• strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /chroot/home/ctodorg/ctod.org/html/portal/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_argument::init() should be compatible with views_handler::init(&$view, $options) in /chroot/home/ctodorg/ctod.org/html/portal/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_argument.inc on line 744.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /chroot/home/ctodorg/ctod.org/html/portal/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 607.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /chroot/home/ctodorg/ctod.org/html/portal/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 607.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter_boolean_operator::value_validate() should be compatible with views_handler_filter::value_validate($form, &$form_state) in /chroot/home/ctodorg/ctod.org/html/portal/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter_boolean_operator.inc on line 159.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_plugin_style_default::options() should be compatible with views_object::options() in /chroot/home/ctodorg/ctod.org/html/portal/sites/all/modules/views/plugins/views_plugin_style_default.inc on line 24.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_plugin_row::options_validate() should be compatible with views_plugin::options_validate(&$form, &$form_state) in /chroot/home/ctodorg/ctod.org/html/portal/sites/all/modules/views/plugins/views_plugin_row.inc on line 134.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_plugin_row::options_submit() should be compatible with views_plugin::options_submit(&$form, &$form_state) in /chroot/home/ctodorg/ctod.org/html/portal/sites/all/modules/views/plugins/views_plugin_row.inc on line 134.

CTOD & Reconnecting America Reports

Station Area Planning: How To Make Great Transit-Oriented Places (2008)

TOD 202

This is the first in our TOD 202 series of guidebooks to promote best practices in transit-oriented development. Following publication of “Why Transit-Oriented Development and Why Now?” our TOD 101 guidebook, we realized there is a need for more in-depth analysis and discussion for TOD practitioners. This 202 manual is intended to help with simplifying the complex decisions that surround planning for TOD projects and station areas by providing details about the scales of development likely to occur in different places, as well as station area planning principles and TOD plan checklists.

The manual begins with a discussion of seven ”TOD place types,” followed by a self-diagnostic questionnaire to help identify a particular station area place type in a TOD typology we have applied and refined in several regions around the U.S. There are also typologies of buildings and of the kinds of open spaces sometimes included in transit-oriented neighborhoods. All of these typologies can help inform decisions by enabling the planning partners to visualize and talk about the possibilities for station areas. They are intended to be suggestive only and not a complete list of options.

Center for TOD Demand Estimate Update

Market demand estimate for TOD rises from 14.6 million households by 2025 to 15.2 million by 2030.

The Center for TOD has updated its market demand estimate for the number of households likely to be looking to rent or buy housing near transit, from 14.6 million households by 2025 to 15.2 million households by 2030. These numbers are more than double the number of households who live near transit today. Meeting this demand would necessitate building 2,000 housing units near every station in the U.S. The earlier demand estimate was released in our landmark TOD market study ³Hidden in Plain Sight: Capturing the Demand for Housing Near Transit² in 2004. The numbers were updated for 2030 in order to be consistent with the time horizon of many regional transportation and land use planning efforts underway, as well as to account for the construction of new fixed-guideway systems.

Center for TOD Demand Estimate by City

Preserving Opportunities: Saving Affordable Homes Near Transit

Study examines federally assisted affordable housing located in close proximity to public transportation in 8 cities

Preserving affordable housing near transit means more than simply saving a building—it means preserving opportunities for low-income families and seniors to access jobs and services. Next to housing, transportation is the second highest household cost for most Americans. Affordable housing located near transit allows families and seniors to live an affordable lifestyle and access employment, education, retail, and community opportunities.

Reconnecting America and the National Housing Trust identified federally assisted affordable housing located in close proximity to existing or proposed public transportation in 8 cities: Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Denver, New York City, Portland,St. Louis, and Seattle. We found that more than 100,000 federally assisted housing units sheltering more than 300,000 individuals in these cities are located in transit rich neighborhoods. Approximately 65,500 of these units- or 63 percent of total units near transit- are covered by federal rental assistance contracts expiring before the end of 2012.

Preserving Opportunities: Saving Affordable Housing Near Transit

Station Area Planning Manual

Reconnecting America creates companion to MTC’s TOD Policy and for Priority Development Areas under the FOCUS program

This manual is intended to serve as a companion to MTC’s Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Policy and for Priority Development Areas under the Focusing Our Vision (FOCUS) program to assist jurisdictions with decisionmaking as they complete planning efforts around Bay Area transit hubs and corridors.

MTC’s TOD Policy, adopted in 2005, requires new regional transit expansion projects to meet corridor housing thresholds that require local governments and transit providers to work together to show how they will provide for a minimum amount of housing within walking distance of transit stations. The goal is to make regional transit investments as efficient as possible and encourage local jurisdictions to focus growth around transit nodes. In order to reinforce the requirements of the TOD Policy, MTC has made funding available for Station Area Plans that address future land use changes, station access needs, circulation improvements, pedestrian-friendly design, TOD-supportive parking policies and other key features in a transit-oriented development.

TOD Case Studies: Implementation In Low- Income, Ethnically Diverse Neighborhoods

TOD Case Studies: Implementation In Low- Income, Ethnically Diverse Neighborhoods

These case studies, funded through the support of the Surdna Foundation, present transit-oriented development (TOD) examples from diverse, low-income neighborhoods around transit, all built within the last 10 years. The goal of this survey is to provide examples that can help spur development around Philadelphia’s underutilized transit resources in similar types of neighborhoods. To that end, the examples in these case studies all overcame barriers to implementation using innovative, but replicable approaches. These examples are intended to allow the Philadelphia Neighborhood Development Collaborative and others to advocate for more involvement by the public sector, test some of the same mechanisms for financing and land assembly, and provide examples of successful TOD to developers and community members.

TOD Case Studies: Implementation in Low- Income, Ethnically Diverse Neighborhoods

Realizing The Potential: Expanding Housing Opportunities Near Transit

Study shows location matters when it comes to reducing household costs; examines five case studies

This new national study funded by the Federal Transit Administration and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development shows that location matters a great deal when it comes to reducing household costs. While families who live in auto-dependent neighborhoods spend an average of 25 percent of their household budget on transportation, families who live in transit-rich neighborhoods spend just 9 percent, the study says. The report examines five case study regions – Boston, Charlotte, Denver, Minneapolis, and Portland -- to better understand the proactive strategies being undertaken to create and preserve affordable housing near transit.

Realizing The Potential: Expanding Housing Opportunities Near Transit

Realizing the Postential: One Year Later

Hercules Aerial Tram, Mobility Study and Report (2007)

Connecting waterfront to new town center using aerial ropeways

This study seeks to inform City of Hercules Council and Staff about connecting the City’s waterfront to a new developing town center. This study gives technical information on the possibility of using aerial ropeways (which includes aerial trams and gondolas) and discusses alternatives such as buses and streetcars.

Hercules Aerial Tram/Mobility Study & Report

Case for Mixed-Income Transit-Oriented Development in the Denver Region

Study examines demand for TOD, barriers to it and tools to get around those barriers

The passage of the “FasTracks” ballot measure by metro Denver voters in 2004 signaled the start of a new era of transportation, growth and development in the area. FasTracks has terrific potential to deliver on its promises of reduced congestion, livable neighborhoods and greater economic competitiveness, but its success is dependent on the kind of development that grows up around new and existing transit stations.

Well-planned “transit-oriented development” (TOD) can foster greater use of FasTracks light rail by encouraging housing, retail and office developments in the districts around transit stops. Incorporating affordable housing into TODs presents opportunities to meaningfully address the region’s growing affordability crisis by tackling housing and transportation costs simultaneously—while expanding access to jobs, educational opportunities and prosperity for the many households living in the Denver region.

Why Transit-Oriented Development And Why Now? (2007)

TOD 101

Transit-oriented development or TOD is typically defined as more compact development within easy walking distance of transit stations (typically a half mile) that contains a mix of uses such as housing, jobs, shops, restaurants and entertainment. At Reconnecting America we believe projects should also achieve the goals listed here. TOD is really about creating walkable, sustainable communities for people of all ages and incomes and providing more transportation and housing choices (including townhomes, apartments, live-work spaces, and lofts). These neighborhoods provide for a lifestyle that’s convenient, affordable and active, and create places where our children can play and our parents can grow old comfortably.

Preserving and Promoting Diverse Transit-Oriented Neighborhoods (2006)

Preserving and Promoting Diverse Transit-Oriented Neighborhoods (2006)

It was not too long ago that our mass transit systems had become yet another symbol of disinvestment in urban America. As people exited cities for the suburbs, they left in their wake the decaying public amenities and assets that had given rise to cities in the first place —the schools, the infrastructure and the mass transit.

How times have changed. According to the American Public Transportation Association, riders in the U.S. took more than 9.7 billion trips on public transportation systems in 2005. Since 1995, public transportation use has increased 25 percent. There are 3,349 mass transit stations in the

U.S. today, and regions from coast to coast are building or planning to build new rail systems or expand existing systems. Over 700 new stations are currently under development.

A number of factors are driving this growth in transit use and construction. First, automobile transportation is increasingly expensive. Transportation — mostly fueled by the costs of owning and operating a personal vehicle — now costs as much or more than shelter in region after region. Studies show that expenditures for personally-owned vehicles drain household wealth and undercut community economic viability.1 Second, residents are looking for the convenience and access that alternatives to auto transportation can provide. And third, residents are tired of auto-related congestion and air pollution and are looking for alternatives.

Syndicate content