Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 17, Transit-Oriented Development (2007) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 1-135
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
• "Types of Transit Oriented Development," outlining what constitutes TOD and the various dimensions along which response to it may vary, primarily for purposes of chapter organization. • "Analytical Considerations," identifying approaches that are used to evaluate the impacts of transit oriented development and discussing their potential limitations.
|
From page 2... ...
Types of Transit Oriented Development The term "transit oriented development" is imperfect in its ability to fully characterize the nature of a project. Generally speaking, TOD refers to moderate-to-high-density development, designed with pedestrian priority, located within an easy walk of a major transit stop.
|
From page 3... ...
Although locating TOD in either area type may result in boosted transit ridership and increased walking, the regional context plays a role in determining the overall traveler response. City center TODs generally have higher levels of transit service to more travel markets than suburban TODs and consequently have higher transit ridership generation potential.
|
From page 4... ...
As is evident in the "Types of Transit Oriented Development" discussion it is impossible to develop a simple litmus test for what is or isn't TOD. As a result, many studies look at adjacency to transit as a surrogate measure.
|
From page 5... ...
High-density, mixeduse development and high levels of transit service are often present together at sites exhibiting a high transit commute mode share and a high midday non-motorized mode share. Unknowns involving causality make it difficult to separate the contribution of each site element to the resulting transit and pedestrian activity (Douglas and Evans, 1997)
|
From page 6... ...
Traveler Response Summary TOD concentrates trip generation and attraction around transit stops and stations resulting in more transit ridership per stop, even if one makes the hypothetical assumption that TOD transit mode shares are no higher than produced by conventional development in the same locations. Typically, however, the special attributes of well-designed TOD result in transit shares that are higher -- and automobile mode shares that are lower -- than for non-TOD.
|
From page 7... ...
Transit mode shares along the Washington Metro system were found to decrease by 7 percentage points for every 1,000 feet of distance from a station in the case of housing and by 12 percentage points in the case of office worker commute trips.1 A 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study found TOD office workers within 1/2 mile of rail transit stations to have transit commute shares averaging 19 percent as compared to 5 percent regionwide. For residents, the statewide average transit share for TODs within 1/2 mile of the station was 27 percent compared to 7 percent for residences between 1/2 mile and 3 miles of the station.
|
From page 8... ...
(Factors other than parking supply alone were undoubtedly at play.) Constrained and priced parking may lead to lower park-and-ride ridership but potentially higher transit mode shares for the development within the TOD.
|
From page 9... ...
Some reviewers of TOD efficacy have postulated that the higher transit mode shares normally observed in TODs may simply result from attraction of "transit-oriented" residents to TOD housing and that the outcome may be a lack of significant increase in transit use when viewed from a region-wide perspective. This overall hypothesis has received the somewhat confusing "self-selection" short-hand labeling.
|
From page 10... ...
Note that the "rail" and "bus" mode shares within mode share tables in this chapter are calculated in the manner of primary mode shares, not sub-mode shares, because they are expressed as percentages of travel by all means and presented in context with modes of all types. These tabulated rail and bus mode shares may be summed to obtain transit mode shares, a calculation not supported by true sub-mode shares.
|
From page 11... ...
City center TODs may have transit services radiating in multiple directions. Suburban TODs tend to be located along radial transit services and thus only have high quality service available in one or two directions.
|
From page 12... ...
City center TOD tends to be less discrete than suburban TOD in that it may comprise several projects over multiple blocks. While there are many examples of city center TOD, virtually none provide a case where comprehensive and specific development, transit service, and traveler response information has been documented.
|
From page 13... ...
Transit mode share for suburban TOD is higher than for traditional suburban development, but the automobile still plays a predominant role in providing mobility for TOD tenants. The "Underlying Traveler Response Factors" section discusses the attributes that distinguish the experiences of different suburban TODs in this regard, including automobile ownership rates, transit service characteristics, and parking policies.
|
From page 14... ...
. Table 17-2 Standard Contra Costa Country Versus Pleasant Hill Station Parking Ratios The Pleasant Hill station was among the locations reported on in the collaborative "Travel Characteristics of Transit Oriented Development in California" study conducted in 2003 with publication in 2004.
|
From page 15... ...
17-15 Mode Pleasant Hill Station Area City of Walnut Creek City of San Francisco Drove Alone 48.9% 73.8% 43.5% Carpool 4.0 8.2 11.3 Rail Transit 44.3 13.5 9.8 Bus Transit 0.6 1.0 22.4 Walked 2.3 2.1 9.8 Other 0.0 1.3 3.2 Notes:–Denominator used in Census mode share calculation excludes workers working at home. The city of San Francisco is included to provide a range for comparison (Walnut Creek, suburban; San Francisco, urban Central City)
|
From page 16... ...
. Table 17-5 compares average weekday passenger boardings for the Downtown Plano station and the two adjacent LRT stations, Parker Road (the end-of-line station)
|
From page 17... ...
City Center Versus Suburban TOD Comparisons Generally available examples of TODs, such as those presented above, provide individualized snapshots in varied contexts. They do not offer the consistency needed to support direct comparison of the travel characteristics exhibited by city center TODs relative to outlying TODs.
|
From page 18... ...
Persons attracted to non-work activities in central area and outlying TODs had roughly the same propensity to choose a non-motorized travel mode, at 18 percent of trips in either case. Whether made by residents or not, non-work trips to or from central area TODs were roughly four times as likely to be made on public transit as trips to or from outlying TODs.
|
From page 19... ...
. The study cautions that the mode share averages obtained are not area averages but rather averages of the specific sites surveyed, which included 17 office sites and 18 residential sites in total.
|
From page 20... ...
. Table 17-7 Office and Residential Site Mode Shares in the Vicinity of Washington Metrorail Stations by Concentric Area Type
|
From page 21... ...
Possibility for higher project transit mode shares and walk mode of access to transit shares, coupled with potential for shared parking among uses, may lead to lower overall parking requirements than for lessdiverse TOD or non-TOD centers. Auto Ownership Need/desire to own and use a car may be higher in a less diverse context than in a more diverse context.
|
From page 22... ...
While this study looked at projects near rail transit stations, it did not examine TOD specifically. Across all projects, the study found average commute mode shares as follows: 73.0 percent drive a car, 5.0 percent ride in a car, 15.0 percent use rail transit, 2.2 percent use bus transit, 2.7 percent walk, and 2.0 percent use another mode.
|
From page 23... ...
Village Green Arlington Heights, IL 2001 250 condominiums Office: 17,000 sf Retail: 53,000 sf The Village Green project is located in downtown Arlington Heights, near the commuter railroad station. A big grocery store is also within walking distance.
|
From page 24... ...
The 1992 California transit-focused development study also compared the station-area work-trip rail transit mode share obtained from a household survey conducted by the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) to the rail transit mode share reported in the 1990 Census for broader areas.
|
From page 25... ...
Residence location within 1/2 mile of a rail station is a given. Source: Based on Handbook author calculations using model as specified by Cervero (1993)
|
From page 26... ...
. 17-26 Table 17-11 San Francisco Bay Area Comparisons of Station-Area and Citywide Work-Trip Rail Transit Shares Work-Trip Rail Transit Mode Share System (Mode)
|
From page 27... ...
." Additional mode of access details from the 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study are presented in the upcoming "Response to TOD by Primary Transit Mode" subsection. Mention should be made, in connection with heavily residential TOD examples, of developments built as TODs that may meet their non-transit development objectives well but have not produced substantial transit ridership.
|
From page 28... ...
Fewer vehicles available at home, residence location in a BART-served city, workplace parking availability constraints, and pricing of parking appeared to be the most powerful positive influences on rail transit choice for this 17-28
|
From page 29... ...
. 17-29 Figure 17-2 Sensitivity to parking, origin, and vehicles available of commute trip rail mode choice by San Francisco Bay Area station-area workers Note : Non-named predictor variable values are held constant across scenarios (no employer transit allowance, commute distance is 14.7 miles, 0.9 parking spaces per employee, one midday trip for every two workers, workplace is less than 500 feet from rail station)
|
From page 30... ...
Differences in which sites were surveyed between 1987 and 2005 may contribute significantly to the change in average office worker mode share noted. The 34 percent overall site average transit mode share for worker commute trips surveyed in 2005 was nearly double the transit share obtained in comparable 1989 office surveys.6 In contrast, the overall 2005 site average of 45 percent transit for all trips by residents at residential sites was little changed from 1989 (WMATA, 2006a)
|
From page 31... ...
. The 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study looked at three shopping centers near rail transit stations in three cities: the Bay Area's El Cerrito Plaza (also surveyed in the earlier study)
|
From page 32... ...
. Table 17-15 Retail, Hotel, and Entertainment Site Mode Shares in the Vicinity of Washington Metrorail Stations 7 Some caution should be exercised in use of these Ottawa statistics, as the "after" transit mode shares are from different original sources and likely differing survey methodologies compared to the "before" shares.
|
From page 33... ...
In addition, the 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study included a small-sample survey of hotel patrons and employees at two station-area hotels: the Embassy Suites at BART's Pleasant Hill Station and the Doubletree Hotel at the San Diego Trolley's Hazard Center Station. Data on 111 commute trips made by hotel workers were collected.
|
From page 34... ...
Motorized cars draw power from a third rail and operate on exclusive right-of-way with no at-grade crossings. Offboard fare payment at or verified by fare gates.
|
From page 35... ...
. It is reasonable to assume that a significant portion of the passenger capacity increase was reflected in improved service frequency and its associated attractiveness, and that growing passenger volumes in the peak direction (primarily in-commuting from residences served by the Metrorail line)
|
From page 36... ...
Moreover, the inherent differences that are reflected pertain only to the particular manifestations of HRT, LRT, and CRR -- including contrasts among these rail modes -- that are found in the California context. As illustrated previously in Table 17-12, the Pleasant Hill and South Alameda County HRT station-area projects achieve resident commute trip transit mode shares 32 and 36 percentage points higher, respectively, than immediately surrounding areas.
|
From page 37... ...
. Further information is provided in the "Overall Mode Shifts from Before to After TOD Residency" subsection under "Related Information and Impacts" -- "Pre- and Post-TOD Travel Modes." 17-37 HRT LRT CRR All Attribute Pleasant Hill Alameda County a Long Beach Mission Valley Caltrain Grand Total b Commute Mode Share Single-occupant vehicle 49% 57% 88% 81% 77% 66% 5 5 4 5 5 4 loopraC Rail transit 44 37 0 11 16 24 Bus transit 1 1 3 2 2 2 Other (includes walk/bike)
|
From page 38... ...
b 89 50 50 49 63 3 58 Number of responses 83 60 34 140 218 37 580 Employer Programs c Allows flexible hours 81% 56% 22% 76% 69% 47% 67% Lets me work at home 32 20 0 19 18 15 19 Provides a car for day use 8 0 0 20 10 0 10 Helps pay for transit 39 9 19 17 61 8 33 Free parking at work 33 77 89 83 25 87 57 Helps pay for car commute 2 7 5 10 4 10 6 Number of responses 93 98 37 199 272 60 780 scitsitatS Projects surveyed 1 2 2 1 2 1 10 Stations surveyed 1 2 2 1 2 1 10 Overall survey response rate 24% 21% 6% 26% 32% 11% 20% Notes: a Includes responses from workers at station-area locations on rail lines with insufficient responses to list separately. b Midday "other" trips were all between 97 and 100 percent walk and less than 3 percent bike or miscellaneous travel modes.
|
From page 39... ...
. Table 17-19 HRT Sites Surveyed in the 2003 California TOD Travel Characteristics Study
|
From page 40... ...
. At the below-market-rate Center Village apartments in the Center Commons TOD, residents reported a 46 percent increase on average in the use of bus and rail transit for the work commute, a 15 percentage points increase in transit mode share between their prior and new residence (from 31 to 46 percent)
|
From page 41... ...
Travel mode shares and employer attributes found for projects near rail stations on certain individual California LRT line segments were reported above for station-area residents and workers in Tables 17-17 and 17-18, respectively. Table 17-20 gives an overview of the seven LRT station-area residential and office projects surveyed on the three line segments that researchers reported on individually.
|
From page 42... ...
. The Long Beach and Mission Valley station-area projects were found to have resident commute trip transit mode shares, respectively, that are 8 percentage points below and 7 percentage points above those of immediately surrounding areas (Table 17-12)
|
From page 43... ...
Travel mode shares and employer attributes for projects near rail stations on reported-on CRR segments were presented for station-area residents and workers in Tables 17-17 and 17-18, respectively, introduced in the "Heavy Rail Transit" subsection. Table 17-21 gives an overview of the three CRR station-area residential projects and one office project surveyed on the two line segments reported on individually.
|
From page 44... ...
Furtherapart stop spacing compared to traditional bus services and the granting of vehicle priority through special lanes, exclusive rights-of-way, and/or traffic signal priority can provide travel time advantages. Chapter 4, "Busways, BRT and Express Bus," provides coverage of 17-44 Parking Supplies Surrounding Density CRR Station Project Site Project Size a Dist.
|
From page 45... ...
. Table 17-22 Transit Mode Shares for Selected Ottawa-Carleton Locationsa U.S.
|
From page 46... ...
. Traditional Bus Traditional local bus service acts as an important link to TOD regardless of whether or not it is the primary transit mode serving the location.
|
From page 47... ...
Quantification of bus service changes and ridership outcomes immediately pre-TOD, particularly for the initial half of Metro's "Six-Year Transit Development Plan 1996-2001," is found in the Chapter 10 case study, "Service Restructuring and New Services in Metropolitan Seattle." The case study focuses especially on the service "hub" located at the Renton Transit Center. 17-47 Village at Overlake Station Metropolitan Place AW ,notneR AW ,dnomdeR noitacoL Former use Surface park-and-ride lot Downtown auto sales lots New uses 536 space parking garage 308 rental housing units 2,400 sq ft child care facility 240 space parking garage 90 rental housing units 4,000 sq ft ground-level retail Affordable Housing Component All units are priced to be affordable to households earning 60 percent of area's median income and 30 units are wheelchair accessible.
|
From page 48... ...
. The Renton Transit Center and adjacent Metropolitan Place development are immediately adjacent to Renton's traditional downtown.
|
From page 49... ...
, and internal trips will not be candidates for using the regional transit service. For an estimate of transit use increase in response to TOD densification that is derived from actual experience, see the "Arlington, Virginia" example under "Response by TOD Dimension and Strategy" -- "Response to TOD by Primary Transit Mode" -- "Heavy Rail Transit."
|
From page 50... ...
Whether for residential or office, the transit mode shares observed at any given distance from the station tend to be higher at urban stations than at suburban stations. Development integrated with transit stations such as through direct pedestrian connections may receive an added boost in transit mode shares (Cervero et al., 2004)
|
From page 51... ...
Table 17-24 Summary of Walk Distance Ridership Gradient Relationships for Work Trips The ten office projects surveyed in the 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study provide a striking example of the interplay between mode share, distance, and other different characteristics of specific developments. Eight of the office developments surveyed were between 500 and 2,700 feet of a rail station.
|
From page 52... ...
From 1992 to 1995, more than 250,000 surveys were collected by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District from over 1,100 work sites in Napa, Marin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, Sonoma, and Solano counties. Analysis of these survey findings clearly shows the dropoff in transit mode share as distance between the work site and its rail station increases, and also shows differences among rail transit modes.
|
From page 53... ...
Mode shares were analyzed for persons living and/or working within, or not within, 1/2-mile walks of rail transit stations or stops and ferry terminals. Walking distances were measured along street-system approximations of the true pedestrian network.
|
From page 54... ...
The short walking distances from transit to development entrances that pertain in the ideal TOD contribute not only to elevated transit mode shares but also to high walk-access mode shares. The 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study reported that over 90 percent of surveyed residents of station-area housing who were rail commuters walked to access their rail station.
|
From page 55... ...
Rail transit mode market penetration was found to fall sharply outside the 1/2-mile radius of each station. A number of characteristics were identified that appeared to contribute to the high ridership of the six stations, most notably a Drove Alone Carpool Dropped Off Bus Walked Other Mode of Access Shares by Access Trip Length (percentages calculated across each row)
|
From page 56... ...
. Table 17-27 Selected Attributes from Six High-Ridership Metra CRR Stations Pedestrian-Friendly Design and Walking and Transit Use.
|
From page 57... ...
The 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study performed several analyses of collected survey data to explore the influence on transit usage of neighborhood design and streetscape attributes specific to station-area developments. The analyses and findings were: • Simple correlations between design attributes and transit usage for specific trips yielded hints of positive relationships between more pedestrian friendly elements and greater transit usage, but also produced some counter-intuitive correlations.
|
From page 58... ...
0.011 4.855 Street Tree Density: Number of street trees along shortest route from project to station per 1,000 ft walking distance. 0.012 2.803 Street Furniture Density: Number of street furniture items along shortest route from project to station per 1,000 ft walking distance.
|
From page 59... ...
In contrast, residents with one vehicle available had a 27 percent transit share, and residents with two-or-more vehicles had a 10 percent transit share. The multiple-regression model developed to investigate influences on transit mode share for all trips made by station-area residents, discussed above in connection with station-area design and displayed in Table 17-28, also highlights the importance of vehicle ownership.
|
From page 60... ...
Surveyed were some 4,000 households in 60 buildings around 6 stations on the Skytrain system, Vancouver's Advanced Light Rail Transit rapid transit service with many HRT operating characteristics.
|
From page 61... ...
. 17-61 Household size influences on auto ownership were further examined in a California TOD study involving surveys of residents in 12 HRT station areas.
|
From page 62... ...
Transit Service Characteristics The traveler response to TOD will obviously be influenced by the service characteristics of the one or more public transit modes providing access to and from the location. TODs with better transit service characteristics would be expected to have higher transit ridership levels.
|
From page 63... ...
A multiple regression research model of projectlevel transit mode share, already presented in Table 17-28, found greater relative job accessibility by transit to be an important factor in explaining increased transit mode share among rail-based housing projects, all else being equal (Lund, Cervero, and Willson, 2004a)
|
From page 64... ...
. A research model developed as part of the 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study appears to confirm the importance of highway travel conditions.
|
From page 65... ...
-3.618 4.38 Similarly, having free tolls or fuel makes transit choice less likely. Neighborhood Design Connectivity levels at destination: proportion of intersections that are 4-way or more 2.021 1.59 Pedestrian connectivity and environment at the destination are important to transit choice because almost all transit trips ultimately become walking trips to reach the final destination.
|
From page 66... ...
For offices with less than one parking space per two workers, a commuting transit mode share of 30 percent was reported. For office projects with more than one space per two workers, an average commuting transit mode share of less than 10 percent was reported (Lund, Cervero, and Willson, 2004a)
|
From page 67... ...
The ULI publication provides an analysis methodology that incorporates mode share and trip capture in parking demand estimation. Practitioners advise that the suburban versus urban parking demand values now available in ITE's 3rd Edition Parking Generation provide indications of reduced parking demand with favorable modal options and mixed-use blends and serve the useful purpose of bracketing the values likely appropriate for most TOD (ITE, 2004; Urban Land Institute, 2005; McCourt, 2006)
|
From page 68... ...
. Two of the multiple regression research models developed for the 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study, one of which was displayed in Table 17-28, found higher levels of station-area parking to be related to higher average transit mode shares for station-area housing projects.
|
From page 69... ...
. The implication of this approximation is that when station parking is reduced many riders will find another way to use the transit service, whether by walking further, getting dropped off at the transit stop, parking at another station, or some other means.
|
From page 70... ...
Designed in large measure for evaluating options, it includes a quantitative process for assessing net ridership impacts of alternative parking replacement, access enhancement, and development scenarios. Drawing from sources ranging from the ITE Trip Generation manual to the 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study to special surveys, it allows estimated answers to questions such as how much density is necessary in a particular station area development project to generate more riders than the parking displaced.
|
From page 71... ...
TOD-specific findings are provided below. Employer-Based Programs The 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study reported not only on mode shares of stationarea residents and workers, but also the availability of various employer programs, including free workplace parking, transit subsidies, and flexible work hours.
|
From page 72... ...
. Table 17-32 Employer Policies and Transit Mode Share of Station-Area Residents and Workers
|
From page 73... ...
(These were covered under "Response by TOD Dimension and Strategy" -- "Response to TOD by Primary Transit Mode" -- "Traditional Bus" -- "King County, Washington.") It is a reasonable but primarily anecdotally-supported speculation that offering TOD-based pass programs as part of purchase or rent programs may be a useful device for attracting low-autoownership, transit-using residents to TODs located on less-intensive transit services such as the conventional albeit focused express and local bus services providing the anchors for the King County TOD examples.
|
From page 74... ...
Transit was cited as of major importance to residence location choice among village residents in greater proportions than it was among non-village residents. In addition, transit village residents owned fewer vehicles on average than residents outside the transit village area and reported more frequent use of transit.
|
From page 75... ...
. Table 17-33 Travel Characteristics of New Jersey Transit Village Residents Versus Non-Transit Village Residents 19 The apparent importance of lower income is potentially a reflection of a regional public policy requiring below-market-rate housing as a component of redevelopment around rail stations.
|
From page 76... ...
At the Verandas Apartments in Union City on BART, "main" trip transit mode shares increased from 27 to 42 percent, while auto shares decreased from 69 to 54 percent and walk/bike trips held constant at 4 percent. This outcome was in the context of an increase in average household size from 1.54 to 1.71 persons and a decrease in auto ownership from 1.22 to 1.06 per household.
|
From page 77... ...
2003 (less than 6 months) Main Trips a Single-occupancy vehicle 62.5% 66.7% 65.4% 62.2% Carpool 4.2 3.5 13.2 16.5 Rail transit 29.2 24.8 16.7 15.7 Bus transit 4.2 2.8 2.2 1.3 Walk or bike 0.0 2.1 2.3 4.3 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 rehtO Number of trips 24 141 953 230 Commute Trips Single-occupancy vehicle 45.5% 61.4% 68.6% 63.6% Carpool 0.0 1.2 5.3 7.7 Rail transit 45.5 36.1 22.5 23.8 Bus transit 9.1 1.2 1.9 2.1 Walk or bike 0.0 2.1 1.7 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 rehtO Number of trips 11 83 627 143 Note: a The survey instrument asked for travel information for three "main" trips on the survey day.
|
From page 78... ...
Among the findings, 56 percent of 1992 California station-area resident rail transit commuters and 65 percent of 1992 bus transit commuters were previously either rail or bus transit commuters. This finding may be reflective of respondents' workplace location situations, for example, continuing to work in the same transit-accessible place, as much as it is of any residence location effects.
|
From page 79... ...
Thus higher public transit mode shares for urban dwellers are not accompanied by higher numbers of weekly miles via transit. This would not necessarily be the case, and certainly not to this degree, in a comparison involving suburban TOD instead of the TOD-like North San Francisco urban traditional neighborhood examined here.
|
From page 80... ...
Two household differences between urban North San Francisco and suburban Pleasant Hill and Concord do stand out. North San Francisco has 0.8 vehicles per licensed driver as compared to 1.1 in each suburb, and 32 percent of North San Francisco households are singles versus 20 percent in Pleasant Hill and 12 percent in Concord (Schwanen and Mokhtarian, 2003)
|
From page 81... ...
These households tend to be engaged in white-collar occupations in greater proportions than average. The 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study found that young people (aged 18 to 35)
|
From page 82... ...
Discussions with developers of four Mountain View, California, TODs revealed that those Silicon Valley TODs seemed to be attracting three primary market segments, roughly divided into thirds: (1) young singles; (2)
|
From page 83... ...
The projection was derived using demographic trends, consumer preference assumptions, and capture rates applied separately by metropolitan region and transit zone type. In the year 2000, a total of 6.2 million households lived within 1/2 mile of existing urban rail stations, representing 12 percent of the total population in the 27 regions examined.
|
From page 84... ...
Mode share differentials relative to non-TOD areas, especially in the suburbs, are the dominant factor allowing lower vehicle trip generation rates. Nevertheless, auto use remains substantial for both work and non-work purpose trips.
|
From page 85... ...
. Table 17-38 Mode Shares by Trip Purpose for Station-Area Residents in California Trip Chaining Trips requiring an intermediate stop are more difficult to conduct using transit.
|
From page 86... ...
Midday trips made by station-area workers surveyed in the 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study were for the following trip purposes: meal or snack (48 percent) , business-related (21 percent)
|
From page 87... ...
Disaggregate Mode Shifts with Residency Change to TOD The 1992 California transit-focused development study included an analysis of the usual commute mode at the prior residence in comparison with the usual commute mode at the current, stationarea residence. Results are presented in Tables 17-39 and 17-40, disaggregated by current mode and prior mode, respectively.
|
From page 88... ...
17-88 Usual Mode to Work Before Living in Station Area Current Usual Mode to Work Drove Rode Car Rail Bus Walked Other 0.9%3.2%2.6%9.3%2.0%82.0%Drive Ride Car 65.5 10.3 6.9 10.3 6.9 0.0 6.54.613.742.53.928.8Rail 0.05.941.223.55.923.5Bus 6.720.020.013.30.040.0Walk 34.615.430.00.00.020.0Other Note: Shows distribution of prior mode of users of each current mode (each row totals 100%)
|
From page 89... ...
This exercise introduces various statistical approximations and uncertainties including recognition that the production of aggregate estimates may have been shunned by the original research team for sound statistical reasons.21 Taken at face value -- but making allowance for exclusion from "before" data of Santa Clara County LRT station-area residents with their lower transit and walk shares -- the approximated results seem to indicate virtually no change in prevalence of driving a car to work and less than a percentage point mode share increase in taking transit to work or in making the commute by transit, walk, or auto passenger in total. Probably the only overall work mode share changes with statistical significance were a roughly 5 percentage points increase in rail transit commuting with rail transit station-area residency, and a smaller increase in carpooling, counterbalanced by decreased use of bus transit and non-motorized commute modes (Handbook author computations)
|
From page 90... ...
It pertains, however, only to LRT-based TODs under Portland's highly transitsupportive conditions and medium-sized urban area environment with moderately low "before" condition mode shares. Additional cautions with regard to interpretation and use are provided in the case study.
|
From page 91... ...
. 17-91 Table 17-41 Changes in Commute Mode Between Transit and Non-Transit for Residents Moving into Portland Station-Areas LRT Blue Line Station Neighborhood Transit to NonTransit Continued to use NonTransit NonTransit to Transit Continued to use Transit Transit PercentagePoint Gain Sample Size Convention Center The Merrick 0.0% 74.1% 25.9% 0.0% 25.9% 54 Beaverton Central Beaverton Round 8.3 58.3 25.0 8.3 16.7 12 Elmonica/ SW 170th Condos and Arbor Station 0.0 71.0 25.8 3.2 25.8 31 Orenco Arbor Homes 6.5 69.6 17.4 6.5 10.9 46 Orenco Original and Club 1201 6.8 69.5 11.9 11.9 5.1 59 Orenco Sunset Downs 0.0 72.7 18.2 9.1 18.2 11 All 8 Sites 3.8% 70.4% 19.7% 6.1% 15.9% 213 Notes: LRT stations are listed east to west, from the new downtown area east of the Willamette River to the western suburbs.
|
From page 92... ...
• Pre-existing commute mode shares for transit in the BART service area, basically the San Francisco and Oakland/Berkeley commutershed, that are sufficiently high to leave reduced leeway for additional shifts to transit use. • Insufficient transit competitiveness in other parts of California vis-à-vis auto commuting to support either major attraction of potential transit users into TODs or commanding shifts to transit use.
|
From page 93... ...
. The same 2003 California TOD travel characteristics study that obtained marginal results in surveying automobile commute mode shifts found quite clearly through station-area survey and 2000 Census analysis that commute shares of residents within an 0.5-mile radius around the rail stations of TODs differ from the shares of those outside.
|
From page 94... ...
. On the workplace side of the equation, comparing office workers within an 0.5-mile radius around the rail stations of TODs with workers regionwide, the 2003 California study found an average station area transit commute share of 19 percent compared to 5 percent regionwide.
|
From page 95... ...
To the extent that TOD creates more opportunities for walking it can contribute to a healthier lifestyle. A 2003 study looked at the correlation between a sprawl index and the body mass index for 448 counties in urban areas across the United States.
|
From page 96... ...
Reduced motor vehicle travel brought on by mode shifts to non-motorized travel or clean transit modes will have a positive impact on health in the form of cleaner air. Finally, the pedestrian environment that accompanies TOD is generally much improved over traditional suburban walking environments and will likely be safer.
|
From page 97... ...
. Transit Oriented Development Index An interest in characterizing the "TOD-ness" of projects near transit has been expressed in various forms by a number of researchers and practitioners.
|
From page 98... ...
recent TOD publications as well as original research performed by the Handbook authors as part of TCRP Project B-12B. Reviewing proposed measures of TOD success was a useful starting point in visualizing a TOD Index.
|
From page 99... ...
The test model added a set of simple yes-no TOD "dummy" variables -- indicating presence of TOD characteristics -- to a regional non-work mode share research model that already included an advanced measure encompassing key urban design descriptors. Including the dummy variables appeared to improve the predictive capability of the model at the same time as the composite land use mix and connectivity measure remained roughly as significant a variable as before (Evans and Stryker, 2005)
|
From page 100... ...
At this stage the TOD Index is offered as a general approach to characterizing and evaluating the degree to which a project functions or would function as a TOD, and as a preliminary design-planning guidance tool. It is not presented as something ready-made for use in travel demand modeling.
|
From page 101... ...
. Supportive Density Density is sufficient to enable cost-effective transit service and infrastructure provision, create a market supportive of utility retail, and keep local attractions and destinations within short walking distances.
|
From page 102... ...
Such an approach can reduce the need for automobile ownership, leading to a variety of TOD benefits: fewer parking spaces required, higher transit mode share, lower vehicle miles of travel, and greater support for local retail. Car sharing ratios of one car per 20 subscribers have been used.
|
From page 103... ...
and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Characteristics of Rail and Ferry Station Area Residents in the San Francisco Bay Area: Evidence from the 2000 Bay Area Travel Survey. The latter report uses a regional data set obtained from nearly 35,000 residents to examine demographic profiles and travel characteristics of individuals residing within various sidewalk walking distances of rail stations and stops and ferry terminals (Metropolitan Transportation Commission, 2006)
|
From page 104... ...
Thus the inherent proximity of TODs to good transit service was already represented in their initial model, along with effects of auto ownership and availability. Their final research model adds a quantitative continuous urban land use and design variable describing the intensity of the mix of retail businesses, households, and local intersections, the latter being a measure of street and pedestrian facility continuity.24 The TOD variables which were then superimposed indicate whether the conventional and urban land use and design variables are sufficient to express TOD effects on non-work travel mode choice or whether they leave unexplained some degree of walk, bike, or transit mode attractiveness peculiar to non-home destinations in travel analysis zones (TAZs)
|
From page 105... ...
Table 17-46 lists the variables and provides calibration results for the Steering Committee's initial base-case model, their final research model with its urban design variables, and the TOD-included modification. 17-105 Table 17-46 Initial-Research, Final-Research, and TOD-Included Logit Model Calibrations (Coefficient Values and T-Statistics)
|
From page 106... ...
Adding the urban design variable in the final research model reduces the overestimate from 8.6 percent to 1.5 percent, while inclusion of the TOD variables further halves the overestimate to 0.8 percent. Similarly, TOD non-work auto trip attractions are overestimated by 6 percent in the initial research model and by 3 percent in the final model with the urban design variable, while adding the TOD variables produces a perfect match for auto trip attractions overall.
|
From page 107... ...
17-107 Table 17-47 Comparison of 1995 Observed and Estimated Non-Work Trips and Mode Shares for Portland, Oregon, TOD and Non-TOD Area Types Walk or Bike Public Transit Auto Driver/Passenger Area Type Data Source P's A's P's A's P's A's Observed 431 33% 494 18% 103 8% 198 7% 755 59% 2,043 75% Initial Model 334 26% 426 16% 79 6% 133 5% 876 68% 2,176 80% Final Model 430 33% 509 19% 95 7% 126 5% 765 59% 2,100 77% C en tr al A re a T O D TOD-Included 430 33% 510 19% 96 7% 184 7% 763 59% 2,041 75% Observed 153 14% 144 18% 26 2% 12 2% 946 84% 626 80% Initial Model 130 12% 112 14% 24 2% 14 2% 971 86% 656 84% Final Model 139 12% 118 15% 25 2% 15 2% 961 85% 649 83% O ut ly in g T O D TOD-Included 146 13% 128 16% 27 2% 26 3% 952 85% 628 80% Observed 1,672 8% 1,618 8% 276 1% 195 1% 20,356 91% 19,388 91% Initial Model 1,792 8% 1,718 8% 302 1% 258 1% 20,210 91% 19,225 91% Final Model 1,688 8% 1,629 8% 285 1% 263 1% 20,331 91% 19,308 91% N on -T O D O ve ra ll TOD-Included 1,682 8% 1,618 8% 281 1% 195 1% 20,341 91% 19,388 91% Notes: P's = Non-Work Trip Productions (trips observed/estimated at the home end of the trip) ; A's = Non-Work Trip Attractions (trips observed/estimated at a non-home end of the trip)
|
From page 108... ...
Analysis. A record of actions taken, the accompanying land use development and population and employment shifts, and aggregate impacts on transit use, is maintained by the Arlington County Planning Director and his staff to support furtherance of the program.26 17-108 26 A presentation error in the Metrorail ridership element of this record led to erroneous ridership data and conclusions in the "Arlington County, Virginia, Transit Oriented Development Densities" case study presented in the 2003 printing of TCRP Report 95, Chapter 15, "Land Use and Site Design," and the corresponding electronic (pdf)
|
From page 109... ...
Sources: Brosnan, R., "Transit Oriented Development," The Smart Growth Speaker Series. Oral presentation and visuals (updated 2001)
|
From page 110... ...
Opened in 1998 with 20 new stations, the Westside LRT is operated together with the Eastside LRT as Tri-Met's "Blue Line." The outer Hillsboro segment, given the extraordinary venture into matching land use policy with transportation investment, received federal funding only with the pre-condition that Metro's Region 2040 plan be adopted and supported by local entities. Analysis.
|
From page 111... ...
study examined development within 1/4 and 1/2 mile of stations serving the Gresham Central, Lloyd Center, Beaverton Central, and Orenco Station TODs. Included in all calculations were not only the TOD development, but also all other development, new and pre-existing, within the specified radius.
|
From page 112... ...
Not much better than Beaverton Central was Orenco Station and vicinity, a partially built-out greenfield development site, at 26 percent including all streets and 16 percent excluding major roads from the calculation. The Lloyd District, a primarily office/commercial area located like Gresham on a traditional grid, was next best to Gresham at 47 percent including all streets and 30 percent excluding major roads.
|
From page 113... ...
Although some approximations had to be made in the taking of these counts, it would appear that the observed vehicle trip rates were mostly below -- in some cases very substantially below -- the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates for the applicable land use types.
|
From page 114... ...
Outliers were Russellville Commons on the Eastside LRT, where the 1/4- to 1/2-mile distance from the station of the occupied units may have contributed to the lower 0.17 per unit four-hour rate (although the walk distance was not unique) , and Gresham Central Apartments, where especially heavy PM peak period LRT and bus transit usage pushed the rate up.
|
From page 115... ...
The top four reasons reported for moving into Center Commons were, in descending order of frequency: newness/design, close to transit, affordability, and location. 17-115 Table 17-52 Travel Mode Shares Before and After Moving to Center Commons Trip Category Drive Alone Carpool or Other LRT or Bus Bike or Walk Work Trips, Prior Residence 56% 4% 31% 9% Work Trips, TOD Residence 44% 7% 46% 3% Non-Work Trips, Prior Residence 59% 16% 20% 5% Non-Work Trips, TOD Residence 45% 16% 32% 6% Orenco Station residents were surveyed in 2001 by means of in-person interviews.
|
From page 116... ...
Residents in the Southwest Portland neighborhood reported 71 percent single-occupant motor vehicle and 18 percent transit, while residents in the closer-in and substantially lower income Northeast neighborhood reported 66 percent single-occupant motor vehicle and 20 percent transit. The Southwest neighborhood's lower single-occupant percentage relative to Orenco Station appears to be balanced out by a fivepercentage-points higher carpool, bike, and walk commute share (11 percent total)
|
From page 117... ...
It employed a variety of survey questions contained within self-administered questionnaires distributed at 8 separate developments located at 4 LRT stations. The 8-page survey, with the aid of incentives, achieved a 43 percent response rate at the Merrick Apartments surveyed in March 2005 on the Eastside LRT Blue Line and 24 to 33 percent response rates at the 7 Westside Blue Line developments surveyed in October 2005.
|
From page 118... ...
Primary Commute Mode is Transit a LRT Commuters Walking to Station b Convention Center Station The Merrick Central area apartments 1.3 $35,00049,999 0.9 n/a c 28% 100% Beaverton Central Station Beaverton Round Apartments and offices 1.6 $75,00099,999 1.1 1.7 33% 100% Elmonica/SW 170th Ave Station Arbor Station Attached and townhomes 2.1 $50,00074,999 0.9 Elmonica Station Condominiums 2.0 $35,00049,999 1.0 ↑ 4.4 ↓ ↑ 30% ↓ ↑ 76% ↓ Orenco/NW 231st Ave Station Arbor Homes Detached and townhomes 2.4 $75,00099,999 0.9 5.5 25% 90% Orenco Station Various single family, retail 2.0 $75,00099,999 0.9 ↑ ↑ (same) Condominiums, retail 1.7 $75,00099,999 1.0 ↑ 10.3 ↓ 23% 69% Club 1201 Condominiums 1.5 $35,00049,999 0.9 6.7 ↓ ↓ Sunset Downs Conventional single family 2.6 $50,00074,999 1.0 12.0 23% (insufficient data)
|
From page 119... ...
The Portland study for TransNow included an analysis of the usual commute mode at the prior residence in comparison with the usual commute mode at the current, station-area residence, both reported in the 2005 surveys. Summary results for all modes are presented in Table 17-54.
|
From page 120... ...
. • Dill, J., Travel and Transit Use at Portland Area Transit-Oriented 17-120 Table 17-54 Primary Commute Modes, Before and After TOD and Transit-Adjacent Residency, for Eight Residential Developments on Portland's Blue Line LRT Old Commuting Mode Current Commuting Mode Primary Commute Mode Category Number Share Number Share Drove alone or carpool 153 71.8% 123 57.7% Rail transit 11 5.2% 44 20.7% 1.9%42.8%6Bus transit Multiple transit modes 4 1.9% 6 2.8% 7.0%154.7%10Walk 1.4%31.4%3Bike Multiple modes 26 12.2% 18 8.5% 100.0%213100.0%213Total Note: Unexpanded combined survey results are given in the "Number" columns.
|
From page 121... ...
Separate trip generation rates (tables) were developed for walk 17-121
|
From page 122... ...
trips. The 2001 regional household travel survey permitted analyses to be conducted to determine whether the existing process could be enhanced to provide a higher level of discernment among different land use contexts than simply using the four density-related area-type codes.
|
From page 123... ...
To understand the importance of these various influences, a disaggregate analysis was undertaken in which household travel activity was studied in simultaneous relationship to demographic characteristics, regional accessibility, and local land use. Several multiple regression models were developed to ascertain the statistical importance and relative contribution of these various factors to household travel, including a model of household DVMT and a model of household vehicle ownership.
|
From page 124... ...
The coefficients in the model of household DVMT production have the expected sign and realistic magnitudes: household DVMT is predicted to increase with the number of members, number of workers, number of vehicles, and annual income, and to decrease with higher values of regional job accessibility, entropy, and local opportunities. In addition to the daily model, similar models were estimated for home-based work and non-work VMT, with the general difference being that the model for work travel showed the regional accessibility measure of land use to be important 17-124 Table 17-55 BMC Multiple Regression Models for Predicting Daily Household (HH)
|
From page 125... ...
to the exclusion of entropy and opportunities, while the non-work model found the local land use measures -- entropy and opportunities -- to be very important and regional accessibility less important. The household automobile ownership model also reflected the importance of land use factors.
|
From page 126... ...
R., Baber, C., Savory, D., "Use of a Walk Opportunities Index to Quantify Local Accessibility." Transportation Research Record 1977 (2006)
|
From page 127... ...
B., Boroski, J., Smith-Heimer, J., Golem, R., Peninger, P., Nakajima, E., Chui, E., Dunphy, R., Myers, M., McKay, S., and Witenstein, N., "Transit-Oriented Development in the United States: Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects." TCRP Report 102, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2004)
|
From page 128... ...
. Douglas, G., and Evans, J., "Urban Design, Urban Form, and Employee Travel Behavior." Proceedings of the Sixth TRB Conference on the Application of Transportation Planning Methods, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (1997)
|
From page 129... ...
S., Zimmerman, S., Clinger, J., Rutherford, S., Smith, R., Cracknell, J., Soberman, R., "Volume 1: Case Studies in Bus Rapid Transit." TCRP Report 90, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2003)
|
From page 130... ...
. Marchetta, A., "Transit Oriented Development: A Developer's Perspective." Transit Village Symposium.
|
From page 131... ...
. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc., Cervero, R., Howard Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc., and Zupan, J., "Mode of Access and Catchment Areas of Rail Transit." TCRP Project H-1 Unpublished Research Findings, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (1996b)
|
From page 132... ...
. Renne, J., and Wells, J., "Transit-Oriented Development: Developing a Strategy to Measure Success." NCHRP Research Results Digest 294, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (February, 2005)
|
From page 133... ...
F., Downtown Plano: Creating a Transit Village. City of Plano, TX (May 30, 2003)
|
From page 134... ...
There key-station ridership, the second decade-plus after opening, rose 15 percent in 12 years, compared to an overall average change of 0 percent for other pre-1980 stations." In the paragraph on page 15-32 immediately below the paragraph headed "Density and Transit Choice," the last two sentences should read: "The volume effect of density is illustrated by the ‘Arlington County, Virginia, Transit Oriented Development Densities' example under ‘Case Studies.' Arlington's policy of focusing dense development on its Washington Metro stations is thought largely responsible for 1990 to 2002 ridership growth at the key Rosslyn, Court House, and Ballston stations of 9, 26, and 18 percent, respectively. During the same period, the ridership for other Metrorail stations opened prior to 1980 was, from the perspective on an overall average, static (Brosnan, 2000; WMATA, 2002)
|
From page 135... ...
Ch. 17 – Transit Oriented Development (2007)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.