retained their single family homes. The neighborhoods. county tries to protect the neighborhoods’ The county has largely achieved its residential feel by promoting walking and goals through good planning and inte- limiting through traffic.25 All projects are

14 Transit Oriented Development Stations on the western end of Washington's Orange line provided the backbone of Arlington's redevelopment efforts.

Map courtesy of Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

designed to be pedestrian- and cyclist- tive place to live. Its population grew by friendly to facilitate use of the subway.26 26 percent from 1980 to 2000.29 Easy Today the development corridors access to transit has kept vehicle trips along the two lines contain 31.4 million down, especially in the Rosslyn-Ballston square feet of office space, which is more corridor where 73 percent of Metro rid- than 90 percent of all commercial office ers walk to the station.30 Metro ridership space in Arlington, and nearly 5 million has grown by 50 percent.31 Many resi- square feet of street-level retail space.27 dents do not even own cars: 20 percent The areas are not exclusively for com- of renters and 10 percent of homeowners mercial and retail activity, however. Over do not own a vehicle, enabling them to 30,000 residential units have been con- spend more on housing or other services.32 structed near the Metro stations.28 In the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor alone, This TOD has helped Arlington to property near the five Metro stops is val- thrive, growing and remaining an attrac- ued at $9 billion. Though this property

Succesful Programs 15 equals only 7.6 percent of the land in Ar- them and apply their planning skill lington, it yields nearly one-third of the and political ability to ensure the county’s real estate tax revenue.33 This plans are followed. large tax base enables the county to have • Tax increment districts. Tax incre- the lowest real estate tax rate in northern ment financing has allowed the city Virginia.34 of Portland to designate tax revenues collected from property value in- creases in a certain area to pay for revitalization in that area. In Portland, OR Portland’s Gateway District, tax increment financing is expected to Whereas Arlington illustrates the value provide $164 million for public of redeveloping an urbanized area, improvements.36 Portland’s success in promoting TOD provides an example of the development • Property tax exemptions. Both potential of rail transit when extensive Portland and the suburb of Gresham open space is available. waive property taxes for 10 years on A number of policies adopted by the improvements (not land) that meet transit agency (TriMet) and local govern- density, design, and transit-accessi- ments have helped promote TOD. Some bility requirements. Developers must of those policies and programs are: demonstrate that the property tax exemption is necessary to make the • Start planning early for TOD. project viable.37 Planning for TOD begins early and • Impact fee discounts. Gresham includes all relevant agencies. Long imposes traffic impact fees to pay for before construction commenced on road upgrades to serve new projects. the Westside light rail line, the state Developments in pedestrian and Department of Transportation, transit districts receive a discount on Metro (the multi-county regional this fee.38 government), TriMet, Washington County, and the cities of Portland, • Limited parking requirements. Beaverton, and Hillsboro spent $2 Portland has adopted a Central City million to begin planning for devel- Transportation Management Plan to opment near future rail stops. The ensure livability and mobility while Westside line’s route was determined enabling growth in its downtown. in part by the availability of open The plan limits the amount of land near stations. By agreement, the parking that can be constructed region created special zoning dis- downtown. Office buildings cannot tricts around light rail stations to include more than 0.7 parking spaces allow greater development and limit per 1,000 square feet of occupied car-oriented use. The plans were building and new residential build- developed with extensive input from ings do not have to include any the public, elected officials, landown- parking at all. Another important ers, and local government staff to aspect of the plan is encouraging the ensure broad support.35 Though construction of 15,000 new residen- TriMet led the effort to create tial units downtown, allowing growth specific station area plans, ultimately without adding significantly to cities and counties have had to adopt congestion.39

16 Transit Oriented Development • Joint development. TriMet offers agency-owned land for development on the condition that projects meet transit-supportive requirements.40 • Flexible development. TriMet adjusts station and parking plans to create better TOD. At the Beaverton Creek MAX station, TriMet altered plans for a park and ride lot to allow development closer to the station and permitted some short-term parking to serve shops in the devel- opment.41 Portland's Orenco Station development is as accessible by The best example of the strength of car as by train. this approach is at the suburban 190-acre Orenco Station on the Westside light rail above in the town center area.42 Slightly line. The development, which was rec- further from the station, housing options ognized by the National Association of are more varied and range from single- Homebuilders as the best master planned family homes to townhouses to lofts. In community in the country, includes of- total, Orenco Station contains over 1,800 fices and retail with housing on the floors residential units, which have been sell-

Advance planning and creative design allowed the developer to include shops and apartments above Mockingbird Station in Dallas, Texas.

Succesful Programs 17 ing for 20-30 percent more than other development proposals.48 This coordina- nearby homes. Commercial space has tion is made easier by DART’s decision been similarly sought-after: rents are to have one point of contact within the higher than average and vacancy rates are agency for all TOD-related activity. low. Another success of Orenco Station DART has recently expanded its TOD has been to increase transit use by resi- efforts and is now leasing transit-agency dents, over 70 percent of whom reported property to developers. Parking lots at using transit more than before they stations provide room for development. moved to Orenco Station.43 DART does not require developers to Total investment within walking dis- replace all displaced surface parking be- tance of Portland’s light rail lines has been cause some parking lots under consider- more than $3 billion and Portland’s early ation have excess capacity and parking planning for development near rail meant demand will be reduced by allowing that over $500 million in development shared parking between retail, residen- occurred along the Westside line before tial, and transit users.49 it even began operating.44 One of the best examples of TOD in the city of Dallas is Mockingbird Station, which has turned a warehouse and its Dallas and Plano, TX surroundings into a vibrant gathering area. An irregular shape bordered on two Dallas has had a light rail system since sides by a busy road and the Central Ex- only 1996 but nonetheless has experi- pressway, the site originally held a 1940s enced significant development around brick warehouse owned by Western Elec- stations. More than $1 billion worth of tric. The building has been renovated and development has occurred around the the site now contains a movie theater, new transit system.45 The value of prop- clothing stores such as Urban Outfitters erties near rail has risen dramatically. and the Gap, restaurants and a coffee From 1997 to 2001, property adjacent to shop, and other retail. There are also over light rail stations gained more value than 200 apartments that are fully occupied, comparable property not accessible by 250,000 square feet of office space, and light rail.46 nearly 1,500 parking spaces.50 The light Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), the rail station is a transfer point between two transit authority, promotes development lines and is just a 10-12 minute ride on around transit stations to increase transit light rail from downtown. Mockingbird ridership and public acceptance of tran- Station is also accessible by car from the sit and to integrate transit into the com- nearby freeway and surface streets. Most munity. DART has adopted numerous of the parking is underground, however, policies to support its goals. The agency to ensure that cars do not dominate the incorporates TOD into early planning site. One weakness of the development is stages for new rail lines. Developers have that though the site itself is pedestrian appreciated this early attention to devel- friendly, it is poorly connected to sur- opment because it gives them a chance rounding areas. to influence the location and design of Though public subsidies were available the station to best complement TOD.47 to help with financing and street improve- DART coordinates with the munici- ments, the developer opted to construct palities in its service area to ensure land the project with private funds only. The use and transportation goals are com- site’s proximity to the freeway helped the plementary and to smooth zoning and developer obtain financing for the project.

18 Transit Oriented Development Investors who might have been hesitant to back a transit-oriented development were willing to provide support because the site was also accessible by car. How- ever, enough people arrive at the site by train that the primary developer is seek- ing to lower the amount of parking in the next development stage.51 The odd shape of the Mockingbird Station location made it crucial that plans for the rail station and the surrounding buildings be developed at the same time. Had the light rail stop been built with- out consideration for other uses at the The light rail carries people from Dallas to location, the strange shape of the site Plano attractions. likely would have precluded any signifi- cant TOD.52 accessible downtown area. Those policies Other TOD projects in the DART include: system include South Side on Lamar and • Tax increment financing. Funds for Galatyn Park in Dallas and the Eastside infrastructure and building improve- Village projects in Plano. South Side on ments and land purchases within the Lamar includes 450 loft units, a restau- downtown area are provided by a rant and club, and the headquarters for special development tax district. The the Dallas police department. The project tax increment finance (TIF) district is valued at $150 million. Galatyn Park is is the result of cooperation by the a 12.5 acre site with housing, retail, of- four government entities that collect fices, a Renaissance Hotel and a perfor- property tax revenue in Plano. For mance hall.53 Some of the site’s success 15 years, tax revenue on any growth results from the station location, which in the appraised value of properties DART adjusted during the planning pro- within the district goes to the TIF cess when a major landowner asked that rather than to the city, county, or the station be moved to facilitate devel- other entities. When the TIF was opment.54 created, total property values within The Eastside Village projects in Plano the district were $328 million. Now, reflect extensive work by both DART and values have risen by $123 million, the city of Plano. In the early 1990s, yielding $3.6 million in revenue. The Plano, a city of 250,000 located 20 miles TIF ultimately is expected to gener- north of Dallas, crafted a vision for its ate $20 million. Projects financed by downtown that included residential and the TIF include the renovation of a commercial use, infill growth, and a more 1930s school gym into a performance urban feel. The city changed its zoning space.55 requirements to make this possible—per- mitting live-work units, allowing build- • Historic preservation tax abatement. ings to cover the entire lot, and letting Restored and maintained historic restaurants offer sidewalk seating—and properties can receive a 38 to 100 undertook streetscape improvements. percent tax reduction from all four Plano also adopted specific policies to governments that collect property promote redevelopment in the transit- tax revenue downtown.

Succesful Programs 19 mize the rail line’s impact on develop- ment. Plano worked closely with DART to select an appropriate station location near city-owned property and to acquire land for a large project next to the rail station. The city had funds for infrastruc- ture improvements but no money for land assembly, so it agreed to build the infra- structure projects at the station platform in exchange for DART’s purchasing the remainder of the land necessary to sup- Planners in Plano located multi-use port a development.58 The city closed the buildings rather than parking lots next to street between its property and the rail the rail station. station to allow the project to be fully connected to rail. With the rail station in place and hav- • Development fee waivers. Plano has ing assembled land, Plano sought a de- designated an empowerment zone veloper for the property. It selected a for downtown and the surrounding developer and granted a 70-year ground neighborhoods in which develop- lease, with rent tied to the developer’s net ment fees for sewer and water service operating income from the project. The and building permit fees are waived resulting development occupies 6.7 acres for many new construction, remodel- on two blocks and includes 460 apart- ing, and rehabilitation projects. For ments and 40,000 square feet of retail some multi-family housing units, the space. The properties were valued at ap- park fee is also waived. Thus far, the proximately $2 million in 1998 and to- city has waived nearly $225,000 day have a tax valuation of over $20 worth of fees for $28 million of million.59 construction.56 In addition to promoting growth downtown, Plano’s redevelopment efforts • Lowered parking requirements. have resulted in higher transit ridership. Plano permits building owners to Initial projections for Plano’s downtown add up to 4,000 square feet of space station anticipated 100 trips per day but without increasing the amount of actual use has been closer to 1,000 trips parking provided. New buildings in per day.60 the downtown area must offer Plano will soon launch a pilot “Smart parking but at a lower ratio than Commute” loan program offering loca- buildings elsewhere in the city. tion-efficient mortgages to encourage Public parking, provided in small lots people to buy transit-accessible homes. throughout the downtown area, and People who live near transit spend less shared parking—made possible on commuting and therefore may be able because shoppers during the day can to afford a larger home loan. The city is park in spaces used by residents at testing the program in conjunction with night—reduce the need for every Fannie Mae (a national lender), local building to include parking.57 lenders, and transit agencies.61 When DART planned to extend the light rail to Plano, the city sought to maxi-

20 Transit Oriented Development roads. Developer enthusiasm is great Atlanta, GA enough that MARTA now receives calls Atlanta city government and the Metro- from developers wanting to know about politan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority future development plans for particular (MARTA) have made significant efforts station areas.66 to promote transit-oriented development Development has occurred at many along MARTA’s 60 miles of rail line, par- stations in the downtown area along the ticularly at urban locations.62 Develop- North line. Former industrial sites such ers have responded: in 2000, construction as an old steel mill and land used for park- and renovation efforts within one-quar- ing have been converted into attractive ter mile of rail stations were worth $885 new offices and housing. million.63 Employers, too, have taken Lindbergh Center is just one example notice and a major regional employer has of TOD in Atlanta. Previously an indus- moved back into the city. trial site, the 47-acre property was owned MARTA and Atlanta have both helped by MARTA, which obtained a federal to promote TOD. Atlanta zoned the ar- grant to help fund redevelopment. The eas near downtown stations such as Lindbergh station development, only Lindbergh Center for a mix of commer- partially complete, eventually will include cial and residential use. Developers have 2.7 million square feet of office space, been drawn to TOD opportunities by 300,000 square feet of ground-level re- these zoning changes that allow more tail, apartments, condominiums, and a development and reduced parking re- hotel. The project also has, however, over quirements, both factors that increase the 10,000 parking spaces, reducing the profitability of a project.64 development’s potential for increasing MARTA, which owns land around transit ridership or alleviating traffic in many stations, has made large sites avail- the neighborhood.67 able for projects that provide revenues, The Lindbergh Center project and boost transit use, and help revitalize a others along the North line helped draw neighborhood with a mix of pedestrian- a major employer back into the city. For friendly residential and commercial con- decades, the city has struggled to retain struction. The developer leases or buys jobs. Especially in the 1980s, employers property from MARTA, providing rev- relocated to less expensive suburban sites enue for the transit agency. In pursuit of near a beltway highway. The result is that its neighborhood revitalization goals, 70 percent of the region’s office space is MARTA coordinates with the Atlanta now located in the suburbs.68 Regional Commission, a planning body, Bell South, a regional phone company to sponsor studies to learn what the com- and the area’s second largest employer, munity surrounding a rail station would decided in 1999 to consolidate its offices like their neighborhood to look like. With from multiple suburban locations and that information available to guide devel- return to downtown Atlanta.69 Wanting opers, MARTA requests project plans.65 to improve the quality of life and produc- The success of some early TOD tivity of its employees by reducing their projects has helped draw developers’ in- time stuck in congested traffic, Bell South terest toward other rail stations. Property moved 10,500 employees to three down- values are generally higher near transit town locations near rail stations.70 Bell as people have come to realize that living South’s decision to concentrate its em- or working near transit eliminates some ployees downtown is a significant sign of of the need to drive Atlanta’s congested progress for Atlanta.

Succesful Programs 21 At North Station, MARTA worked The success of the HBLR line in en- with BellSouth to build its new headquar- couraging Jersey City’s rebirth is partially ters. BellSouth’s 2 million square foot the result of the city’s strong planning for building was constructed over the rail sta- how to capture the greatest value from tion. Because the building was planned the line. In 1985, the city recommended before the station was constructed, a new rail line to meet the area’s long-term MARTA was able to integrate the transportation demand.75 After extensive building’s foundation into the station and planning, work on the rail line began in create a direct link between the station 1996. The city created redevelopment and the offices. The site also offers a re- plans for more than 60 neighborhoods and tail mall.71 BellSouth’s third downtown placed transit overlay zones around sta- office is located at Lenox, slightly farther tions to encourage development.76 north of downtown. Planning had two benefits. First, mas- Transit-oriented development in At- ter plan requirements that were clearly lanta has not produced perfect results. In communicated to prospective developers many cases, there is little pedestrian link allowed rapid approval once formal between new projects and surrounding project proposals were submitted. Sec- neighborhoods. Despite the availability ond, this long planning period allowed of transit, parking requirements for new developers to anticipate the opening of buildings have not been reduced as much the line and to construct projects along as would be desirable (lenders have been the route of the light rail train. Redevel- reluctant to support projects with less opment activity increased as the exact parking than would be necessary in sub- route of the light rail line became clear urbs), which raises the cost of new build- and developers knew how close to a train ings.72 And Atlanta received limited stop their project would be.77 public benefits and amenities such as af- To further promote walkable devel- fordable housing and public space from opments and transit use, the city reduced developers because zoning densities were its parking requirements to just one guaranteed to be very high. The city space per 1,000 square feet of office could have established slightly lower ini- space, or approximately enough parking tial zoning densities and allowed devel- for 20 percent of workers.78 Reduced opers to build more units provided they parking requirements enable develop- created more affordable housing or pub- ers to build more office space that they lic amenities.73 can rent out, making the project more profitable. The HBLR opened in April 2000 with north-south service from Exchange Place Jersey City, NJ to southern Jersey City and Bayonne. Jer- Though Jersey City was a thriving com- sey City has had rail service to New York mercial and residential center in the early City since the early 20th century but not 1900s, it lost population in mid-century until the opening of the HBLR did it have as people moved to suburbs. Today Jer- rail transit linking neighborhoods within sey City’s population is increasing and Jersey City and surrounding towns. former industrial sites are being rebuilt, Initial TOD in Jersey City was con- thanks in part to the new Hudson-Bergen centrated at Exchange Place and New- Light Rail (HBLR) and the development port, both served by the Port Authority it has fostered by making previously un- Trans-Hudson (PATH) line to New York attractive areas more desirable.74 City. Exchange Place has been the site of

22 Transit Oriented Development New Jersey Transit Village Initiative

ew Jersey created its Transit Village Initiative in 1999 to promote transit-oriented development and increase private-sector support for Nredevelopment.81 Through planning and at relatively low cost, the program has helped lay the groundwork for privately-financed TOD in communities throughout New Jersey. Fourteen towns have been designated as transit villages after meeting certain criteria. Candidate towns must:82

• Commit to adding people, jobs, and housing. • Have a transit facility. • Have land available for development, whether in the form of open space or underused existing buildings. • Adopt a land-use plan for “achieving compact, transit-supporting, mixed-use development within walking distance of transit” (defined as within a quarter mile of transit) and already have substantial residential development in place.

Because the designation process is competitive, towns that are most likely to be selected are those that already use their transit station as a community gathering place; promote transit and seek to reduce car use; provide park- ing near transit stations but also reduce parking construction requirements near transit; and work to ensure that new projects blend in with existing buildings.83 The benefits available to transit villages include opportunities to receive funding from the state, ready assistance from 11 state agencies that play a role in development decisions, and identification to developers as places that have an established growth plan.84 Developers know that transit vil- lages want to grow and have already spent time creating a growth plan. In New Jersey, where developable land on the urban fringe is increasingly limited and many communities are resistant to any additional growth, de- velopers have been pleased to find towns that want growth and that have adopted supportive policies. Newly designated transit villages have experi- enced a large increase in developer interest.85 The state’s financial investment has been fairly limited. In the current budget, the state expects to provide $1 million worth of grants to transit villages. Other funding also has been made available, such as the $250,000 that was given to six towns and $600,000 given to one town when their transit village designation was announced, but these special grants are not a regular funding source.86 Within a few years, it should be possible to assess the impact of the Transit Village Initiative.

Succesful Programs 23 extensive commercial projects, with large Jersey City now is a thriving place. tenants such as Merrill Lynch and New housing options have helped to draw Goldman Sachs building major offices residents to this city that once was unde- there. Development at Newport has in- sirable. Jersey City’s population rose by cluded a greater mix of commercial and 240,000 from 1980 to 2000 and is ex- residential facilities. By the late 1990s and pected to rise by another 11 percent by with the route of the planned HBLR line 2020. In contrast, the population of the set, development spread to areas soon to state’s other large cities declined in the be accessible by mass transit.79 past two decades.80

24 Transit Oriented Development TOD Potential in Maryland

aryland has barely begun to tap Spring and Bethesda have experienced its potential for development substantial rejuvenation. In Silver Spring, M around transit stations. WMATA made the most of its parking lot and the space above the transit sta- tion to embark on a joint development Existing TOD that, when complete, will include office and retail space, housing, and a hotel.89 Many neighborhoods in downtown Bal- The station eventually will be surrounded timore have all the characteristics of by other offices, restaurants, shops, and TOD—residences next door to shops and public space. These developments have restaurants, offices just around the cor- produced economic benefits for ner, all within walking distance of the light rail or subway—because they grew up around the trolley system that served the city in earlier decades. MTA has pursued joint development projects near some transit stations that has led to better use of transit-accessible land. Adjacent to the Reisterstown Road Plaza mall the MTA has built a police substation using funding from the city of Baltimore and a federal Livable Commu- nities grant.87 A joint development project above the Charles Street Metro station includes 250,000 square feet of office space, 25,000 square feet of retail space, and a plaza.88 TOD has been more extensive in the Downtown Baltimore light rail stations are surrounded by a Washington, D.C. area. Downtown Silver variety of stores and offices.

TOD Potential in Maryland 25 Table 3. Distribution of Existing Rail Stations in Maryland

Baltimore DC County Light Rail Metro Metro MARC TOTAL

Baltimore City 14 14 - 3 31 Montgomery - - 12 11 23 Prince George’s - - 13 8 21 Baltimore County 11 3 - 2 16 Anne Arundel 7 - - 2 9 Harford - - - 4 4 Anne Arundel/Howard - - - 3 3 Frederick - - - 3 3 Washington - - - 1 1 Howard - - - 1 1

Note: Total number of stations is actually lower due to double-counting of stations serving two lines.

WMATA and owners of property near Maryland Department of Transportation, rail stops. In Bethesda, WMATA collects Prince George’s County, the city of $1.6 million annually from developments Hyattsville, and others have agreed upon above the Metrorail stop.90 a plan for the 27.5 acres owned by WMATA at the West Hyattsville station and 80 additional acres surrounding it. Untapped Potential at The development will include housing for 10,000 people in a mix of housing Existing Stations options, 1 million square feet of office and Near Washington, D.C., growth could be retail space, and public and open spaces, accommodated at many of the existing all easily accessible to the rail station and Metro stops in Prince George’s County. the surrounding neighborhood.93 More than 3,000 acres of land in the Project-supporting infrastructure needs county within one-half mile of Metro are estimated to total about $16 million stops is either undeveloped or underde- but that is expected to yield $660 million veloped. One-third of the land in the en- in private investment. tire Washington, D.C. area that is The Baltimore region also offers great simplest to develop—land owned by potential. There are 46 rail stations along WMATA—is in Prince George’s Baltimore’s light rail and subway lines. County.91 Nine of the 13 stops in the Downtown area stations are the most county operate below capacity and could developed, such as at the Lexington Mar- accommodate more passengers if they ket stop. Others in the city have not been were drawn to the area by TOD.92 the focus of development and thus are The plan for West Hyattsville in surrounded by just homes or a few shops. Prince George’s County illustrates A number of fringe stations have agency- Maryland’s potential for TOD. The owned surface parking lots that provide

26 Transit Oriented Development room for development, particularly potential for TOD at Purple Line stations, where lots are not currently used to ca- planners have begun drawing up a list of pacity or where alternative parking can steps necessary to ensure development be arranged. occurs as the line is being built, not af- Stations along the three MARC com- terward. muter lines offer more opportunities. The proposed expansion of the Balti- more rail system would add 66 miles of track and over 60 stations.95 An advisory Future Stations panel has made general recommendations on the locations of stations. A review of Expanding the rail system in either Bal- development potential at different sta- timore or Washington would create more tions could help ensure the greatest ben- opportunities for TOD. Including con- efit from the enlarged system. sideration of the TOD potential of dif- The Corridor Cities Transitway run- ferent areas when selecting track ning north from the Shady Grove Metro alignments will allow Maryland to cap- stop could provide more TOD opportu- ture the greatest benefit from develop- nities with 18 proposed stations.96 ment around new stations. Planning for the proposed Inner Purple Line in Montgomery and Prince George’s County has incorporated the Obstacles development potential at different sta- Considering the benefits and popularity tions. Nineteen locations have been of neighborhoods with homes, stores, and evaluated for their TOD potential. Three offices within walking distance of transit stations under consideration are in al- and Maryland’s potential for building ready substantially developed areas with more such projects, the question arises some further potential for growth. as to why more TOD has not occurred Though the few stations located on col- in Maryland. lege campuses or in primarily industrial Projects that involve redeveloping an areas have limited opportunities for area, completing construction on a site TOD, most of the stations have substan- already surrounded by buildings, or in- tial capacity to accommodate a mix of tegrating homes and businesses are less residential and commercial develop- straightforward than are single-use projects ment.94 In addition to identifying the constructed on open fields. This can deter

Table 4. Distribution of Stations Created Through Rail Line Expansions

Baltimore Region Inner Corridor Cities County Transit Plan Purple Line Transitway

Montgomery - 4 18 Baltimore County 20 - - Howard 9 - - Baltimore City 3 3 - Prince George’s - 3 - Anne Arundel 2 - -

TOD Potential in Maryland 27 both developers and their financial Zoning can be another barrier. If the backers. A single developer often does not area surrounding a station is zoned for have experience in retail, commercial, and low-density housing, a developer seeking residential construction and may be un- to build a project containing retail, of- sure about working in a new market area. fice, and residential space will have to Building in a developed neighborhood request zoning changes. This introduces presents other challenges. It requires greater uncertainty to the project and greater flexibility, more effort to acquire slows it down. adequate land, and working with nearby Resistance from residents of neighbor- residents. hoods surrounding the train station also These same factors may dissuade can impede a new development. Neigh- financers and lenders. Development bors may fear that adding new offices, projects typically are financed by real es- shops, and homes will add to traffic and tate developers and investors, whose pri- congestion because many people will mary criteria for supporting a project is a drive to the station or they may fear that certain and solid return on their invest- increased rail ridership may spur crime ment. Though TOD can yield a higher in the area. Involving neighbors in the return on investment than a conventional planning process from the beginning can project—due to greater development and address concerns by modifying the lower parking requirements—financial project to reduce its negative impact and supporters may be reluctant to fund TOD to shape it to create maximum commu- projects simply because they are unusual. nity benefit.

28 Transit Oriented Development Conclusion and Recommendations

aryland has great potential for funds—Maryland’s towns and counties transit-oriented development can play a crucial role in promoting TOD. M and should pursue the creation of projects that capitalize on the state’s full potential. The best TOD projects can Create a TOD Coordinator increase the use of transit and decrease Position dependence on cars, offer an attractive al- Planning and completing a TOD project ternative to sprawl and reduce pressure involves coordinating the work of many to construct homes on open space, and public agencies and requires community improve overall quality of life for resi- involvement. A TOD coordinator— dents of the TOD project and of the state. someone within local government who Capturing this potential, however, will has experience in planning, development, require concentrated efforts by local gov- finance, and public participation—can ernments, the state, and transit agencies. help developers over the many hurdles Each has a role to play in promoting that accompany unusual or complicated TOD, in ensuring that TOD is as projects. The coordinator would also help straightforward for a developer to pur- solve community concerns and ensure sue as a typical single-use urban fringe that the completed project is integrated development and in shaping projects to into surrounding neighborhoods. achieve the greatest benefit from valuable Montgomery County has created re- transit stations. gional service centers that provide this kind of assistance. Staff at the Wheaton center have promoted development in the Recommendations for Wheaton area through several ap- proaches. They have worked with the Local Governments public and county government to create Because of their unique powers—influ- guidelines for development in Wheaton encing zoning, planning growth, allocating and then informally presented that vision

Conclusions and Recommendations 29 to developers. Proposed projects that near rail stations. While zoning itself can- conform to that vision generally receive not ensure that the best use is made of more rapid approvals because the basic land near transit, it can rule out less ben- elements of the plan have already been eficial projects. Land near transit stations agreed upon. The staff of the regional should be zoned for more development service center shepherd the developer than property several miles away. Regu- through the review and approval process lations should allow neighborhoods to by attending meetings between county contain a variety of retail and residential agencies and the developer and by ensur- options and perhaps commercial office ing the project receives immediate space. Vertical mixing—residential units and intense attention from all agencies built above ground-floor stores—allows involved.97 the greatest integration of the different uses. Incorporate TOD into All Growth By establishing zoning standards con- and Spending Plans ducive to building TOD, counties signal their willingness to support TOD and A town or county’s growth plan should reduce potential delays for developers incorporate TOD into the area surround- who would otherwise have to seek vari- ing each transit station. The first steps ances to land use guidelines. New Jersey’s include identifying the TOD potential at transit villages have experienced this ben- each station and creating a general vision efit of zoning for TOD. for what development should occur at which station. Later versions can include Reduce Parking Requirements a specific vision for what should be in- cluded near the station, establish a review An especially important aspect of zoning process for approving a development regulations is parking. Typically, subur- plan, and identify priority components of ban zoning regulations establish a mini- the project. This will help ensure the rail mum number of spaces that must be station is connected to the immediate provided with each 1,000 square feet of area, not isolated by parking lots or retail or office space or per bedroom in heavily-traveled roads, and that the TOD residential units; regulations do not cap neighborhood fits in with the larger com- the number of spaces. The situation near munity. rail stations is very different from a car- Another aspect of planning for TOD oriented setting and parking minimums is to include TOD in spending propos- can be counterproductive. Further, a de- als. Counties can anticipate funding re- velopment with intermingled homes, quirements of roads and other public shops, and offices can reduce parking infrastructure. Budgeting should include needs by relying on shared parking, in elements necessary to support TOD, which spaces are used by residents at such as sidewalks, public buildings, and night and shoppers during the day. open space. Federal funds such as from Mandating that developers include the Congestion Mitigation and Air Qual- extensive parking in any project near a ity program may be available to help. rail station creates several obstacles. First, parking is costly (surface parking can cost Zone for TOD $1,500-$3,000 per space and garage park- ing $12,000-$20,000 per space) and County governments can adjust zoning drives up the price of the development, a regulations to promote good development problem for both the developer and for

30 Transit Oriented Development people seeking affordable housing.98 Sec- traffic congestion, or destroy open space. ond, it can increase vehicle traffic around Involving residents and businesses in dis- the station, making it more hazardous and cussions of what shape and form the less appealing for people to walk to the project will take will allow the people station. Abundant parking may encour- most affected by the project the oppor- age people to drive to the station even tunity to modify the project so that it cre- when they could walk and thus the avail- ates the broadest benefit for their ability of transit will not help reduce traf- neighborhood. fic congestion or air pollution. Finally, the land nearest to a rail station is the most valuable. Filling it with a parking structure Recommendations for does not capture the full value of that space. Though developers and lenders ini- Transit Agencies tially may be reluctant to reduce the Transit agencies like WMATA, in Wash- amount of parking at a site, fearing it will ington, D.C., and the Maryland Transit deter customers, they will soon learn that Administration, which operates with good transit options nearby there is Baltimore’s light rail and subway lines, less need for extensive parking. Develop- can promote TOD through a number of ers in Jersey City have happily built approaches. Each has already undertaken projects with less parking because they elements of the recommendations below realized fewer parking spaces means more but should do much more. marketable office space.99 Plan for TOD Set Fees to Encourage TOD TOD should be included in all plans for Counties should ensure that property system expansion, from consideration of taxes, permit fees, and other publicly im- where a line is placed to consultations posed development-related costs do not with local governments to shape land use inadvertently discourage walkable devel- regulations. Such advance planning will opment near rail stations. Portland has ensure that a mix of jobs, housing, and developed guidelines for when to reduce retail are available at stops throughout the or waive fees. transit system and will boost ridership. Some of Portland’s success in attracting Involve MDOT residential and commercial developments to its light rail stations stems from its MDOT has experience planning for decision to route the Westside line TOD and coordinating discussions be- through areas with TOD potential. tween multiple government agencies, planners, and developers. The depart- Assist with Land Assembly ment has staff and resources available to counties and local governments who want Transit agencies can help provide ad- help in planning a TOD project. equate land near a transit stop for a planned TOD project. Many agencies own extensive amounts of land. If agency Seek Community Involvement land is not available, the authority can Communities may resist TOD projects, help assemble multiple properties into fearing that they may change the atmo- one piece. Portland’s TriMet, for ex- sphere of the neighborhood, increase ample, provides staff to help developers

Conclusions and Recommendations 31 consolidate parcels of land.100 WMATA municipalities, and developers to encour- already operates a public/private joint de- age new projects.103 Other transit agen- velopment program to encourage devel- cies in Washington, D.C., Miami, San opment on WMATA-owned land.101 The Francisco, Atlanta, Los Angeles, and Maryland Department of Transpor- Portland offer similar assistance. tation’s Office of Real Estate offers some Technical support from the agency can parcels of state-owned land for develop- help ease private developers’ entry into ment but relatively few sites are near projects that are more complicated than Baltimore’s light rail or subway stations. 400 identical houses on an open field. An alternative to purchasing dozens of Agencies can: small parcels to create space for the de- • Provide examples of successful TOD velopment is to form a partnership of all projects, including what obstacles current landowners who would be af- arose and how they were overcome. fected. A partnership allows current com- munity members and building owners to • Educate and reassure developers benefit from development of the station about the reduced need for parking area and gives them a voice in how their at TOD locations through studies of community will change. It can also en- parking demand at similar develop- courage creation of a shared vision, sim- ments and through modeling of plifying decision-making on develop- parking needs at the proposed ment plans. project. • Help identify financial institutions Adopt TOD-Consistent Policies that are willing to lend to nontradi- tional projects and provide assistance Once land is available, adopting TOD- in segmenting the project into friendly policies for agency-owned prop- discrete phases that are more attrac- erty reduces barriers for good private tive to lenders, if necessary. development projects. TriMet limits auto-oriented use, requires minimum densities, and caps parking immediately adjacent to stations.102 Requiring exten- Recommendations sive commuter or retail parking at tran- sit stations, as San Francisco does at some for the State stops, makes projects more expensive for the developer and harder for pedestrians Expand MDOT’s Efforts to Plan to navigate. WMATA’s recent policy change that allows for less than full re- for TOD placement of parking lost to development The Maryland Department of Transpor- may prove the crucial difference that en- tation should build on its demonstrated ables some projects to succeed. capabilities and continue to help commu- nities wanting to make the most of their transit stops by offering planning assis- Offer Support to Developers tance, helping with streetscape improve- Agencies can provide assistance to private ments, and sharing their experience with developers and investors that will make successfully building TOD. The Depart- TOD projects more straightforward. ment should assist communities with Denver’s transit agency has hired a TOD studies and initiatives similar to its award- specialist who works with other agencies, winning efforts in support of TOD in the

32 Transit Oriented Development West Hyattsville station area, which have cations that have a TOD component to been recognized by the Urban Land their development plan. Institute and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Reinvigorate the Office of Smart Officials. Growth Providing additional planning re- sources will enable the State to assist more The Office of Smart Growth was cre- towns, explore development options in ated to protect open space, promote tran- more places, and share its experience. sit, and encourage the revitalization of already developed areas. Formerly unaf- Offer Infrastructure Incentives filiated with any department, it has been made a division of the Department of As a major funder of infrastructure Planning and its budget and staffing have projects, the state can support TOD by been sharply reduced. It should again be offering more money for infrastructure elevated and allocated more resources so that strengthens TOD communities. that it can effectively coordinate efforts This could include sidewalk and other between state agencies to deal with improvements for pedestrians and pro- growth management issues. moting libraries or other public facilities near TOD instead of in a different loca- Require State Offices to Be tion. Targeting state spending near TOD would complement the existing Priority Transit-Accessible Funding Areas law that focuses state The state of Maryland could help con- funding for infrastructure in areas in- centrate development near transit stations tended for development. by requiring that new state offices in the One tool for doing this is the Priority Baltimore or Washington, D.C. area be Places Strategy, which selects five or six close to transit. A similar requirement locations annually within Priority Fund- that applies to federal government build- ing Areas, to receive additional state re- ings near Washington, D.C. has resulted sources and attention for three to five in six agencies leasing space near years to complete a development project. Arlington’s Ballston station.104 Such a In selecting locations each year, the requirement adopted by governments in Department of Planning should favor lo- Maryland will help guarantee a market for office space near transit, reassuring developers and lenders that new build- ings will be leased.

Conclusions and Recommendations 33 Notes

1. Lend Lease Real Estate and Program, October 2002. PriceWaterhouseCoopers, Emerging Trends in 9. Hank Dittmar, “Development Around Transit Real Estate 2002, October 2001. Good for Drivers, Too,” Washington Business 2. M. Al-Mosaind, K. Dueker, J. Strathman, Journal, 22 August 2003. “Light Rail Transit Stations and Property 10. Gloria Ohland, Great American Station Values: A Hedonic Price Approach,” Transporta- Foundation, Transit-Oriented Development in tion Research Record, No. 1400, 1994, as cited in Four Cities, presented to the Partnership for Karen Vessali, “Land Use Impacts of Rapid Regional Livability, Chicago, Il, August 2001. Transit,” Berkeley Planning Journal, 1996. 11. Dena Belzer and Gerald Autler, Strategic 3. Claude Gruen, et al, The Effect of CTA and Economics, Transit-Oriented Development: Metra Stations on Residential Property Values, Moving from Rhetoric to Reality, discussion paper Gruen Gruen and Associates, June 1997. prepared for the Brookings Institution Center 4. Robert Cervero, “Transit-Based Housing in on Urban and Metropolitan Policy and the the San Francisco Bay Area: Market Profiles and Great American Station Foundation, June 2002. Rent Premiums,” Transportation Quarterly, 1996, 12. A survey of driving habits in Montgomery as cited in Roderick Diaz, Booz-Allen & County found that 31 percent of evening Hamilton, Impacts of Rail Transit on Property commute-time trips include a nonwork stop. Values, May 1999. Ajay Kumar and David Levinson, “Chained 5. Stanford Research Institute, as cited in Trips in Montgomery County, Maryland,” ITE PriceWaterhouseCoopers, Review of Property Journal, 17 December 1996. Value Impacts at Rapid Transit Stations and Lines, 3 13. Metro, Travel Behavior Survey for Portland, April 2001. Multnomah County, Oregon, 1994, as cited in 6. Bernard Weinstein and Terry Clower, An California Department of Transportation, Assessment of the DART LRT on Property Valua- Statewide Transit-Oriented Development Study: tions and Transit-Oriented Development, Univer- Factors for Success in California, September 2002. sity of North Texas, September 2002. 14. Ibid. 7. Ibid. 15. See note 11. 8. Robert Cervero, Christopher Ferrell, Steven 16. Barbara McCann, Driven to Spend: The Murphy, “Transit-Oriented Development and Impact of Sprawl on Household Transportation Joint Development in the United States; A Expenses, Surface Transportation Policy Institute, Literature Review,” Research Results Digest downloaded from www.transact.org/progress/ Number 52, Transit Cooperative Research jan01/driven.asp, 23 July 2004.

34 Transit Oriented Development 17. See note 11. August 2004. 18. Center for Livable Communities, A Policy- 41. Community Building Sourcebook: Land Use and maker’s Guide to Transit-Oriented Development, as Transportation Initiatives in Portland, Oregon, cited in MDOT, Strategic Plan for Transit- TriMet, December 2002. Oriented Development (TOD) in Prince George’s 42. California Department of Transportation, County (Draft), May 2003. Statewide Transit-Oriented Development Study, 19 See note 8. Factors for Success in California, Technical Appendix, 20. Great American Station Foundation, September 2002. Economic Impact of Station Revitalization, 2001. 43. G.B. Arrington, “Light Rail and the 21. Ibid. American City: State-of-the-Art Practice for Transit-Oriented Development,” Transportation 22. Philip Langdon, “TOD Times Five: How Research Circular, E-C058, November 2003. the Subway Revived a Virginia Suburb,” New Urban Times, September 2003. 44. Ibid. 23. Leon Vignes, Arlington Department of 46. Dr. Bernard Weinstein, University of North Community Planning, Housing, and Develop- Texas, as cited in G. B. Arrington, et al, Statewide ment, personal communication, 13 August 2004. Transit-Oriented Development Study, Factors for Success in California, Technical Appendix, CalTrans, 24. Christopher Zimmerman, Arlington County September 2002. Board, Transportation for the Urban Village: Arlington County’s Success, downloaded from 47. Jack Wierzenski, Director, Economic www.commuterpage.com/powerpoint/2, 6 Development and Planning, Dallas Area Rapid August 2004. Transit, Public/Private Partnerships: Best Practices, powerpoint presentation, no date. 25. See note 23. 48. Ibid. 26. Christopher Zimmerman, Arlington County Board, Transportation for the Urban Village: 49. Cheri Bush, Senior Planner, Dallas Area Arlington County’s Success, downloaded from Rapid Transit, personal communication, 17 www.commuterpage.com/powerpoint/2, 6 August 2004. August 2004. 50. Gloria Ohland, Mockingbird Station, Great 27. Ibid. American Station Foundation, downloaded from www.stationfoundation.org/pdfs/ 28. Ibid. mockinbirdPDF.pdf, 16 July 2004; and Cheri 29. Pennsylvania Environmental Council, Case Bush, Senior Planner, Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Studies and News: Joint Development Brings Riders personal communication, 17 August 2004. and Revenue to Washington Metro, downloaded 51. See note 45. from www.pecpa.org/_final_pec/ TOD_case_study_WMATA.htm, 18 May 2004. 52. Ibid. 30. See note 9. 53. Cheri Bush, Senior Planner, Dallas Area Rapid Transit, DART Station Area Economic 31. Ibid. Development, powerpoint presentation, no date. 32. Philip Langdon, “TOD Times Five: How 54. See note 49. the Subway Revived a Virginia Suburb,” New Urban Times, September 2003. 55. Frank Turner, City of Plano, Downtown Plano Development Incentive Programs, no date; and 33. See note 9. Frank Turner, City of Plano, personal communi- 34. See note 26. cation, 17 August 2004. 35. Community Building Sourcebook: Land Use and 56. Ibid. Transportation Initiatives in Portland, Oregon, 57. Ibid. TriMet, December 2002. 58. Frank Turner, City of Plano, personal 36. Ibid. communication, 17 August 2004. 37. Ibid. 59. Frank Turner, City of Plano, Eastside Village I 38. Ibid. Project Profile and Eastside Village II Project Profile, 39. Ibid. no date. 40. Jillian Detweiler, Land Development 60. See note 58. Planner, TriMet, personal communication, 18 61. See note 55.

Notes 35 62. City of Seattle, Office of Policy, Planning, 86. Ibid. and Major Projects, Station Area Planning: 87. California Department of Transportation, Transit-Oriented Development Case Studies, Statewide Transit-Oriented Development Study: downloaded from www.ci.seattle.wa.us/transpor- Factors for Success in California, Technical Appendix, tation/ppmp_sap_todstudies.htm, 20 July 2004. September 2002. 63. See note 10. 88. Ibid. 64. Ibid. 89. See note 29. 65. Corey McDaniel, MARTA, personal 90. See note 8. communication, 18 August 2004. 91. Harold Foster, Planner, Maryland National 66. Ibid. Capital Park and Planning Commission, 67. See note 10. personal communication, 19 August 2004. 68. See note 62. 92. MDOT, Strategic Plan for Transit-Oriented 69. See note 10. Development (TOD) in Prince George’s County (Draft), May 2003. 70. David Goldberg, Sprawl Watch, Case Study: BellSouth’s Atlanta Metro Plan, downloaded from 93. Al Dobbins and Paul Morris, “A Transit www.sprawlwatch.org/bellsouth.html, 20 July Village for Hyattsville,” Urban Land, May 2004. 2004. 94. Purple Line Transit-Oriented Development 71. See note 68. Assessment, prepared for the Maryland Depart- ment of Transportation by Parsons Brinckerhoff, 72. See note 10. January 2003. 73. Ibid. 95. Report of the Advisory Committee, Baltimore 74. Neal Fitzsimmons and Whitney Birch, Regional Rail System Plan, August 2002. Booz-Allen Hamilton, “Light Rail Transit and 96. U.S. Department of Transportation and Transit-Oriented Development: Hudson-Bergen Maryland Department of Transportation, Multi- Light Rail System and Economic Development Modal Corridor Study, Frederick and Montgomery on the Waterfront,” Transportation Research Counties, Maryland, Draft Environmental Impact Circular, 9th National Light Rail Transit Confer- Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation, May 2002. ence, Transportation Research Board, November 2003. 97. Natalie Cantor, Wheaton Regional Service Center, personal communication, 20 August 75. Ibid. 2004. 76. Rachel Kennedy, Jersey City Planning 98. See note 94. Department, personal communication, 16 August 2004. 99. See note 74. 77. See note 74. 100. See note 10. 78. See note 76. 101. See note 42. 79. See note 74. 102. Ibid. 80. Ibid. 103. Ibid. 81. Monica Etz, Transit Village Initiative 104. See note 8. Coordinator, personal communication, 19 July 2004; and New Jersey Department of Transpor- tation, New Jersey Transit Village Initiative, 16 July 2004. 82. New Jersey Department of Transportation, Transit Village Initiative: Transit Village Criteria, 19 July 2004. 83. Ibid. 84. See note 82. 85. Ibid.

36 Transit Oriented Development