Development Trends Along Transit
A Look at the Past, Present, and Future of development along Twin Cities Transitways
2018 Report Executive Summary
This report examines real estate development trends After considering the amount of development occurring along six existing and planned Light Rail (LRT) and Bus along transitways at the regional level, this report considers Rapid Transit (BRT) lines in the Twin Cities Metropolitan the amount of development along individual transitways. Area. By estimating the total amount of development that The transitways examined are the Blue Line LRT, Green has occurred between 2003 and 2017, and considering Line LRT, A Line BRT, Green Line Extension LRT, Blue Line the potential for future development, this report seeks to Extension LRT and Orange Line BRT. The data indicate that provide insight into how successful the region’s transitways development along these lines has not been equal, with far are at encouraging transit oriented development (TOD), more development along the Blue Line LRT and Green Line and to gauge the value that developers and residents LRT. The areas served by LRT or BRT that experienced the place on transit. most development included Downtown Minneapolis, the University of Minnesota, the Prospect Park neighborhood of This study uses data from the Metropolitan Council’s Minneapolis, Downtown St. Paul, the Mall of America/South Annual Building Permit Survey, a compilation of Loop in Bloomington, and the future City West Station Area development data reported annually by municipalities in in Eden Prairie. the Twin Cities Region. Three categories of development are looked at in this study: multifamily residential, Next, this study turns to development planned along commercial, and public/institutional. These categories transitways in the short term. Data on development are were chosen because they are the types of development drawn from the Metropolitan Council’s Development most likely to be drawn to the access and mobility Tracker, a database of development that has been publicly provided by LRT or BRT. announced but not yet permitted. These data indicate that over 15,000 multifamily residential units and over $5 billion Development trends are first considered from a regional in development are planned along the LRT and BRT lines perspective. Over 15,500 multifamily residential units, included in this study. $3.7 billion of commercial development, and $850 million of public and institutional development have been built The final section of this report considers long term along the LRT and BRT lines included in this study since demographic trends and the long term development 2003. These totals represent a large percentage of all forecasts that they inform. According to Metropolitan regional development during that time frame, far more Council forecasts, it is forecasted that 10 percent of than what would be expected based on the 1.7 percent population growth between 2010 and 2040 will occur in the of the regional land area made up of the station areas station areas included in this study. included in this study.
Development Trends Along Transit | 1 Table of Contents
Executive Summary 1
Purpose 4
The Scope of this Study 5
Regional Development Trends 7
Multifamily Residential Development Along Transit 7
Commercial Development Along Transit 9
Public and Institutional Development Along Transit 11
Development by Transitway 13
Downtown Minneapolis LRT 13
Blue Line LRT 14
Green Line LRT 15
A Line BRT 17
Blue and Green Line LRT Extensions 18
Orange Line BRT 20
Planned Development 21
Planned Multifamily Units 21
Planned Development by Value 21
Long Term Forecasts 23
Conclusion 25
Contact Information 26
Sources 26
Appendix A: Metro Transit High-Frequency Network 27
Appendix B: Station Areas 28
Development Trends Along Transit | 2 Charts and Maps
Chart 1: Multifamily Residential Development Along Transit 7
Map 1: Multifamily Residential Development in Station Areas 8
Chart 2: Commercial Development Along Transit 9
Map 2: Commercial Development in Station Areas 10
Chart 3: Public and Institutional Development Along Transit 11
Map 3: Public/Institutional Development in Station Areas 12
Chart 4: Downtown Minneapolis Development 13
Map 4: Downtown Minneapolis Development Value 13
Chart 5: Blue Line Development 14
Map 5: Blue Line Development Value 14
Chart 6: Green Line Development 15
Map 6: Green Line Development Value 15
Chart 7: A Line Development 17
Map 7: A Line Development Value 17
Chart 8: Green Line Extension Development 18
Chart 9: Blue Line Extension Development 18
Map 8: Green Line Extension Development Value 19
Map 9: Blue Line Extension Development Value 19
Chart 10: Orange Line Extension Development 20
Map 10: Orange Line Extension Development Value 20
Chart 11: Planned Multifamily Units 21
Chart 12: Planned Development by Value 22
Map 11: Planned Development 22
Chart 13: Population of Seven County Metro Area 23
Chart 14: Population Growth by Age 24
Development Trends Along Transit | 3 Purpose
Metro Transit’s mission is to “deliver environmentally in the Twin Cities region. Although the volume of sustainable transportation choices that link people, jobs development occurring along transitways has been and community conveniently, consistently and safely.” This estimated before, this report will use Metropolitan Council mission requires operating a transit system that connects building permit data to assess how much development has people to the jobs, housing and services that currently occurred along LRT and BRT transit lines in the Twin Cities exist in the region. However, if a transit system is to meet region. While this analysis does not investigate the extent the needs of a region’s future population, consideration to which transit was responsible for creating development, must also be given to how a transit investment will affect it will provide an idea of how much of the region’s land uses in the surrounding area. This is especially true development is occurring along transitways. for fixed-guideway transitways such as Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), which cannot be easily This report consists of four sections. The first looks at modified to respond to changes in the urban form, and where multifamily residential, commercial and public/ therefore are dependent on compatible development institutional development has occurred within the region. occurring along their alignment. The more development The second breaks down the development that has that occurs along a fixed-guideway transitway, the more occurred along each of the six transitways included in this effectively it is able to link people, jobs and community. study. The third section reviews planned development while the fourth and final section analyzes long-term Because the effectiveness of LRT and BRT is tied to demographic trends in the Twin Cities region and provides its proximity to residents, jobs, businesses and public a long-term forecast of how much development may occur facilities, it is important to accurately quantify the volume along transit in the coming decades. of development occurring high-frequency transitways
Development Trends Along Transit | 4 The Scope of this Study Transitways
This study will focus on LRT and BRT transitways in the Twin LRT and BRT transit in the Twin Cities region that meets the Cities that meet the definition of high-frequency transit. High- definition of high-frequency consists of the METRO Green Line frequency LRT and BRT can carry the most riders and therefore LRT, the METRO Blue Line LRT and the A Line BRT. As the Blue have the greatest potential to influence land use patterns. Line and Green Line share an alignment through downtown High-frequency transit is defined as follows: Minneapolis, downtown Minneapolis is considered its own transitway for the purposes of this study.i High-Frequency Transit: The Metro Transit high-frequency network consists of bus, Bus Rapid Transit and light rail lines In addition to the four operating lines examined, three planned that operate every 15 minutes or less on weekdays between 6 lines, the METRO Green Line Extension LRT, the METRO Blue a.m. and 7 p.m., as well as on Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 6 Line Extension LRT and the METRO Orange Line BRT were p.m.1 A map of the Metro Transit High-Frequency Network is in included because they have entered project development and Appendix A. have identified alignments and station locations.
Development Along Transit
This report considers any development within one half-mile of they are closer to the station of a different transitway. As a final a LRT or BRT station to be along that transitway. Developments clarification, several stations in the Twin Cities offer both LRT that are less than a half-mile from multiple transit stations are and BRT service. Developments near these stations have been assigned to the nearest station and its respective transitway. assigned to the LRT station because LRT is generally considered This methodology avoids double counting, but it also means more likely to attract development than a BRT line. The map in that some developments within a half-mile station area of a Appendix B depicts the station areas used in this study. transitway are not associated with that transitway because
Types of Development
Not all types of development regularly occur along transit. Multifamily Residential: Residential developments that consist Industrial uses and low-density single-family homes fit into this of five or more units in one building. category.ii This study focuses on developments that are more likely to occur along transitways such as multifamily residential Commercial: A broad category of development that includes development, commercial development, and public and office, retail, restaurant, hotel and other business developments. institutional development. These categories are defined as The dollar value associated with converting or remodeling existing commercial space is counted in this study. follows. Public and Institutional: Land uses that do not fit into the commercial, industrial or residential categories. These generally consist of government buildings, hospitals, parks and public recreation facilities, religious buildings and educational facilities. Transportation projects such as roads and transit are excluded from this study, as are utilities and other public works projects. Finally, development associated with MSP International Airport is excluded due to the substantively different nature of this type of development.
i Two other transitways exist in the Metro Transit fixed-guideway network. These are the Red Line BRT and the Northstar Commuter Rail, both of which were not included in this study because they are not high-frequency. ii Land use guiding frequently precludes the development of new industrial space or single-family homes near high-frequency transit. These uses have been excluded from this study.
Development Trends Along Transit | 5 Time Frame
This study includes data beginning in 2003 for commercial Commercial and Multifamily Transitway and public/institutional development, and beginning in Public/Institutional Residential 2009 for multifamily residential development.i Downtown Dates were limited further to reflect the fact that the Minneapolis LRT 2003 – 2017 2009 – 2017 transitways in this study were not built at the same time. Blue Line LRT This study counts a development as being along transit if it is permitted within a half-mile station area of a LRT Green Line LRT 2006 – 2017 2009 – 2017 line that has already entered project development, or a Green Line Extension 2011 – 2017 BRT line that has already begun construction. BRT lines LRT have a shorter anticipation period because BRT lines Blue Line are designed and constructed more quickly than LRT. 2014 – 2017 Extension LRT Based on these conditions, developments considered along transit are restricted to those occurring in the years A Line BRT 2015 – 2017 depicted in the adjacent chart Orange Line BRT 2017
Statistics and Figures
This study uses the building permit value provided to The analysis of multifamily residential in this study will the Metropolitan Council by the region’s municipalities. look at the number of units permitted rather than Building permit value is not analogous with the the value since building permit values for multifamily development value. Among other differences, permit residential development are not always available. Further, value excludes land value. data not reported by municipalities will not be reflected in this report.
i No centralized, locally-specific building permit data are available prior to these dates.
Development Trends Along Transit | 6 Regional Development Trends Multifamily Residential Development Along Transit
Over 15,000 multifamily housing units have been Not only has a high percentage of multifamily permitted along the region’s high-frequency LRT and development been built along transitways since 2009, BRT lines since 2009. This total represents 30 percent of but as Chart 1 indicates, development has increased all multifamily units built in the seven-county metro area significantly after 2011 with the recovery from the Great between 2009-2017, an impressive figure considering Recession of 2008-2009. With the upward trend of high-frequency LRT and BRT station areas make up multifamily development from 2009-2017 and the planned only 1.7 percent of the region’s land area and contain expansion of the region's LRT and BRT network, the 8.6 percent of the region's population.2 The amount of amount of multifamily development along transit has the multifamily development occurring along LRT and BRT is potential to remain a high percentage of the regional total evidence that developers believe residents of multifamily in the coming years. housing value the accessibility brought by transit.
Chart 1: Multifamily Residential Development Along Transit
3000
2500
2000
1500 Units
1000
500
0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Downtown Minneapolis Blue Line Green Line Blue Line Ext Green Line Ext A Line Orange Line
Development Trends Along Transit | 7 Map 1: Multifamily Residential Development in Station Areas
Number of Units AA NN OO KKAA < 50 BROOKLYN 50 - 99 PARK 100 - 199 200 - 407 Located within a Station Area for select years RR AA MM SSEEYY
NEW 2009 - 2017 Data HOPE
ROBBINSDALE CRYSTAL ROSEVILLE H E N N EPIN H E N N EPIN GOLDEN FALCON VALLEY HEIGHTS
ST. PAUL ST. LOUIS PARK
HOPKINS MINNEAPOLIS MINNETONKA
EDINA FORT SNELLING
RICHFIELD V E R V E R EDEN R R PRAIRIE A A BLOOMINGTON C C DDAA KKOOTTAA
BURNSVILLE SS CC OO TTTT
TOD August 2018
Map 1 provides a glimpse of where multifamily amounts along the Blue Line and the future alignment of development is occurring. As can be seen, it has been the the Green Line Extension. The newest lines, the Blue Line most prevalent in downtown Minneapolis as well as along Extension, the A Line and the Orange Line, have seen the Green Line, particularly in downtown St. Paul and near limited growth though this may increase as the lines come the University of Minnesota. In addition to these areas, to be viewed as more established transitways. multifamily development has also occurred in significant
Development Trends Along Transit | 8 Commercial Development Along Transit
Over $3.7 billion in commercial development has been As Chart 2 indicates, the majority of commercial permitted along high-frequency LRT and BRT between development along transit has occurred in downtown 2003 and 2017, a total that amounts to 33.4 percent of all Minneapolis, even with the exclusion of US Bank Stadium. commercial development in the region during that time3. This is perhaps not surprising as downtown Minneapolis As with multifamily development, commercial development has not only been one of the areas longest served by along transit has trended upwards, most noticeably since LRT, but is also the region’s largest business district. The 2010. The nearly $800 million construction of US Bank years 2011-2013 mark an exception as most commercial Stadium is removed from Chart 2 as it turned 2014 into an development took place along the future alignment of the outlier.i Green Line Extension due to the construction of the United Health Group campus near the future City West station.
Chart 2: Commercial Development Along Transit
$700,000,000
$600,000,000
$500,000,000
$400,000,000
$300,000,000 Permit Value
$200,000,000
$100,000,000
$- 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Downtown Minneapolis Blue Line Green Line Blue Line Ext Green Line Ext A Line Orange Line
i The permit value for US Bank Stadium remains included in the total value of commercial development along transit and in all other analyses.
Development Trends Along Transit | 9 Map 2: Commercial DevelopmentMap 2: in C Stationomm Areasercial Development in Station Areas
Permit Value AANNOOKKAA ($) In Millions
< 1 BROOKLYN PARK 1 - 9.9 10 - 19.9 20- 552.4 Located within a Station Area for select years RRAA MMSSEEYY NEW 2003 - 2017 Data HOPE
ROBBINSDALE CRYSTAL ROSEVILLE HHEENNNNEEPPIINN GOLDEN FALCON VALLEY HEIGHTS
ST. PAUL
ST. LOUIS PARK
MINNEAPOLIS MINNETONKA HOPKINS
EDINA FORT SNELLING
RICHFIELD V E R
V E R EDEN PRAIRIE R R A A BLOOMINGTON DDAAKKOOTTAA C C
BURNSVILLE
SSCCOOTTTT
Z TOD August 2018
Map 2 provides a more detailed look at where commercial Prairie. While concentrations of commercial development development has been occurring in the region. Of note exist in areas away from the transit network, such as are the high concentrations of development in downtown Uptown in Minneapolis and the West End on the border Minneapolis, downtown St. Paul, along University Avenue of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley, Map 2 shows that between the University of Minnesota and Snelling Avenue, many of the areas with the highest amounts of commercial Bloomington’s South Loop area near Mall of America and development in recent years are areas served by high- City West station on the border of Minnetonka and Eden frequency LRT and BRT.
Development Trends Along Transit | 10 Public and Institutional Development Along Transit
Accessibility to public and institutional developments such Chart 3 shows that public and institutional development as government buildings, hospitals, parks and schools is has mostly varied between $5 million and $100 million an important consideration in determining their location. per year since 2003, with no perceivable upwards or Placing such developments near transit fosters equity by downwards trend. 2016 is an outlier with over $250 million increasing accessibility to the important community services in public and institutional development, due to high value that these land uses provide. additions at Hennepin County Medical Center, Augsburg University and a remodel of the Minnesota State Capitol. Over $850 million in public and institutional development Not included in this analysis is the nearly $1 billion of has occurred in the station areas included in this study development that has occurred at MSP International since 2003. This total represents 16 percent of all regional Airport since 2003. This development consists of both public and institutional development, a lower percentage commercial development and public upgrades to the than the share of regional multifamily and commercial airport, however it was excluded from this report along development that has occurred along LRT and BRT, but with other transportation and utility infrastructure. still far exceeding the 1.7 percent of the region’s land made up of the high-frequency, fixed-guideway station areas.4
Chart 3: Public and Institutional Development Along Transit
$300,000,000
$250,000,000
$200,000,000
$150,000,000 Permit Value $100,000,000
$50,000,000
$- 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Downtown Minneapolis Blue Line Green Line Blue Line Ext Green Line Ext A Line Orange Line
Development Trends Along Transit | 11 Map 3: Public/InstitutionalMap 3Development:: Publliic//I inn Stationsttiittutt Areasiionall Devellopmentt iin Sttattiion Areas
Permit Value ($) In Millions AANNOOKKAA
< 1 BROOKLYN PARK 1 - 9.9 10 - 19.9 20 - 107.3 Located within a Station Area R A M SEY for select years R A M SEY
2003 - 2017 Data NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE CRYSTAL ROSEVILLE HHEENNNNEEPPIINN GOLDEN FALCON HEIGHTS VALLEY
ST. PAUL
ST. LOUIS PARK
MINNEAPOLIS MINNETONKA HOPKINS
FORT EDINA SNELLING
RICHFIELD V E R V E R EDEN R R PRAIRIE A
A BLOOMINGTON C C DDAAKKOOTTAA
BURNSVILLE SSCCOOTTTT
Z TOD August 2018
Map 3 depicts where public and institutional development has occurred around the region. It is more dispersed than commercial or multifamily development, though Map 3 indicates that it is most heavily concentrated in downtown Minneapolis and downtown Saint Paul.
Development Trends Along Transit | 12 Development by Transitway Downtown Minneapolis LRT
Map 4: Downtown Minneapolis Development Value Z Downtown Minneapolis Development Nonresidential Type Permit Value Multi-Family Units Target Field Nicollet Mall arehouse District/ Government Pla a U S Bank Stadium Commercial ($ Millions) Hennepin Ave < 50 Public/Institutional < 1 50 - 99 Nonresidential Data; 1 - 9.9 2003 - 2017 10 - 19.9 100 - 199 Multifamily Data; 2009 - 2017 20 - 553.4 200 - 369
Downtown Minneapolis’s LRT service consists of a shared !<( alignment of the Blue and Green lines. This shared ! !<( alignment results in 5-7 minute service. Because of this, !<( downtown Minneapolis is considered separately from the !<( remainder of the Blue and Green lines. !<(
Downtown Minneapolis has seen a development boom in recent years as previously underutilized properties and surface parking lots have been converted into new apartments, offices and retail. This development boom has
0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles included the central part of downtown Minneapolis served TOD Aug 2018 by LRT, resulting in this portion of the Blue and Green lines leading all other transitways with over $2 billion in Map 4 also shows that development of each type has commercial development. been relatively consistent along each of downtown Minneapolis’s five light rail stations. Commercial Chart 4: Downtown Minneapolis Development development has been most heavily concentrated in (Source: Metropolitan Council Building Permit Survey; Metropolitan Council Development Tracker) Downtown East, largely due to the construction of U.S. Bank Stadium, and residential development has been Total Development Planned highest in the Target Field Station area at the northwest Development Types Completed Development 2003-2017 end of downtown, largely due to multifamily housing construction in the North Loop. Residential (# Units) 5,356* 3,375
Commercial (Value) $ 2,416,177,659 $ 920,200,000
Public/Institutional (Value) $ 308,961,939 $ 152,500,000
*Data from 2009-2017 Map 4 shows that recent development is concentrated in not only downtown Minneapolis compared to the surrounding areas, but also station-areas relative to the rest of downtown. While there are many reasons for development activity in downtown Minneapolis, this fact indicates that light rail may be viewed as an attractive amenity even within downtown Minneapolis.
Development Trends Along Transit | 13 Blue Line LRT
Cedar-Riverside Franklin Ave Lake St/Midtown 38th St 46th St 50th St/ VA Medical CenterFort Snelling Terminal 1 Terminal 2 American Blvd Bloomington Central28th Ave Mall of America Minnehaha Park
The Blue Line runs along the Hiawatha corridor from Map 5: Blue Line Development Value downtown Minneapolis to the Mall of America in Bloomington. In operation since 2004, the Blue Line was the first LRT line built in the Twin Cities. Despite this, the Blue Line has not seen as much commercial or multifamily development as the Green Line (See Chart 1 and 2 above). There are a variety of potential explanations for this. One is that the Blue Line saw reduced development for a significant part of its operation due to the Great Recession in 2008 and 2009. Another is that much of the Blue Line’s alignment is less conducive to multifamily and commercial development because it runs along a principal arterial highway. Finally, there is the fact that a coordinated community development effort such as the Green Line’s S
Central Corridors Funders Collaborative did not occur T . P A U L MINNEAPOLIS for the Blue Line at the time of construction. Despite all of these obstacles, the Blue Line, excluding downtown Minneapolis, has seen over 1,700 multifamily units, $250 Blue Line million in commercial development and over $77 million Development in public/institutional development permitted along its Nonresidential Type Commercial alignment. Public/Institutional Chart 5: Blue Line Development Permit Value (Source: Metropolitan Council Building Permit Survey; Metropolitan Council ($ Millions) Development Tracker) < 1 1 - 9.9 Total Development Planned Development Types Completed 10 - 19.9 Development 2003-2017 20 - 553.4 Multi-Family Units FORT SNELLING Residential (# Units) 1,754* 1,973 < 50 Commercial (Value) $ 257, 543, 897 $ 869,900,000 50 - 99
Public/Institutional (Value) $ 77,418,137 $ - 100 - 199 200 - 395 *Data from 2009-2017 Nonresidential Data; 2003 - 2017 Map 5 shows that substantial commercial development has Multifamily Data; 2009 - 2017 occurred in Bloomington's South Loop area, driven largely by new hotels and retail. Multifamily development has also been prominent in the South Loop, filling an area once dominated by expansive surface parking lots with a wide BLOOMINGTON variety of mixed-use and high density development. Mixed-use and multifamily development has also occurred 0 0.5 1 2 Miles near Minneapolis’s Lake Street, 38th Street and 46th Street Z TOD Aug 2018 stations. If current trends continue, the Blue Line will increasingly be a mixed-use transit corridor as well as a way to transport people between downtown Minneapolis, the airport and Mall of America.
Development Trends Along Transit | 14 Green Line LRT
est Bank East Bank Stadium VillageProspect Park estgate Raymond Ave Fairview Ave Snelling Ave Hamline Ave Lexington PkwyVictoria St Dale St estern Ave Capitol/Rice StRobert St 10th St Central Union Depot
In operation since 2014, the 9.2-mile Green Line Chart 6: Green Line Development (Source: Metropolitan Council Building Permit Survey; Metropolitan Council LRT has already seen an enormous amount of Development Tracker) development along its alignment. Running along Total Development University Avenue between downtown Minneapolis Planned Development Types Completed and downtown St. Paul, the Green Line has the highest Development 2006-2017 ridership of any corridor in the Twin Cities metro area and has had noticeable land use impacts on the Residential (# Units) 6,313* 4,411 neighborhoods it serves.5 Commercial (Value) $ 534,115,802 $ 1,728,800,000 While the Green Line has seen significant amounts of commercial and public/institutional development, Public/Institutional (Value) $ 391,430,223 $ 160,320,000
the largest upturn in development has been in the *Data from 2009-2017 form of multifamily housing. In fact, with over 6,000 multifamily units permitted between 2009 and 2017, the Green Line has seen the most multifamily development of any transitway in this study.
Map 6: Green Line Development Value
Green Line Development Nonresidential Type Permit Value Multi-Family Units FALCON Commercial ($ Millions) HEIGHTS < 50 Public/Institutional < 1 50 - 99 Nonresidential Data; 1 - 9.9 2006 - 2017 10 - 19.9 100 - 199 Multifamily Data; 2009 - 2017 20 - 553.4 200 - 407
MINNEAPOLIS
ST. PAUL
0 0.5 1 2 Miles Z TOD Aug 2018
As Map 6 shows, multifamily development has occurred housing boom is particularly striking because of how along most of the Green Line’s alignment, though it centralized it is within Green Line station areas. As Map has been particularly prevalent near Stadium Village, 6 shows, development is primarily concentrated directly Prospect Park and downtown St. Paul. This multifamily on University Avenue. The fact that 94 percent of new
Development Trends Along Transit | 15 multifamily housing in St. Paul has occurred along the While it is not within the scope of this study to investigate Green Line is indicative of the scale of development causation between the construction of the Green Line occurring along the alignment.6 and redevelopment along the University Avenue corridor, other studies have looked at this topic. A recent study The development occurring along the Green Line over the concluded that announcement of the Full Funding Grant last decade is noticeably different from the past condition Agreement for the Green Line LRT increased building of the corridor. Before the Green Line, University Avenue permits by about 24 percent, and value by 80 percent,7 between the University of Minnesota and downtown indicating that the Green Line is largely responsible St. Paul was an auto-oriented arterial fronted primarily for setting off the development boom along University by industrial uses and low-density strip malls surrounded Avenue. by large surface parking lots. The ongoing multifamily development in the Prospect Park neighborhood as well as Allianz Field and the surrounding mixed-use development at Snelling Avenue are indicative of what the future of University Avenue could be.
Development Trends Along Transit | 16 A Line BRT
Rosedale Snelling Snelling Snelling Larpenteur Snelling ComoSnelling HewittSnelling MinnehahaSnelling UniversitySnelling DaytonSnelling GrandSnelling St SnellingClair RandolphSnelling HighlandFord FairviewFord ennethFord Finn Ford oodlawn46th St 46th46th Ave St Minnehaha46th St Station County Road B Hoyt-Nebraska
The first line to be completed in the arterial BRT network Map 7: A Line Development Value envisioned for the region was the A Line. Opening in 2016, and operating at a different scale in terms of ridership than A-Line Station Area Development either the Blue or Green lines, the A Line has not yet seen a level of development along its alignment that compares Nonresidential Type Commercial with what has occurred along the Blue or Green Line. Public/Institutional Nevertheless, the A Line has been successful at increasing ROSEVILLE ridership through the corridor and reducing travel time Permit Value 5 ($ Millions) compared with the local bus service. There are indications < 1 that development activity will follow this increased traffic 1 - 9.9 through the corridor. Large redevelopment areas such as 10 - 19.9 FALCON the Ford Plant in St. Paul's Highland Park neighborhood 20 - 553.4 HEIGHTS and Allianz Field at University and Snelling have the possibility to be catalytic developments for the corridor. Multi-Family Units In addition, a number of proposed mixed-use multifamily < 50 developments along Snelling Avenue indicate that 50 - 53 development may be attracted to the A Line as BRT comes 2015 - 2017 Data to be seen as an amenity that improves accessibility for those who live and work along it.
Chart 7: A Line Development (Source: Metropolitan Council Building Permit Survey; Metropolitan Council Development Tracker)
Total Development Planned Development Types Completed Development 2015-2017
Residential (# Units) 60 596 ST. PAUL Commercial (Value) $ 54,691,276 $ 10,000,000
Public/Institutional (Value) $ 8,007,073 $ - MINNEAPOLIS
0 0.5 1 2 Miles Z TOD Aug 2018
Development Trends Along Transit | 17 Blue and Green Line LRT Extensions
South est Golden Triangle City est Opus Shady Oak Downtown HopkinsBlake Rd Louisiana Ave ooddale Ave Beltline Blvd est Lake St est 21st St Bryn Mawr Bassett Creek RoyalstonValley Ave/ Farmers Market
Oak Grove Pkwy 93rd Ave 85th Ave Brooklyn Blvd 63rd Ave Bass Lake Rd Robbinsdale Golden Valley Rd Plymouth Ave/ Penn Ave Van hite Blvd Theodore irth Park
The Green and Blue Line extensions are twin extensions Chart 8: Green Line Extension Development of the current Blue and Green lines. The Green Line (Source: Metropolitan Council Building Permit Survey) extension will run from Target Field Station in Minneapolis Total Development Planned to Eden Prairie and open in 2023. The Blue Line Extension Development Types Completed Development will run from Target Field Station to Brooklyn Center 2011-2017 and open in 2024. While these two light rail lines are not Residential (# Units) 2,002 4,117 yet under construction, they were included in this study because the alignments are established and developers Commercial (Value) $ 385,759,368 $ 208,400,000 have begun to plan developments around the lines. Public/Institutional (Value) $ 59,339,692 $ - As can be seen in Charts 8 and 9, development along the Blue and Green Line Extensions has been a tale of two Chart 9: Blue Line Extension Development transit lines. The Green Line Extension has already seen a (Source: Metropolitan Council Building Permit Survey) significant amount of development, particularly multifamily Total Development residential development in St. Louis Park and Hopkins as Planned Development Types Completed Development well as commercial development at Eden Prairie’s City West 2014-2017 Station. Alternatively, the Blue Line Extension has thus far seen limited development along its alignment, potentially Residential (# Units) 78 because work on the Blue Line Extension began several Commercial (Value) $ 49,964,137 $ - years after work on the Green Line Extension, and because of a moratorium on new development the City of Brooklyn Public/Institutional (Value) $ 11,873,319 $ 55,000,000 Park passed in June 2017 to allow for station area planning to be completed. Additionally, the 610 West multifamily development with 473 units was built just outside of the 1/2 mile buffer of the Oak Grove Parkway Station and is therefore not reflected in the data. Long term plans around the Oak Grove Parkway Station and the Target Northern Campus indicate that a significant amount of development may continue in that area.
Development Trends Along Transit | 18 Map 8: Green Line Extension Development Value Map 9: Blue Line Extension Development Value
GOLDEN VALLEY ! !
!
! !
!
! Blue Line Extension ST. LOUIS PARK ! BROOKLYN PARK Development Value ! Nonresidential Type ! MINNETONKA Commercial ! MINNEAPOLIS Public/Institutional ! HOPKINS ! Permit Value Green Line ($ Millions) ! Extension Development < 1 ! Nonresidential Type 1 - 9.9 Commercial Public/Institutional 10 - 19.9 Permit Value 20 - 553.4 ($ Millions) ! < 1 Multi-Family Units ! 1 - 9.9 < 50 EDINA 10 - 19.9 ! 20 - 553.4 50 - 68 Multi-Family Units 2014 - 2017 Data ! < 50 TOD Aug 2018
! 50 - 99 EDEN 100 - 199 PRAIRIE 200 - 322 2011 - 2017 Data NEW HOPE CRYSTAL ! ! ROBBINSDALE ! BLOOMINGTON 0 0.5 1 2 Miles Z TOD Aug 2018
MINNEAPOLIS
!
GOLDEN VALLEY !
! ! Z 0 0.5 1 2 Miles
Development Trends Along Transit | 19 Orange Line BRT
Downtown MPLS I-35 Lake St I-35 46th St I-35 66th St nox Ave 76th St nox Ave I-35 98th St Burnsville I-35 /Burnsville Pkwy American Blvd
The METRO Orange Line is a 17-mile planned BRT line Map 10: Orange! Line Extension Development Value that will run from downtown Minneapolis to Burnsville predominantly along Interstate 35W. The line is expected to ! open in 2020 and operate at 10-15 minute frequency.
! ! The Orange Line is the newest to be included in this ! study, with only permits from 2017 analyzed. As such, a ! MINNEAPOLIS limited amount of development is indicated in Chart 10. Nevertheless, several redevelopment areas along the line are likely to be home to continued development in the coming ! years. One of these is at the Knox and American Blvd station where higher density development on an old retail area has already occurred.8 The line's terminus at Burnsville's Heart of the City is also an area that could see Transit Oriented Development as it is already a mixed-use suburban EAGAN FORT SNELLING 9 downtown 20 years in the making. Both of these areas may (UNORGANIZED) see continued transit oriented development with the added ! amenity of BRT. RICHFIELD
Chart 10: Orange Line Development ! (Source: Metropolitan Council Building Permit Survey) ! Total Development Planned Development Types Completed Development in 2017
Residential (# Units) 2 918 Orange Line Development Value BLOOMINGTON Commercial (Value) $ 7, 258, 570 $ 31,000,000 ! Nonresidential Type Commercial Public/Institutional Public/Institutional (Value) $ 1,500,000 $ 3,400,000 Permit Value ($ Millions) < 1 1 - 9.9 10 - 19.9 20 - 553.4
Multi-Family Units BURNSVILLE < 50 ! 2017 Data ! TOD Aug 2018 Z 0 0.5 1 2 Miles
Development Trends Along Transit | 20 Planned Development
The Metropolitan Council maintains a database of same level of accuracy as the building permit data. development that is planned but has not yet been issued Nevertheless, keeping track of planned development does a building permit. This database draws its information provide a glimpse of what is likely to be built along transit primarily from news media and thus does not have the in the coming years.
Planned Multifamily Units
Chart 10 displays multifamily units planned along the high- in multifamily development along as the Green Line frequency LRT and BRT transitways. With over 15,000 units Extension is also noteworthy, while both the Blue Line and planned, it is likely the amount of multifamily development Downtown Minneapolis are also likely to see significant along transitways will increase in the next several years. residential development. Finally, the chart also shows that developers have begun to plan multifamily development As with recent years, multifamily residential development along the A Line and Orange Line, indicating that along transit is expected to be strongly driven by residents and developers alike realize the benefits of the construction along the Green Line. A large expansion accessibility BRT brings.
Chart 11: Planned Multifamily Units
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500 Units 2000
1500
1000
500
0 A Line Blue Line Blue Line Downtown Green Line Green Line Orange Line Extension Minneapolis Extension
Planned Development by Value
Chart 11 displays the value of planned development. The absence of planned development along the Blue With over $2 billion in planned development value, the Line Extension is also noticeable. This is largely explained development boom along the Green Line is expected by the fact that while communities along the line are to continue in the coming years. Over a billion in total preparing for development and Target Corporation has development value is also planned along both the Blue Line major plans for continued development at its Brooklyn LRT and the Downtown Minneapolis LRT. Smaller but not Park Campus, these developments are still in the early insignificant amounts of development are planned along stages and lack estimates of what the eventual value of the Green Line Extension LRT, the A Line BRT, and the development will be. Orange Line BRT. Development Trends Along Transit | 21 Chart 12: Planned Development by Value
$2,500,000,000
$2,000,000,000
$1,500,000,000
$1,000,000,000
$500,000,000
$- A Line Blue Line Blue Line D ow ntow n Green Line Green Line Orange Line Extension Minneapolis Extension
Mixed Use Commercial Public/Institutional Residential
Map 11: Planned DevelopmentPlanned Development in Transit Areas
Planned Development Type A N O KA Multi-Family BROOKLYN Residential PARK Mixed Use Commercial Public and Institutional Proposed For 2018 -2019 R A M SEY
NEW HOPE
ROBBINSDALE CRYSTAL ROSEVILLE H E N N EPIIN FALCON GOLDEN HEIGHTS VALLEY
ST. PAUL
ST. LOUIS PARK
MINNETONKA HOPKINS MINNEAPOLIS
EDINA FORT SNELLING
RICHFIELD V E R V E R EDEN
R PRAIRIE R A A C C BLOOMINGTON D A K OTA
BURNSVILLE S C O TT
Z TOD August 2018
Development Trends Along Transit | 22 Long Term Forecasts
Long term real estate trends are heavily influenced by of development that occurs along transitways will be demographic trends. This is due to the fact that real estate examined, and forecasts for how much development may development in the long term is tied to the needs of the occur along the transitways highlighted in this study will future residents and employees of a region. In this section, be provided. three demographic trends that will influence the amount
Chart 13: Population of Seven County Metro Area
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0 3.74
Millions 3.46 3.16 1.5 2.85 2.64 2.29 1.0
0.5
0.0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
(Source: Metropolitan Council orecasts pdated une 2017)
The first trend that will affect future real estate Population growth alone provides a limited amount of development is population growth. As seen in Chart information on what new development will look like, and 13, the seven-county metropolitan area is expected where it will occur. Because different demographics have to experience steady growth from about 2.85 million different needs, understanding who these new residents residents in 2010 to 3.74 million residents in 2040. These are is essential to forecasting where development is likely new residents will create demand for more residential to occur in the future. As Chart 14 depicts, every age units as well as new commercial development where group is expected to grow, but none as quickly as the 65+ they will work and shop, and new public and institutional population. The 65+ population is projected to double development to provide government services, education between 2010 and 2030, and to increase to 21 percent and recreation. of the total regional population by 2040, up from just 11 percent in 2010.
Development Trends Along Transit | 23 Chart 14: Population Growth by Age
4,000,000 3,500,000 797,000 684,000 3,000,000 474,000 307,000 2,500,000 255,000 225,000 2,000,000 1,872,000 1,695,000 1,746,000 1,445,000 1,579,000 1,500,000 1,236,000 1,000,000 384,000 386,000 409,000 427,000 318,000 357,000 500,000 509,000 585,000 581,000 605,000 620,000 641,000 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
Ages 0-14 Ages 15-24 Ages 25-64 Ages 65+
(Source: Metropolitan Council orecasts pdated une 2017 )
The increasing percentage of older adults means that compatible with transit, indicated by the fact that over future development will have to consider the needs of this a third of multifamily developments in the region are demographic. In terms of residential development, it is occurring along high-frequency LRT and BRT lines. expected 75 percent of net new households will be 65+.10 While some older adults will "age in place," a growing It is partially because of the expected demand for transit- number will opt for townhomes, apartments, and age- compatible housing that the Metropolitan Council forecasts specific communities. This trend is already underway as 10 percent of the region's population growth between 2016 Baby Boomers have been contributing to and 2040 will occur in the transit station areas included in the demand for multifamily housing. this study (Metropolitan Council 2016 population estimates and Metropolitan Council 2040 population forecasts).11 As A third trend that is expected to influence future mentioned earlier, these station areas consist of 1.7 percent development is the shrinking average household size of the region's land area, indicating that the station areas of the region. It is estimated that by 2040 one in three included in this study are expected to continue to grow at a households will consist of people living alone.10 This trend faster rate than the region as a whole. is mainly due to the increase in older households, which are more likely to be one- or two-person households. As the region's transitway system continues to expand Fewer people per household as well as population growth beyond the stations included in this study, more of the indicate that more residential units will be needed, region's communities will have convenient access to high- particularly smaller units that meet the needs of one- or frequency transitways. This will mean both more people two-person households. living along transit as well as new jobs and amenities that residents from other areas can access. It is for this reason A growing population with an increasing share of older that the expansion of transitways benefit not only the area to adults and smaller households indicates that demand which they are expanding, but also the region. As the region for small-lot houses, attached options and age specific moves towards 2040, the ability of transit service to connect communities will likely remain strong in the coming to more people, more jobs, and more destinations will help decades. These types of housing are often highly to create the access and mobility that the Twin Cities region needs to grow and thrive.
Development Trends Along Transit | 24 Conclusion
This report found that more than 15,000 multifamily are possibly the largest factors driving development along residential units and over $4.5 billion in nonresidential transitways. These trends include an aging population, development occurred along the Twin Cities’ high- smaller household sizes, and indications that both younger frequency LRT and BRT routes between 2003 and 2017. generations and retirees increasingly value living in walkable, urban neighborhoods served by transit.12 The value of developing housing, businesses and other amenities along high-frequency transitways comes from Further research into the relationship between transit the accessibility it provides residents, customers and and development in the Twin Cities could be done employees. As the Twin Cities region continues to grow to build upon the findings of this study. Possibilities in the coming decades, the amount of development that include looking at why some transitways spur more occurs along transit will be an important indicator not only development than others, testing causation between a of the effectiveness of transit but of the region’s ability to transit investment and an increase in development along grow efficiently. its alignment, and investigating how developments along a transitway increase ridership. Research to answer these Both short-term and long-term trends indicate that an questions will provide a more robust picture of both the increasing amount of development will likely occur along interaction between land use and transportation, as well the region’s LRT and BRT lines in the foreseeable future. as the benefits that transit service can bring to a region by While there are numerous possible explanations for this linking people, jobs and community. trend, changing demographics and residential preferences
Development Trends Along Transit | 25 Contact Information
For questions or comments on the information included in this report, please email us at [email protected], or check out our website at www.metrotransit.org/tod.
Data from the Metropolitan Council's building permits survey and the Council's population forecasts are available at www.metrocouncil.org/data
Sources
1 Metrotransit.org/high-frequency-network
2 Multifamily data from Metropolitan Council Residential Regional Development Data. Available at https://metrocouncil.org/data
3 Commercial Development Data are from the Metropolitan Council Nonresidential Regional Development Data. Available at https://metrocouncil.org/data
4 Public and Institutional Development Data are from the Metropolitan Council Nonresidential Regional Development Data. Available at https://metrocouncil.org/data
5 Metro Transit Ridership Data
6 Metro Stats: On the Rise: New Residential Construction in the Twin Cities Region. Metropolitan Council. September 2016. Available at https://metrocouncil.org/data-and-maps/data/reports-resources/metrostats.aspx
7 Real estate development in anticipation of the Green Line light rail transit in St. Paul. Xinyu Cao and Dean Porter- Nelson. Transport Policy. Oct. 2016.
8. https://www.bloomingtonmn.gov/plan/penn-american-district
9. http://www.ci.burnsville.mn.us/index.aspx?NID=89
10. 2010 data on households from Census Bureau; 2020-2040 forecasts from the Metropolitan Council July 2015. Available at https://metrocouncil.org/data
11. Metropolitan Council 2016 population estimates and Metropolitan Council 2040 population forecasts. Available at https://metrocouncil.org/data
12. America in 2015: A ULI Survey of Views on Housing, Transportation, and Community. 2015
Development Trends Along Transit | 26 Appendix A: Metro Transit High-Frequency Network
High Frequency Service Network
HIGH FREQUENCY PROMISE Colored lines show where High Frequency service is available. Route & Schedule Service every 15 minutes (or better) All of Route 54, A Line and METRO Blue Line andInformation Green Line offer High Frequency service. Weekdays: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. 612-373-3333 Service on these routes—2, 5, 6, 10, 11, 18, 19,metrotransit.org 21, 64 and 515— Saturdays: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. continues outside the areas shown, but operates less frequently. For details, see specific route schedules, visit metrotransit.org or call 612-373-3333.
P
694
51st Ave Columbia Heights
694 94
0th Ave
Columbia Heights 35W Transit Center
Little Canada 2 th Ave 10 Rosedale Transit Center Roseville rand t Lowry Ave 36 35W 36 Emerson Ave remont Ave remont 94 11 2 th Ave 61
Central Ave Maplewood
19 2nd t
280 nelling Ave Downtown Falcon 35E Minneapolis Heights
enn Ave LA E 7th t P ALE 55 Target Field
Warehouse/Hennepin Nicollet Mall A Government Maryland Ave rosperity Plaza U.S. Bank Stadium Stadium State Village Hennepin East Bank Fairgrounds West St. Paul 7th t Bank Prospect Park University 394 Washington of Minnesota
Westgate ayne Hamline 94 Raymond University Franklin niversity Ave 2 94 6 Cedar-Riverside CEDAR Ave 3rd E 7th t LA E Fairview 64 18 Snelling Hamline Lexington Victoria Dale Western Capitol/Rice LA E O 5 Robert T E ISLES Uptown niversity Transit Station 94 10th St 94
Lake/Midtown Ave Cretin Chicago Lake Lake t Union Depot Transit Center 21 Marshall Ave Central
LA E CAL OU Downtown
Hennepin Ave 3 th t Macalester St. Paul Chicago Ave Chicago th Ave 38th St College 35E Minneapolis Hiawatha Ave 35W
Nicollet Ave W 7th t nelling Ave I-35W & 46th St LA E Station 46th St 54 ARRIET th t ord kwy
52
50th/Minnehaha
W 7th t M I S VA Medical Center S 5 th t IS Legend S DIAMO D IP LA E P 62 I R IVE P 35E METRO Station R Fort Snelling Transit Center/Station52 62 P P Park & Ride 77 th t th t Minneapolis - St Paul Point of Interest International 110 Southdale 515 Airport - Airport 54 Bus Route Transit Center Terminal 1 P 35W Each route is marked by a Rich eld different color to show its Airport - travel path. Terminal 2 5 Fort Snelling METRO Blue Line National Trains stop at all stations shown. Cemetery METRO Green Line Trains stop at all stations shown. 494 3 th Ave 3 th 494 American Blvd Lindau Lane 28th Ave Mall of America Transit Station P Bloomington Central 52
06-010-18-16
Development Trends Along Transit | 27 Appendix B: Station Areas Non-Overllappiing,, Hallf-Miille Statiion Areas
Blue / Green Line Blue Line Blue Line Extension A N O KA Green Line Green Line Extension A Line Orange Line
TOD June 2018
R A M SEY
H E N N EPIIN
D A K OTA
Note: Half-Mile Station Areas represent geographically-defined transit influence, allocated to the nearest 1/2 mile transit station. These areas of influence are for 0 1 2 4 planning purposes only, and do not Miles represent actual station locations.
Development Trends Along Transit | 28