Equitable TOD a Sound Transit Case Study Create a Great Way for Presentation Presented by Dana L
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Equitable TOD A Sound Transit Case Study Create a great way for presentation Presented by Dana L. Carlisle P.E. [email protected] Used to denote Project’s Conclusions or Contents Recommendations Context Potential Disruptors • Intersection of High-Capacity Transit and Development • TOD Equitable TOD and Public Policy Performance Metrics • Viewing TOD with an Equity Lens • Economic Performance Index • 80-80-80 Policy • Social Equity Index • Sound Transit TOD Resolution • Possible Further Research • Key Strategies for ETOD ETOD Implementation Appendix • Sound Transit TOD and The Development Process • Sound Transit Equitable TOD and • Case Studies Affordable Housing Supplemental Details • Challenges and Opportunities and Comparison 2 Context 3 TOD - Intersection of High-Capacity Transit and Development We are familiar with multi-modal high capacity transit (bus, train) adjacent to surrounding developments as shown in this graphic. TOD integrates housing, transit, medium- to high-density office and retail, and open space and streetscape, with less space dedicated to cars. Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, Publication GAO 15-70 “Public Transportation, Multiple Factors Influence Extent of Transit-Oriented Development” Nov 2014 Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, Publication GAO 15-70 “Public Transportation, Multiple Factors Influence Extent of Transit-Oriented Development” Nov 2014 Context 4 TOD The idea of TOD came about 30+ years ago, originally as a design strategy for surburban growth to balance and cluster housing, jobs, shopping and recreation within ¼ mile of mass transit. “The Pedestrian Pocket Book” A New Suburban Design Strategy, ” Calthorpe, Kelbaugh (Ed)., Princeton University Press 1989. TOD aligns perfectly with local government goals for urban growth densification, one of the key tenets of the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.070A.020), since TOD mixes commercial and residential real estate within walking distance of transit and promotes open space and a sense of community. Sound Transit describes TOD as …a land development pattern that integrates transit and land use, promotes transit ridership, and supports community land use and development visions.” [emphasis added]. https://www.soundtransit.org/st_sharepoint/download/sites/PRDA/FinalRecords/2018/Resolution%20R2018-10.pdf Context 5 How TOD Became a Thing “PEDESTRIAN POCKETS” Reflecting: As of the late 1980s, there was not ▪ Created during a 1988 design “charrette” necessarily an emphasis organized by architect Peter Calthorpe and on social equity aspects (now retired) Professor Doug Kelbaugh, along of TOD except to the with professional architects and architecture extent of creating more students. housing for middle-class and providing seniors ▪ Original name didn’t stick, later became better access to “Main “TOD” Street” (Doug Kelbaugh ▪ TOD charrettes were hosted in many cities, personal interview June which led to more charrettes, and 2020). presentations and speaking engagements, nationally and globally. According to Professor Kelbaugh the “idea just took off!” Context 6 Charrette, n. \ shəˈret \ • “The term "charrette" is derived from the French word for "little cart." In Paris during the 19th century, professors at the Ecole de Beaux Arts circulated with little carts to collect final drawings from their students. Students would jump on the "charrette" to put finishing touches on their presentation minutes before the deadline. • “Charrette is an intensive planning session where citizens, designers and others collaborate on a vision for development. It provides a forum for ideas and offers the unique advantage of giving immediate feedback to the designers. More importantly, it allows everyone who participates to be a mutual author of the plan.” (The Town Paper, Kentlands, MD) Thus, charrette is part focus group, part brainstorming, part consensus building, commonly used in the sense of architectural or development planning. From http://www.tndtownpaper.com/what_is_charrette.htm Equitable TOD (ETOD) and TOD Public Policy Equitable TOD 8 TOD is uniquely positioned to positively affect low- and moderate-income communities: REDUCING TRANSPORTATION CONNECTING WORKERS TO COSTS EMPLOYMENT CENTERS SPURRING ECONOMIC CREATING JOBS INVESTMENT …but: transit and development increase property values which can lead to resident displacement…. Transit and its attendant development have the potential to spur gentrification of low-income areas (if you know Seattle’s Rainier Valley, consider the before and after following development of the Central Link of Sound Transit light rail). Housing costs in formerly affordable neighborhoods often increase, which can result in low- and moderate-income residents being pushed farther away from jobs and transit. However, when executed with intentional focus on enhancing regional equity, TOD has enormous potential as an overall benefit for low- and moderate-income (LMI) communities. Equitable TOD and Public Policy 9 View TOD with Equity Lens = ETOD Benefits of TOD Additional Provides Housing and Mobility Benefits of Choices Mixed-Income Benefits of Mixed Income Improves Environmental TOD Offers Truly Neighborhoods Performance Affordable Provides Needed Housing Results in Infrastructure Cost Housing Savings Stabilizes Transit Helps Deconcentrate Poverty Helps Support Healthy Lifestyles Ridership Integrates Low Income Broadens Access Households into Society Strengthens Transit Systems to Opportunity Helps Workforce Stability Creates Lasting Value Relieves Reduces Greenhouse Gas Gentrification Pressures Emissions Public Policy that provides government investment and incentive to create, preserve and maintain affordable Developed from National Housing Conference Creating Equitable Communities through Mixed-Income Transit- housing, leads to “Equitable TOD” Oriented Development Equitable TOD and Public Policy 10 Equitable TOD Social equity “ETOD combines the TOD approach with People of all ages, incomes, races, ethnicities, disability, regardless of an equity lens, to ensure that the where they live, have access to development serves those who most affordable, quality housing; stand to benefit. transportation options that meet their needs; good jobs; quality education; ETOD supports mixed-use developments healthy food; safe and healthy that incorporate affordable housing in neighborhoods; parks; services; close proximity to high-quality public technology and other resources that transit and bolsters ridership goals of improve their quality of life.” ([Puget transit agencies.” Sound Regional Council] PSRC 2011) Puget Sound Regional Council, “Growing Transit Communities, Equity, Opportunity and Sustainability in the Central Puget Sound Region, Geography of Opportunity in the Central Puget Sound Region,” https://www.enterprisecommunity.org/solutions-and-innovation/equitable-transit-oriented- May 2012, https://www.psrc.org/sites/default/files/equoppsusreport2.pdf development Equitable TOD and Public Policy 11 Chapter 44, Laws of 2015, 64th Legislature, Section 329 (codified as RCW 81.112.350(1)) “A regional transit authority that includes a county with a population of more than one million five hundred thousand must develop and seek voter approval for a system plan, which meets the requirements of any transportation subarea equity element used by the authority, to implement a regional equitable transit-oriented development strategy for diverse, vibrant, mixed-use and mixed-income communities consistent with transit- oriented development plans developed with community input by any regional transportation planning organization within the regional transit authority boundaries. This system plan, which must be part of any authorizing proposition submitted to the voters after July 15, 2015, must include the following:” Equitable TOD and Public Policy 12 RCW 81.112.350(1)(a) “The regional transit authority must contribute at least four million dollars each year for five consecutive years beginning within three years of voter approval of the system plan to a revolving loan fund to support the development of affordable housing opportunities related to equitable transit-oriented development within the boundaries of the regional transit authority.” Contribute $4,000,000/year for 5 consecutive years into a Revolving Loan Fund = RLF Equitable TOD and Public Policy 13 80-80-80 Policy RCW 81.112.350(1)(b)(i) …unless certain exceptions apply, “a minimum of 80% percent of surplus property to be disposed or transferred, including air rights, that is suitable for development as housing, must be offered for either transfer at no cost, sale, or long-term lease first to *qualified entities that agree to develop affordable housing on the property, consistent with local land use and zoning laws.” The transit authority must require at least 80% of units must be *affordable *Qualified entities = a local government, housing authority, and nonprofit developer *Affordable = for households earning < 80% local Area Mean Income (AMI) *Surplus = Property acquired for transit construction and no longer needed Chapter 44, Laws of 2015, 64th Legislature, 2015 3rd Special Session Sec 329. 14 November 8, 2016 Voters Approve $53.8 Billion Sound Transit 3 Measure https://www.soundtransit.org/get-to-know-us/news-events/news-releases/voters-approve-historic-sound-transit-3-measure Equitable TOD and Public Policy 15 PARADIGM SHIFT - Disposition of Surplus Property* Past After 2016 Recapture land acquisition Equitable TOD - provide costs – “realize the greatest