ULI Advisory Services Program Report About the Advisory Services Program

Federal Highway Administration Influence of Transportation Infrastructure on Land Use

December 6–8, 2004 Washington, D.C. A ULI Advisory Services Workshop Report

ULI–the Urban Land Institute 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W. Suite 500 West Washington, D.C. 20007-5201 About ULI–the Urban Land Institute

LI–the Urban Land Institute is a non- sionals represented include developers, builders, profit research and education organization property owners, investors, architects, public offi- that promotes responsible leadership in cials, planners, real estate brokers, appraisers, U the use of land in order to enhance the attorneys, engineers, financiers, academicians, total environment. students, and librarians. ULI relies heavily on the experience of its members. It is through member The Institute maintains a membership represent- involvement and information resources that ULI ing a broad spectrum of interests and sponsors a has been able to set standards of excellence in de- wide variety of educational programs and forums velopment practice. The Institute has long been to encourage an open exchange of ideas and shar- recognized as one of America’s most respected ing of experience. ULI initiates research that and widely quoted sources of objective informa- anticipates emerging land use trends and issues tion on urban planning, growth, and development. and proposes creative solutions based on that research; provides advisory services; and pub- This Advisory Services workshop report is in- lishes a wide variety of materials to disseminate tended to further the objectives of the Institute information on land use and development. and to make authoritative information generally available to those seeking knowledge in the field Established in 1936, the Institute today has more of urban land use. than 26,000 members and associates from nearly 80 countries, representing the entire spectrum of Richard M. Rosan the land use and development disciplines. Profes- President

2 A ULI Advisory Services Program Report About the Advisory Services Program

he goal of ULI’s Advisory Services Program ers, public officials, academicians, representatives is to bring the finest expertise in the real of financial institutions, and others. In fulfillment estate field to bear on complex land use plan- of the mission of the Urban Land Institute, this T ning and development projects, programs, Advisory Services program report is intended to and policies. Since 1947, this program has assem- provide objective advice that will promote the re- bled well over 400 ULI-member teams to help sponsible use of land to enhance the environment. sponsors find creative, practical solutions for issues such as downtown redevelopment, land management strategies, evaluation of develop- ULI Program Staff ment potential, growth management, community revitalization, brownfields redevelopment, military Rachelle L. Levitt base reuse, provision of low-cost and affordable Executive Vice President, Policy and Practice housing, and asset management strategies, among Mary Beth Corrigan other matters. A wide variety of public, private, and nonprofit organizations have contracted for Vice President, Advisory Services and ULI’s Advisory Services. Policy Programs Each panel team is composed of highly qualified Nancy Zivitz Sussman professionals who volunteer their time to ULI. Senior Associate, Advisory Services They are chosen for their knowledge of the panel Nicholas Gabel topic and screened to ensure their objectivity. ULI Associate, Advisory Services panel teams are interdisciplinary and are developed based on the specific scope of the assignment. Jason Bell ULI teams provide a holistic look at development Panel Coordinator, Advisory Services problems. Each panel is chaired by a respected ULI member with previous panel experience. Yvonne Stanton Administrative Assistant The agenda for a panel assignment is intensive. It includes an in-depth briefing and meetings with Nancy H. Stewart sponsor representatives; discussions with key Director, Book Program people; and a day of formulating recommendations. On the final day on site, the panel makes an Julie D. Stern oral presentation of its findings and conclusions to JDS Communications the sponsor. At the request of the sponsor, a writ- Manuscript Editor ten report is prepared and published. Betsy VanBuskirk Because the sponsoring entities are responsible Art Director for significant preparation before the panel’s visit, including sending extensive briefing materials to Martha Loomis each member, participants in ULI’s panel assign- Desktop Publishing Specialist/Graphics ments are able to make accurate assessments of a sponsor’s issues and to provide recommendations Craig Chapman in a compressed amount of time. Director, Publishing Operations A major strength of the program is ULI’s unique ability to draw on the knowledge and expertise of its members, including land developers and own-

Washington, D.C., December 6–8, 2004 3

Contents

ULI Panel and Project Staff 6

Introduction 7 How Development Decisions Are Made 9 How and When Transportation Projects Affect Local Land Use Decisions 12

Conclusion 15 About the Panel 16

Washington, D.C., December 6–8, 2004 5 ULI Panel and Project Staff

Panel Chair Julia Trevarthen Director William R. Eager The Institute for Community Collaboration, Inc. President South Florida Regional Planning Council TDA, Inc. Hollywood, Florida Seattle, Washington Allan R. Winn Panel Members Managing Partner Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll, LLP Robert Dunphy Washington, D.C. Senior Resident Fellow, Transportation and Infrastructure ULI Project Director ULI–the Urban Land Institute Washington, D.C. Mary Beth Corrigan Vice President, Advisory Services and J. Kevin Lawler Policy Programs Managing Partner ULI–the Urban Land Institute N-K Ventures, LC Washington, D.C. West Palm Beach, Florida Joseph R. Molinaro ULI On-Site Coordinator Manager, Smart Growth Programs Jason Bell Community Outreach Department Panel and Workshop Coordinator National Association of Realtors® ULI–the Urban Land Institute Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. Roger Platt Senior Vice President and Counsel The Real Estate Roundtable, Inc. Washington, D.C.

Karina Ricks Urban Planner D.C. Office of Planning Washington, D.C.

6 A ULI Advisory Services Program Report Introduction

he Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) bers with relevant expertise and experience in the and transportation planning agencies have implications of transportation decisions on land use been grappling with the correlation be- gathered in Washington, D.C., for two days to dis- T tween transportation and land use deci- cuss this issue with FHWA representatives. Panel sions. Often cited as the reason for suburban members represented both the public and private sprawl, roadway projects frequently are opposed sectors and included developers, local government by members of the general public, who assume officials, land use planners, transportation plan- that if roads are built, development will always ners, and environmental professionals. follow. The support for this assumption is most The purpose of the workshop was to facilitate dis- often anecdotal, and the FHWA does not believe cussions among public and private land use de- this is always true. Other factors, such as local cision makers and to promote a dialogue that will and regional land use and economic development allow the FHWA and transportation agencies to policies, also play an important role in suburban better understand the correlation between growth. However, this assumption also is based transportation planning and land use decisions. on anecdotal information. Hearing both public and private sector views on The Federal Highway Administration asked ULI this subject can help the FHWA and transporta- to convene a group of real estate and planning tion agencies become more aware of the impact professionals to provide a better understanding of transportation decisions on land use. of the correlations between the approval of transportation infrastructure projects and local land The questions addressed included the following: use patterns. In requesting the assistance of ULI, • What role does transportation planning play in the FHWA sought a better understanding of local government land use decisions? local land use decision making—as well as of the decision-making process that the private sector • What role does transportation planning play uses when deciding to develop a real estate for private development? project—so that the FHWA and transportation • How can transportation planning better corre- agencies can more logically discuss the correlations late with land use decisions and a community’s between transportation and land use when analyz- vision for the future, and how can land use de- ing projects. In addition, this understanding also cisions and a community’s vision be better cor- can help transportation agencies more effec- related? tively communicate to decision makers the role that transportation projects play in land use pat- FHWA officials met with the panel and provided terns and how local and regional governments an overview of the different programs and poli- can work with transportation agencies to achieve cies involved in the FHWA project approval pro- each entity’s goals. cess. The panel spent the balance of its first day discussing and formulating its recommendations, The ULI Process which it presented on the second day.

ULI conducted an Advisory Services workshop This report is a summary of the panel’s findings titled “Location Decision Making: The Role of and recommendations. It is organized into two Transportation Infrastructure.” Six ULI mem- main sections. The first discusses how develop-

Washington, D.C., December 6–8, 2004 7 ment decisions are made and describes the private sector perspective on where, when, and how private development occurs, as well as how local and regional government policies factor into these decisions. The second section discusses how and when transportation projects affect local land use decisions.

8 A ULI Advisory Services Program Report How Development Decisions Are Made

his section describes the development needed to achieve that vision, to get where the decision-making process from the private community wants to go. By having a vision, a sector perspective, as well as the role that community can set the stage for its future land T local and regional government entities play uses as well as build some predictability into the in the process. It provides a framework for un- planning and development process. A community derstanding the relative importance of transpor- typically uses the following three steps to set tation accessibility, describes the role of local and its vision: regional government actions and policies, and • Comprehensive planning involves drafting and outlines the private developer’s decision-making adopting a master plan that describes the com- process. munity’s goals and objectives. The plan addresses a variety of issues, including future land uses, The Public Process economic development, housing, social services, Most local land use decisions and outcomes start and infrastructure such as water, sewers, storm with a public process. Regional and local policies water management, schools, recreation, and have the greatest impact on how land use deci- transportation. It is, in essence, the blueprint sions are made. The typical components of the for the future of the community. public process are described below. It is impor- • Development regulations are drafted to pro- tant to remember that this is a general discussion vide implementation mechanisms for the com- and that, just as localities are different, so are prehensive plan. They outline, among other local and regional decision-making processes. things, where and how development will oc- Following or Leading cur. Development regulations specify types of development—such as residential, commercial, Development will occur, as discussed later in this industrial, and so forth—as well as allowable report. Local governments play a critical role in densities, permitting procedures, and develop- determining how, when, and where this development review and approval processes. ment will take place, as well as in the quality of the development. Local government therefore • Implementation is the final stage of commu- can be a follower—reacting to development pres- nity visioning and master planning. It puts the sures and making ad hoc decisions on a project- plan into action and produces the end results. by-project basis—or a leader—determining its Public Sector Infrastructure Investments own vision and future; putting in place the goals, objectives, and policies necessary to achieve that Development is not the sole responsibility of the vision; and standing by its vision over the long private sector. The public sector plays a key role run. If planning is done well in a collaborative, in the development process by setting the stage open process, both the private sector and the for development through its infrastructure invest- community at large will have more confidence in ments. These include water, sewer, and storm the development decision-making process water management systems as well as schools, roads, transit, parks and open space, and social Vision and Community Aspirations services. The level of a community’s commitment The public process typically begins with setting a to its infrastructure needs sets the stage for fu- vision and a “road map” for where the community ture land uses and demonstrates the community’s wants to go, as well as by describing the steps commitment to high-quality development.

Washington, D.C., December 6–8, 2004 9 The Developer’s Process in an area that has not seen any major new busi- nesses in a while and that has no prospects of see- The developer goes through a much different ing any in the near future. decision-making process when deciding to build or not build. While its decisions are made within the Competition from existing and anticipated devel- context of the local planning process, it is gener- opment also is a market factor. A high-end retail ally tandem to and not necessarily a result of local developer most likely will not build a new shop- planning decisions. When determining whether a ping mall with upper-end stores if a similar mall project is a good decision or not, a developer typi- exists within a certain distance of the proposed cally uses a general checklist like the following. site. However, if the area lacks mid-level retail Market Demand and its population demographics support that use, First and foremost, the developer needs to deter- a mid-level retail project may be a more feasible mine if a market exists for the product he or she development for the site. is considering building. Market studies are con- Site Suitability ducted to determine a proposed project’s market The next thing a developer will look at is the suit- feasibility, absorption rates, and anticipated costs/ ability of the site or sites available for the project. benefits. Developers, like most people, are in busi- Size, access, amenities, and environmental oppor- ness to make a profit. They usually will not build tunities and constraints all play a role in determin- something that is not going to sell and therefore ing site suitability. A residential developer, for ex- will cause them to lose money. ample, will consider how many units can be built Market determination—from a developer’s per- on the site; its location in relationship to transpor- spective—is typically evolutionary, not revolu- tation infrastructure, including transit; its proxim- tionary. In other words, a developer looks to see ity to and the quality of amenities such as schools, what type of product already has succeeded in the retail, recreation, and health care facilities; the market, rather than try to break into the market nearby market and competition; physical features with a totally unconventional product. Local and such as topography, natural resources, and envi- national development cycles play a key role in ronmental constraints; and any issues that could market determination. For example, one national adversely affect the perception of the project, such trend is the growing number of households with as proximity to undesirable land uses, which could no children under the age of 18—a demographic include landfills, airports, or manufacturing facili- group that currently includes almost 75 percent ties. Site access also factors into the site suitabil- of U.S. households—which has created a growing ity equation, but it is not the primary factor, just market for smaller homes that require less upkeep one of many. and maintenance. This trend, however, also needs to be looked at on the local level. While more and Economic Feasibility more “empty nesters” may be found living near A proposed project needs to “pencil out,” that is, large cities, smaller communities may still have be economically feasible, before a developer will more families with small children looking for the decide to move forward. If the project does not traditional single-family house with a yard. In make sense economically, it usually is not going other words, what works and sells in one area to happen. For example, if the costs of purchas- may not sell in another. ing the land, improving the roads, bringing in Local demographics therefore play a key role in building materials, extending water and sewer the market. The population growth rate—which services to the site, and labor cannot be absorbed dictates how well a development project will do in the cost of the product—that is, if the houses and at what rate it will be absorbed—the employ- will not sell for a price high enough to enable the ment base, and the age and education level of the developer to reclaim those costs and still make a population all play a role in market demand. High- profit—then the project does not make good eco- end office development is not going to take place nomic sense.

10 A ULI Advisory Services Program Report The timeline for the project also factors into eco- Transportation Decisions nomic feasibility. A developer’s typical timeline is One of the questions asked of the panel was how less than five years—generally three to four years transportation decisions factor into land use and —from start to finish. While this will vary depend- development decisions, both for the public sector ing on the size of the project, any project that will and the private sector. While this will be expanded take longer than five years usually is built in phases upon in the next section, it is important to pre- so that it can be developed in manageable pieces sent some preliminary conclusions at this point in and evaluated at certain points along the way. the report. Regulatory Environment First, the panel believes that transportation deci- The regulatory and permitting environment also sions are a component of local public sector actions/ plays a role in the developer’s decision-making planning that are made early in the local land use process. While the development community does planning process. Programmed transportation im- not expect local governments to just give them provements are factored into land use planning everything they ask for, they do expect some pre- and visioning but are not the driving force in these dictability in the process and a level playing field processes. Communities believe that they need to for all parties. If the process is unpredictable—if control their own destinies, at least when drafting their plans, and do not depend on transporta- it is not clear what the impact fees will be from tion improvements. In addition, local government one project to the next or if the community has a planning has a longer time frame than individual history of making arbitrary decisions on projects development projects. Therefore, it is feasible for —developers will be wary of doing business in communities to factor federal and state transpor- that community. If, on the other hand, a commu- tation planning activities into their own planning nity’s development regulations are clear, time processes, but transportation decisions are not frames and approval processes are as consistent the driving force in these processes. and predicable as possible, and government staff are willing to work with developers in order to Transportation decisions may be less important to developers’ decisions about individual projects, achieve the highest-quality development possible, because their time frames and planning horizons a developer is more likely to want to do business are so much shorter than the public sector’s. Typ- there—and to do so in ways that benefit the com- ically, no transportation improvements are re- munity. Community support—or opposition—also quired for infill development, and therefore there is a consideration. If a developer will have to ex- is no real federal impact on such projects. For pend considerable resources on convincing the greenfield locations without any meaningful ac- community that the project will not affect it ad- cess, it usually is not feasible to wait for the pub- versely, those costs need to be evaluated as part lic transportation decision-making process. of the feasibility process. Capital Availability

Most developers—especially smaller ones—do not have enough capital of their own to complete a project. Therefore, they typically borrow money to do so. Lenders and investors consider the risk/ reward ratio for their investment and want to know if a project will be realized within the typical five-year time frame. If the risks do not appear likely to pay off, or if it looks like the development process may be extended or delayed, they are not likely to provide capital to fund the project.

Washington, D.C., December 6–8, 2004 11 How and When Transportation Projects Affect Local Land Use Decisions

he panel felt it was important to under- driving factor for development decisions. How much stand the total context in which land use the capacity spurs development depends on mar- decisions are made before it tackled this ket demand as well as on other factors. T issue. This will make it easier to under- Growth is occurring. The U.S. population is increasing stand how transportation infrastructure decisions —through both immigration and birth—and these affect land use decisions—or vice versa. Develop- people need to live somewhere. ment decisions are incremental and the market is the key. New development and redevelopment The issue, therefore, is not if growth will happen, are the result of thousands of developers making but rather how and where it will happen. The crux thousands of decisions. Although one hopes that of the issue is whether this growth will be managed these decisions are being made wisely, within a or unmanaged. New roads often lead to new devel- rational framework, that is not always the case. opment, but they do not have to lead to sprawl. Local land use policies are the key to managed or Personal Choices unmanaged growth. Critics who want to say “no” to all development should instead focus their en- People tend to want it all: a big house on a big lot ergy on saying “no” to unmanaged development. within a short commute of their workplace. They What transportation agencies need to know when work to earn enough money to buy the house and faced with opposition to projects is whether the then hope that transportation issues will take care critics are attacking the road projects or the an- of themselves. Recent polls have shown, however, ticipated new development. In many communi- that 50 percent of people are willing to live in a ties, the general public does not trust local deci- smaller house to travel less, since they cannot have sion makers to do the right thing when it comes it all. This number is greater than it has been in to land use decisions. the past. In addition, the number of “empty nesters” —people who no longer have children at home and do not need a large house or want the responsibil- U.S. Population Projections ity of keeping up a house and a yard—is increasing.

Personal choices play a large role in land use deci- 500 sions. People who choose to live “out in the sub-

urbs” expect that transportation improvements s n 400 o i

ultimately will improve their commute. They also l l i

may choose to live there because they can get M 300 n

more house for their money in the farther sub- i n

urbs, and they value that more than a shorter o i 200 t a

commute. The market responds to these choices l u

and delivers products that appeal to buyers. p o 100 P New Capacity and the Impact on Growth 0 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 There is no doubt that new roadway capacity might Year cause more development to occur. However, as discussed in the preceding section, this is not the Source: U.S. Census Bureau.

12 A ULI Advisory Services Program Report Transportation agencies can help local governments they are prepared to accommodate new growth “get to yes” for managed development—in other in a way that encourages desired development words, the desired development in the desired patterns. place at the desired time. While the panel recognizes that transportation agencies are not in the • Local governments need to continue to imple- land use policy business, they can be a partner in ment policies for managed development. Plans local decision making and should be aware of how and policies should be sound enough to with- and when local decisions are made. Several re- stand political changes and changes in admin- sources have been developed to help create and istrations. These plans and policies should be implement sound land use decision-making pro- sound, predictable, and foster good cooperation cesses and policies. By working with local gov- with both the public and private sectors. ernments as transportation decisions are being • Managed development requires proactive poli- made, transportation agencies can be informed cies by local governments to guide land use. participants in the process. These include the following: Getting to Yes for Managed Growth • Incentives for focused commercial development that creates commercial centers and To become an informed player in the decision- destinations so that people do not have to making process, transportation agencies need to drive everywhere. understand what managed development is and how development decisions are made. When work- • Clustering of development so that open space ing through the National Environmental Policy can be preserved. Act (NEPA) process for new projects, reviewers • Conservation of natural resources, including at state and federal agencies should be looking for innovative stormwater management practices, certain things with regard to the local govern- open-space preservation, energy-saving poli- ment’s capacity for planning and land use decision cies, and wildlife habitat preservation. making. “Managed growth” may mean different things to different communities. There are, how- • Transfer or purchase of development rights ever, some “green flags” that indicate that a local that allow the community to guide develop- government proactively manages planning and ment where it is appropriate and discourage development practices, as well as some “red flags” it where it is not, without compensation to that indicate that a local government does not the landowner. take an active role in land use decisions, and therefore does not support managed growth. • Programs and policies that reinforce infill development where appropriate and provide Green Flags incentives for it. The following are indicators that local government is being proactive in its management of • Local governments that have innovative financ- development: ing for funding infrastructure and planning programs clearly have thought about planning and • Managed development is planned and antici- are willing to be proactive in managing their pated by the public sector and not just reactive growth. This is a positive sign that managed to development proposals. Managed develop- growth and development are important to the ment recognizes that there may be pressure to community. change land use plans, to increase development or development densities, as a result of a trans- • Multimodal transportation options indicate that portation project. Local plans anticipate that the local government is looking at ways to ease development will occur and leave room for traffic congestion as well as direct growth to growth. Understanding managed development appropriate areas. By emphasizing alternatives requires reviewing local land use plans to see if to the car, the local government is planning for

Washington, D.C., December 6–8, 2004 13 a community that will welcome a mix of income agencies and local government, but that was not levels, age groups, and viewpoints about travel. part of the panel’s assignment. The recommendations to FHWA and transportation agencies • Local governments that have completed fine- should be understood in this context. grained planning around “locator” factors— nodes—indicate that they intend to take ad- State departments of transportation, with FHWA vantage of the transportation access in their support, can work actively with local govern- communities. These nodes typically include mass ments to foster good planning and be part of the transit terminals and transit stations as well as planning process. highway interchanges. Providing detailed plan- Foster Partnerships and Be a Player ning for these areas may limit the need for ad- ditional transportation infrastructure. Sensible land use controls and managed development will occur only if there are partnerships, both Red Flags formal and informal, among all the entities that Just as there are indicators of managed planning have an impact on land use. These partnerships and development policies, other things indicate need to be creative and encompassing. By work- that local government is not proactive in its plan- ing with local governments, metropolitan planning and therefore may not be managing the growth ning organizations (MPOs), growth management process. These indicators include the following: interests, and the private sector, transportation agencies can achieve open communication and • A lack of policies to support land use and popu- knowledge sharing from every perspective. Build- lation projections means that the local govern- ing on existing partnerships—as well as identify- ment is not planning for its growth and instead ing where new ones can be formed and modeling is leaving it to chance. By evaluating growth them on partnerships in other parts of the coun- projections and determining where to guide try—will help advance transportation agencies’ growth, local governments can be better pre- involvement in land use planning. pared to handle growth. Some growth and infrastructure scenarios may not • A local government with a history of weak land be clear-cut. Trade-offs and compromises will need use planning and controls—such as minimal reg- to be made. The key to addressing these issues ulations, unpredictable decision making, and is to be involved in the planning and land use unclear or no zoning—likely will not be proac- decision-making process through partnerships. tive in its growth and development. Transportation agencies are responsible for trans- • A lack of regional coordination on the part of portation planning and land use agencies for land the local government indicates that it is not ad- use planning, yet transportation and land use in- dressing the regional aspects of growth, such fluence each other. In order to plan for the most as infrastructure impacts, and is not planning effective use of the transportation system, all agen- in a manner that will manage development. Be- cies that influence transportation infrastructure cause growth does not happen only in one juris- should be involved in the transportation plan- diction, it must be looked at on a regional level. ning process, which should include goals mutually agreed to by all players What Transportation Agencies and the Evaluate U.S. Department of Transportation FHWA Can Do Planning Programs As stated previously, development decisions result The panel is not recommending that the U.S. De- from a complex interplay of actions by transpor- partment of Transportation (DOT) totally reorga- tation agencies, other public sector agencies, and nize its planning programs. Rather, it is suggest- the private sector. This panel focused on the role ing that DOT diversify the participation of staff in of transportation agencies. A complete picture its planning programs, either on an ad hoc basis would also require recommendations for other or through formal processes. It also should work

14 A ULI Advisory Services Program Report to draw in members of the development community, to educate them about federal processes and to learn from them how they make their decisions.

The FHWA should work to reward collaborative processes that produce better results in coordi- nating land use and transportation. This will send a message to states and MPOs that the FHWA sup- ports projects in areas and communities where land use planning and transportation coordination occur.

Washington, D.C., December 6–8, 2004 15 Conclusion

rogrammed transportation improvements This, however, does not mean that transportation are factored into land use planning and agencies and the FHWA should not take an in- visioning but are not the driving force in terest in land use decisions, but rather that they P these processes. Communities believe that should be part of the planning processes and should they need to control their own destinies when use their resources, wherever possible, to promote drafting their plans, and not depend solely on land use and growth patterns that optimize the transportation decisions to achieve the desired use of existing transportation infrastructure. outcomes. Roadway infrastructure is just one element in the Transportation decisions may be less important to land use decision-making equation, from both the developers’ decisions about individual projects be- public and private sector perspectives. Yet trans- cause their time frames and planning horizons are portation agencies can work with local govern- so much shorter than the public sector’s. For green- ments to foster sound planning and growth deci- field locations without any meaningful access, it sions, and to be proactive in their involvement in usually is not feasible—from the developers’ per- land use policy decisions. The panel recommends spective—to wait for the government transporta- that transportation agencies be proactive in work- tion decision-making process. ing with local governments in their “impact areas” and that they become part of the local government Variables other than transportation, such as mar- planning process as much as is feasible. By under- ket demand, site suitability, capital availability, standing how local decisions are made, transpor- economic feasibility, and regulatory environment tation agencies can better understand how their play a significant role in influencing the developer’s decisions will affect local growth and how local process for determining a development’s viability. land use plans will influence transportation needs. Transportation has an important—although indirect —impact on land use decisions. It can have a strong influence but does not always control the outcome.

16 A ULI Advisory Services Program Report About the Panel

William R. Eager transit-oriented development and the transportation chapters in Implementing Smart Growth at Panel Chair the Local Level and Transforming Suburban Busi- Seattle, Washington ness Districts. In addition, he created Myths and Eager is cofounder and president of TDA, Inc. He Facts about Transportation and Growth, the first has more than 40 years of experience in the trans- in a series of popular brochures that present hard portation field as an educator in transportation en- facts on often-soft issues. gineering, a researcher of commuter travel char- Dunphy has collaborated on a number of studies acteristics, and a consultant on projects throughout of national interest. For the Federal Transit Ad- the United States and abroad. Before founding ministration (FTA), he directed—in partnership TDA, Eager was vice president of transportation with the Texas Transportation Institute—the de- for a large economics consulting firm. Earlier, he velopment of land use criteria for new transit sys- was responsible for analysis of ground transpor- tems, which are now being used as part of the fed- tation systems for the Boeing Company. eral approval process. Also for FTA, he teamed Eager is a member of the Pacific Asia Travel Asso- with the University of California to conduct a ciation and a principal of INTRA–International series of workshops on the development of real Tourism and Resort Advisors. He is a longtime estate adjacent to transit facilities. He has directed member of the Urban Land Institute, where he ULI outreach efforts in Atlanta and Charlotte in- was a trustee for seven years and currently serves tended to engage the development community in as an honorary member of the Public/Private Part- a dialogue on strategies for implementing transit- nership Council. oriented development. He directed the ULI forum on balancing land use and transportation, which Robert Dunphy brought together a wide range of leaders active in local real estate, traffic, transit, and parking con- Washington, D.C. cerns from across the United States. Dunphy also organized ULI’s first conference on technology Dunphy is senior resident fellow for transporta- and real estate and has directed national and re- tion and infrastructure at the Urban Land Insti- gional seminars on transportation and growth, tute. He created ULI’s program of transportation joint development, and landfill siting. research and has been responsible for the Insti- tute’s research, books, conferences, public policy, Dunphy is active in national committees of the and public outreach on transportation and land Institute of Transportation Engineers and the use, transit, and parking. He has directed studies Transportation Research Board, for which he of seven large regions recognized for their efforts chairs the Transportation and Land Development at implementing consistent regional transportation committee. He is a member of Lamda Alpha In- and development policies, as reported in his book ternational, an honorary land economics society. Moving Beyond Gridlock: Traffic and Development. Dunphy is a frequent speaker on issues of trans- He is the author/project director of numerous other portation and smart growth, transit-related de- books, including Residential Streets, Dimensions velopment, and parking to national and local of Parking, Parking Requirements of Shopping groups including ULI District Councils, business Centers, and Transportation Management through and leadership organizations, transit associations, Partnerships, as well as a forthcoming book on and government agencies.

Washington, D.C., December 6–8, 2004 17 J. Kevin Lawler Lawler has lectured extensively on real estate development and financing at Harvard Business West Palm Beach, Florida School, the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Georgetown University Business Lawler is the managing partner of N-K Ventures, School, George Washington University Business LC, and has more than 25 years of national expe- School, the University of Maryland, and Miami rience as a real estate financial and deal adviser. Law School. Prior to relocating to south Florida, N-K Ventures is principally engaged in the devel- Lawler served on the Economic Development opment of urban residential infill and mixed-use Committee of the Washington Board of Trade for projects in southeast Florida. Founded in 2001, several years. He is a graduate of Michigan the company’s development activities reflect the State University and received a MCP from the philosophy of its founding principals: the creation Kennedy School of Government at Harvard Uni- of high-value urban places. The company began versity, where he also was a Mellon and Ford two projects in 2001, both of which are nearing Foundation Fellow. completion of preconstruction. In 2002, the firm started a multiphase urban mixed-use project, Joseph R. Molinaro which now is in planning and permitting. Washington, D.C. Lawler is responsible for initial underwriting of all of N-K Ventures’s new development projects, Molinaro is manager of smart growth programs investor and capital relationships, and all trans- for the National Association of Realtors® in Wash- actional aspects of the company’s ventures and ington, D.C. In this capacity, he manages NAR’s investments. He also manages the firm’s sub- Smart Growth efforts, which include training, contractor relationships and, together with his technical assistance on land use regulation to partner, Nancy C. Graham, is involved in the state and local associations, voter surveys on identification and qualification of new business growth issues, research, and publication of the opportunities. magazine On Common Ground. He also provides support to NAR’s smart growth federal legisla- Prior to forming N-K Ventures, Lawler was a part- tive agenda. ner in the real estate advisory services practice of a major financial services firm in its Washington, Prior to joining NAR in 2000, Molinaro was direc- D.C., and Miami offices. He had a national prac- tor of land development services for the National Association of Home Builders. In this position, he tice advising developers, corporations, nonprofit introduced new urbanism to educational programs organizations, and public entities on financing and for builders, and organized conferences and tours large-scale development transactions. Lawler’s of new urbanist projects in several cities. He also practice included REIT formations, commercial was editor of Land Development magazine. Moli- property portfolio structuring and recapitaliza- naro holds a master of urban and regional plan- tion, corporate real estate ventures and leasing, ning from Virginia Tech and is a member of the large-scale development projects, public/private American Institute of Certified Planners development, and financing transactions.

Lawler is a member of ULI–the Urban Land In- Roger Platt stitute’s leadership group. He serves on the Insti- Washington, D.C. tute’s Policy and Practice Committee and is a member of the Multi-Family Council. He has served Platt is senior vice president and counsel for the on numerous ULI Advisory Services panels and Real Estate Roundtable, which represents the project analysis teams, and as a vice chair of the leaders of America’s top public and privately owned Southeast Florida District Council. In October real estate entities on public policy issues in Wash- 2000, ULI recognized his service with the Robert ington, D.C. Working closely with the Real Estate O’Donnell Award. Roundtable’s Environment and Energy Policy Ad-

18 A ULI Advisory Services Program Report visory Committee, Platt communicates to Con- Agency (EPA), where she addressed the impacts gress, the Bush Administration, and federal agen- of growth management policy on lower-income cies the organization’s views on environmental, and minority communities. While with the EPA, land use, and energy issues affecting real estate, Ricks participated in national forums including such as brownfields cleanup liability under Super- the Ford Foundation Roundtable on Smart fund, smart growth policies, indoor air quality con- Growth and Equity. In addition to her national trols, energy efficiency incentives, and barriers to and local work, Ricks has extensive experience distributed generation. internationally, including Peace Corps service in Tonga, a Fulbright fellowship and consulting in Platt joined the roundtable’s predecessor organi- Latvia, and international elections monitoring in zation, the National Realty Committee, as deputy Bosnia Herzegovina and Ukraine. counsel in 1994. He was named vice president and counsel in 1998, and became senior vice president and counsel in 2001. Before joining NRC, Julia Trevarthen Platt was a senior associate at the San Francisco Hollywood, Florida law firm of Coblentz, Cahen, McCabe & Breyer, where he specialized in real estate and urban Trevarthen is director of the Institute for Com- land use issues. munity Collaboration, Inc., at the South Florida Regional Planning Council, a planning and public A graduate of Harvard University and the Uni- policy agency serving Broward, Miami-Dade, and versity of San Francisco School of Law, Platt is a Monroe counties, where she is responsible for frequent contributor to American Bar Association agency program management. Prior to being and other legal and real estate journals. He is a appointed to her current position, she managed member of the California and District of Columbia the council’s dispute resolution, facilitation, inter- bar associations and the Urban Land Institute, governmental coordination, and development of where he chairs the Sustainable Development regional impact programs. Council. Platt has been listed in the 55th through 58th editions of Who’s Who in America. The council’s region encompasses 4,300 square miles of southernmost Florida; encompasses 69 Karina Ricks local governments including Key West, Miami, and Fort Lauderdale; and has a population of Washington, D.C. nearly 4 million. The council works with the public, private, and nonprofit sectors to identify, ana- Ricks is an urban planner with the government lyze, and develop strategies to meet the chal- of the District of Columbia. She joined the office lenges facing south Florida. as Mayor Anthony Williams began to rebuild planning as a key component of his leadership A member of the American Institute of Certified agenda in 2000. Since that time, Ricks has com- Planners, Trevarthen received her master of pleted a diverse range of projects, including de- regional planning from the University of North veloping a transit-oriented development policy Carolina at Chapel Hill and her BA from Florida for the District, shaping the District’s approach State University. to community planning at the neighborhood level, representing District planning issues in regional Allan R. Winn transportation planning, and completing a number of area-specific plans along the Anacostia Water- Washington, D.C. front, around transit stations, and in major transit corridors. Winn is a partner in the real estate department and managing partner in Ballard Spahr Andrews Prior to joining the District government, Ricks & Ingersoll, LLP’s Washington, D.C., office. He was a policy analyst with the Smart Growth also is a member of the firm’s bankruptcy, reorga- Office of the U.S. Environmental Protection nization, and capital recovery; housing; securitiza-

Washington, D.C., December 6–8, 2004 19 tion; and transactional finance groups. He heads other secondary market programs. He represents the firm’s Washington real estate practice and a number of the nation’s best-known commercial concentrates on real estate finance and develop- and multifamily lenders and has frequently lec- ment, with an emphasis on commercial real estate tured and written in his areas of expertise. finance, multifamily housing, and default loan sit- uations. Winn has more than 25 years of experi- Winn is a member of the American Bar Associa- ence with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban tion and the District of Columbia Bar. Development (HUD), Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and

20 A ULI Advisory Services Program Report