Bus Transit Service in Land Development Planning (2006)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

43 Research on the relationship between bus transit and land developments is relatively limited. The majority of the research on transit and developments is concentrated on the rail modes. The literature indicates that bus transit service is not viewed as positively as rail service in having the ability to influence land use. The reasons for this include: • Bus transit is not viewed as permanent in comparison with rail transit. • The quality and level of service for bus transit is lower than for rail transit. • Rail transit encourages higher densities than bus transit. • Bus transit has a poor public image. Bus changes are typically incremental and relatively small, implemented as part of an existing system, whereas new rail stations are major investments that are associated with specific efforts related to land use. Presumably, this would also be the case for major bus rapid transit (BRT) investments. BRT systems are relatively new in the United States and in the research field. Thus far, the evidence indi- cates that BRT has not significantly influenced land use where new BRT systems have been employed. Perhaps this will change as BRT systems evolve and grow in number. For regular bus systems in most communities, there appears to be little consideration of bus transit in land developments. The survey uncovered frustration on the part of most transit agencies that are contending with inap- propriate and misplaced land developments. New develop- ments are often constructed outside of the transit agency service area, making the development expensive if not impossible to serve. Even developments within the service area are often designed inappropriately for bus transit service. One example that was cited most often was big box retail development. The provision of a bus stop pole and sign at the front door of a big box retailer is not considered an ideal integration of bus transit and land development. The operation of a bus route through a busy parking lot slows down bus service, increasing customer travel time and bus operating costs, and increasing the like- lihood of conflicts with automobiles and pedestrians. From a transit perspective, a successful big box development would incorporate smaller setbacks with less parking and good pedestrian connections, and would provide a separate bus lane, a bus stop with customer amenities, and/or a ter- minal facility. Bus transit generally requires a significant amount of land area to provide appropriate facilities and amenities. There- fore, bus transit cannot be an afterthought if good connec- tions between transit and the development are desired. To successfully integrate bus transit into land developments, all stakeholders agree that transit must be considered early in the planning process. The research, survey results, and case studies all indicate that differing strategies have been successful in different regions. A mix of strategies appears to be the best course of action to build relationships among stakeholders and gener- ate their interest. What has worked in some areas is an effec- tive planning process that provides an overall vision for the region, including how the community will look and how it will manage future growth. The building of relationships among stakeholders begins with the preparation of this plan, and the implementation of revised zoning codes generally follows the production of the plan. The case studies showed that it is useful to have a legal or planning framework in place that requires the inclusion of transit in the development process. In those areas with such legislation, transit is brought to the planning table early in the development process. Examples include the states of Califor- nia and Florida, and the Metropolitan Council in Minnesota. Strong leadership and/or the existence of a “champion” for transit can be found in many successful areas. Champi- ons and strong leadership can be vital for the initiation of actions supportive of transit, but their existence can be fleet- ing. It is more prudent to use strong leadership and champi- ons to build an accepted structure and process that will have lasting effects. Transit agencies should not rely on champi- ons to be there forever. There is a wide range of guidelines produced by transit agencies. The scale and content of guidelines varies from just a few pages on bus stop requirements to multiple volumes covering all aspects of land development. In most cases, for those agencies with guidelines, the distribution of those guidelines could be improved. Only four of the nine agencies that supplied guidelines for this synthesis make them avail- able on their websites. Supplying this information on the agency website seems to be a simple and inexpensive method of providing this information. Website access could create a greater awareness of the issue and act as an educational tool CHAPTER EIGHT CONCLUSIONS

for all stakeholders. Furthermore, website publication per- mits transit agencies to easily share these documents, enabling them to learn from each other’s experiences. A major finding was the lack of resources in terms of oper- ating funding and personnel available to transit agencies to plan for land developments and to provide new or expanded service to new developments. Many transit agencies noted that human resources were unavailable to participate in plan- ning for new developments, and financial resources for new or expanded services were also unavailable. Some transit agencies provided information on innovative funding mecha- nisms that they had used successfully. The Centre Area Trans- portation Authority in State College, Pennsylvania, shares a transit planner with the Centre Regional Planning Agency. The transit planner has offices in both agencies and splits the 40-h work week evenly between the two agencies. This arrangement addresses the issue of inadequate human resources to conduct land development planning and encour- ages good communication between agencies. Other agencies have convinced developers and building owners to finance the operation of new bus routes. LYNX in Orlando has succeeded in procuring the first two years of operating costs for new bus routes serving new developments. In addition, the LYMMO downtown circulator system is funded by the city through parking revenues. Pace Suburban Bus in Arlington Heights, Illinois, partners with the United Parcel Service for the provision of several bus routes serving the United Parcel Service facility. There are similar examples in other cities. However, these partnerships are not available in every case. Transit funding to serve new developments, as well as to maintain existing service, will continue to be a major on-going issue for transit agencies across the nation. This section will introduce ideas for further research and development of products that will support the integration of bus transit into land developments. Most of these future efforts are related to education. Transit officials, transit plan- ners, developers, city officials, city planners, and business leaders are largely unaware of each other’s processes and interests. Educational tools are recommended to bridge the knowledge gap that exists. These diverse groups each have differing needs and might best be served by different formats and methods. Examples of educational tools are described for each group. Research is also suggested to provide lenders with more appropriate market studies and to provide transit agencies with helpful information on appropriate walking distances and regulatory tools. Transit planners can benefit from additional knowledge regarding the development process and how regulations can influence developments. Transit planners need to under- stand the developer’s process, the timeline associated with that process, the economics of land development, and the 44 incentives that developers look for from local governments. Knowing how the process works and how to approach developers sufficiently early in the process will greatly improve the chances that transit can be included in the development. Once the transit planner understands the development process, it could be beneficial to also have some pointers to “sell” transit to developers. A simple primer on the development process, written for transit plan- ners, will improve communications between transit planners and developers, and will assist in the negotiation of transit elements. This primer could be used by multiple audiences, including community leaders and city planners. Transit planners can reach developers through networking opportunities such as luncheon meetings and conferences. An example presentation on the benefits of transit that might be persuasive to developers could be a useful resource for the transit industry. Another educational tool that might be helpful to transit planners is a “How To” document on preparing transit agency development guidelines. The document should out- line a minimum level of transit-supportive design elements and technical specifications. National examples of recom- mended treatments for individual design elements and spec- ifications should be included. A transit agency can choose the elements that meet its local needs or use the examples as a starting point to develop its own design treatments and spec- ifications. If the transit agency prefers to contract with a con- sultant for the preparation of such guidelines, this How To document could provide transit planners with information useful in preparing an appropriate Request for Proposal. Developers are generally unaware of transit and the ben- efits that it can provide in some developments. A tutorial on where transit is appropriate and how it can benefit develop- ment would be useful. This document should include eco- nomic and quantitative benefits as well as the qualitative benefits that transit provides to land developments. Examples that describe how transit increased the success of selected developments are recommended. This tutorial should be specifically focused toward developers and written in terms that they will appreciate. It is recommended that the tutorial be published by an entity familiar to developers and made available through venues frequently used by developers. Education for officials from local government can increase their knowledge of transit-supportive development. A handbook or toolkit with presentation materials can pro- vide guidance for local decision makers involved in the land development process. Short explanations of the critical transit- supportive elements, such as density and pedestrian access, should be presented. The handbook or toolkit could include recommendations on how to incorporate transit into devel- opments and why it is important to do so. Examples of large and small scale developments should be included, as well as suburban and urban environments.

45 Workshops on transit-supportive developments and land uses would be beneficial for all stakeholders. Research could include the identification of the appropriate topics to consider in a transit-supportive workshop, and development of exer- cises that would involve participants and educate them on the importance of transit-supportive land use. The workshops could be designed as on-site or web-based sessions. Recom- mendations on how to conduct the workshops are required. For example, on-site workshops should include participants with a wide array of backgrounds, and participants could be intermixed throughout the room to provide attendees with the widest possible range of perspectives. Transit agencies, local governments, planning organizations, and community groups could use the workshop outline and exercises to con- duct educational workshops in their own regions. Further research is needed on the impact of bus systems on land use and on the economic development of the adjoin- ing area. Methods to measure the impacts of bus service are needed to support future bus transit and land use coordina- tion projects. This research could also include an investiga- tion specifically focused on BRT systems. BRT is still an emerging technology in the United States. More research is needed on the benefits associated with BRT, especially as it relates to land developments. BRT proponents need docu- mentation regarding the positive aspects of BRT on eco- nomic development and the benefits associated with BRT for adjoining developments. This documentation will improve the ability of transit planners and officials to negotiate for dedicated BRT rights-of-way and space provisions for cus- tomer amenities with building owners and developers. A standard component of new developments includes provisions for automobile users. In addition, developers may be requested to provide for transit and bicycle access. Research is needed to determine how a planned transit improvement may affect mode choice to the development. For example, if high-frequency bus service will serve the development, how much of an impact will this have on the projected requirements for the number of parking spaces or roadway improvements? There needs to be credible research that developers, lenders, and municipalities can use to deter- mine the trade-off between the various modes. The avail- ability of this type of research would provide developers with further incentive to implement transit elements in the development. The survey did not question transit agencies on the level of effort expended by transit planners on planning for new developments, and the literature review did not reveal that any analysis had been conducted on this topic. A study is needed that examines the level of staff effort required for development review, negotiation meetings, alternative plan development, and related activities. The study should iden- tify representative transit agencies for examination, and include for each area an indication of the amount of devel- opment occurring and the relative success in building transit elements into new developments. Such a study would give transit agencies baseline information on which to gauge their current efforts. It could provide them with information to determine if additional, or fewer, expenditures may be appro- priate for their planning efforts. Lenders who finance large developments are skeptical of a transit-supportive development because the development proposes reduced parking or mixed uses. Lenders need to receive appropriate information that considers the benefits associated with transit within new developments. Studies that examine the true number of parking spaces needed within a transit-supportive or transit-oriented development are required. In addition, the advantage of mixed-use devel- opments, especially with regard to generation of fewer trips, requires further research. Research on regulatory policies that support the integra- tion of bus transit into land developments would be a useful reference tool. Transit agencies and local governments endeavoring to encourage transit-supportive land uses could use the document to recommend changes in their areas. State policies and programs should be investigated, as well as regional and local programs. This research could also update the American Planning Association’s report on model leg- islative language. This could provide planners with an up-to- date guide on model codes for transit-supportive land use policies, design ordinances, and subdivision requirements. Lastly, more research is needed on the pedestrian envi- ronment. Many survey respondents voiced concern that ade- quate pedestrian environments are not provided in new developments or in the adjoining areas. The impact of the walking environment on acceptable walking distance is not well known. It is suspected that pedestrians are willing to walk farther in pedestrian-friendly environments than in environments hostile to walkers. It also follows that a greater number of walking trips will be made in pedestrian-friendly environments. If this is the case, documentation would pro- vide evidence that lower vehicular trip rates are achievable in pedestrian-friendly environments. This would encourage expenditures to create pedestrian-friendlier environments. A study to examine the impact of the environment on walking trips by trip purpose and trip length together with associated demographic characteristics is needed.