Reston Spring

Reston Spring
Reston Spring

Monday, June 10, 2013

'Transit' Might Not Be Essential to Transit-Oriented Development, The Atlantic Cities, June 10, 2013

By Eric Jaffee
'Transit' Might Not Be Essential to Transit-Oriented Development
Shutterstock



The first thing that comes to mind with transit-oriented development, and sometimes the only thing, is proximity to a busy rail station. The term begins with transit for a reason. But of course that's not the only component of effective TOD: density, a mixture of residences and services, walkability, and the general built environment all play key roles. What if some of these other factors proved as important as rail proximity when it came to TOD's sustainable impact? 
In other words, what if TOD doesn't rely on the T?
That was the question asked by planner Daniel Chatman of the University of California-Berkeley for a study published in the winter 2013 issue of Journal of the American Planning Association. His answer may come as a bit of a surprise. Chatman found that proximity to rail was not the essential TOD element it's typically thought to be — and, in fact, that it's importance vanished in the face of other factors:
In these data, the lower auto ownership and use in TODs is not from the T (transit), or at least, not from the R (rail), but from lower on- and off-street parking availability; better bus service; smaller and rental housing; more jobs, residents, and stores within walking distance; proximity to downtown; and higher subregional employment density. . . .
And the implication of Professor Chapman's findings?
Current sustainability policies are often quite focused on investing in rail and developing housing near rail stations. ... Such a focus primarily on TODs to reduce greenhouse gases could miss the boat. These results suggest that a better strategy in many urban areas would be to incentivize housing developments of smaller rental units with lower on- and off-street parking availability, in locations with better bus service and higher subregional employment density.  (Emphasis added.)
. . . but we just committed to spending $6 billion and year's of effort on a rail line we may not need?!   Would BRT have done as well??  Makes you think....

Click here for the rest of this article.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Your comments are welcome and encouraged as long as they are relevant, constructive, and decent.