The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 1-32

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... ... Research Results Digest 294 February 2005 C O N T E N T S Summary, 1 Introduction, 2 Background on Indicators of TOD Success, 3 Review of TOD Benefits and Indicators, 11 Survey of TOD Indicators, 14 Conclusions and Suggestions for Evaluating TOD, 22 Appendices, 25 SUMMARY This digest offers a strategy to systematically evaluate the potential success of transit-oriented development. The digest identifies and evaluates various indicators of the impacts of transit-oriented development, provides the results of a survey of transit-oriented development indicators, and identifies ten indicators that can be used to systematically monitor and measure impacts. Read the entire page →
From page 2... ... some of these indicators, it is more difficult for some of the others; a strategy suggested in the last section of this digest is setting aside government funds to monitor TOD progress. For virtually every indicator, with a few exceptions, data collection needs to occur only yearly or less frequently. Read the entire page →
From page 3... ... While there have been many claims for the various benefits of TOD, few studies have looked holistically at the outcomes of TOD to measure its success. As Cervero et al. Read the entire page →
From page 4... ... ing TOD. The TCRP project provided a good starting point because it includes responses to a stakeholder survey on TOD from 90 transit agencies from across the country as well as 23 municipalities, 8 redevelopment agencies, 24 MPOs, and 10 state departments of transportation (DOTs) Read the entire page →
From page 5... ... torists over to mass transit, a secondary benefit is the inducement of more walk and bicycle access trips to and from transit. Read the entire page →
From page 6... ... Department of Transportation, 2002) ; it is available online at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/MassTrans/tod. Read the entire page →
From page 7... ... ically recommend ways in which TODs could be systematically evaluated. It states that one of the barriers to implementing TOD is the need for better data: The lack of evidence documenting a track record of TOD as a successful development product is an obstacle in convincing stakeholders and bankers about the benefits of projects. Read the entire page →
From page 8... ... 8TABLE 2 Recommended Indicators to Evaluate TOD as Part of the Evaluation of the New Jersey Transit Village Initiative Environmental and Institutional Economic activity transportation activity changes Community perception Public Investment • Municipal funds • State funds • Grants • Loans • Federal funds • Grants • Loans • Tax abatements • Total public investment (calculated from indicators above) Private Investment, Commercial • New or substantially rehabilitated retail/office spacea • Estimated private investmentb • Estimated new property taxes generatedc Private Investment, Residential • New or substantially rehabilitated housing unitsa • Estimated private investmentb • Estimated new property taxes generatedc • Number of new studios/ one bedroom • Number of new two bedrooms • Number of new three or more bedrooms • Number of new units for sale • Number of new units for rent • Number of new subsidized units for rent and for sale (with income limits) Read the entire page →
From page 9... ... 9TABLE 3 Final List of Indicators to Monitor the Progress of the New Jersey Transit Village Initiative How often the data will be Who will collect Indicator Data source collected the data Net Increase in Dwelling Units Building Permit Data Yearly NJ Department of Community Affairs (DCA) Total Construction Activity Building Permit Data Yearly DCA Residential Construction Activity Building Permit Data Yearly DCA Affordable Housing Units Created Building Permit Data Yearly DCA Nonresidential Construction Activity Building Permit Data Yearly DCA Total Businesses in Transit Village Town/Transit Village Yearly Municipality Annual Application Report Number of Automobile-Dependent Town/Transit Village Yearly Municipality Annual Establishments Application Report Number of Transit-Supportive Town/Transit Village Yearly Municipality Annual Shops Application Report Parking Spaces Town/Transit Village Yearly Municipality Annual Application Report Acres of Brownfields Reclaimed Town Yearly Municipality Annual Report Transit Ridership Counts NJ Transit Yearly or as NJ Transit available Pedestrian Activity Counts Town/DOT Every 1–2 years Town/DOT Public Perception Survey Results Every 2–4 years DOT Public Investment Town Yearly Municipality Annual Report Other Infrastructure or Town Yearly Municipality Annual Transportation Improvements Report SOURCE: Wells and Renne, 2004, 2. Read the entire page →
From page 10... ... terns, it must reflect upon the region and not exclusively the area within a quarter-mile of the local station. To achieve this, the response of developers, consumers, and taxpayers to the TOD concept is crucial. Read the entire page →
From page 11... ... REVIEW OF TOD BENEFITS AND INDICATORS In pursuing the goal of developing a strategy to measure the success of TOD, this section presents the results of this study of what governments and agencies across the United States suggest are the benefits of TOD. The same DOTs, MPOs, transit agencies, municipalities, and redevelopment agencies studied in TCRP Report 102 (Cervero et al., 2004) Read the entire page →
From page 12... ... 12 TABLE 5 Travel Behavior Benefits/Indicators Category Benefit/Indicator Measure Sources Parking Traffic Flow a The New Jersey Transit Village Evaluation was conducted by VTC on behalf of NJDOT, and the other participating state agencies including NJ Transit (see "Background on Indicators of TOD Success" for a summary of the evaluation of the New Jersey Transit Village Initiative) Read the entire page →
From page 13... ... 13 TABLE 6 Economic Benefits/Indicators Category Benefit/Indicator Measure Sources Public Investment Private Investment Municipal Funds State funds (detail by source) : -- Grants -- Loans Federal funds (detail by source) Read the entire page →
From page 14... ... 14 TABLE 6 (Continued) Category Benefit/Indicator Measure Sources Private Investment (continued) Read the entire page →
From page 15... ... 15 TABLE 8 Built Environment Benefits/Indicators Category Benefit/Indicator Measure Sources Design Quality Pedestrian Friendliness Land Use Presence of pedestrianorientation/human scale Length of improved streetscape Number of improved intersections/street crossings for pedestrian safety Length of façade improvement Amount of brownfield properties remediated under a DEPapproved plan Number/size of vacant buildings rehabilitated or replaced Number/amount of underutilized vacant lots reclaimed for construction or green/recreation space Number of new or improved park areas Number of mixed-use structures Subjective/width and height proportions Feet Number Feet Acreage Number/square feet Number/acreage Number Number/square footage NJ Transit; Columbus Planning Division; Seattle; Charlotte Planning Division; Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission; Mountain View, Calif., Community Development; Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency; BRA; North Central Texas Council of Governments; Greater Buffalo–Niagara Regional Transportation Council; Salt Lake City; Redwood City, Calif., Redevelopment Agency; East-West Gateway Council of Governments; METRA NJ Transit Village Evaluation NJ Transit Village Evaluation; METRA NJ Transit Village Evaluation NJ Transit Village Evaluation NJ Transit Village Evaluation North San Diego County Transit District; NJ Transit Village Evaluation Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority; DART; Northern Virginia Transportation Commission; Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission; Caltrans; METRA; NJ Transit Village Evaluation NJ Transit; LA County Metropolitan Transportation Authority; Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority; WMATA; DART; Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority; Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority; Sacramento Regional Transit District; Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board; Seattle DOT; Office of Planning, Washington, D.C.; Sacramento; Columbus Planning Division; Seattle; Charlotte Planning Department; San Mateo, Calif.; Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission; (continued on next page) Read the entire page →
From page 16... ... 16 represent TOD. It did not, however, uncover whether each agency actually collects and monitors the progress of TOD. Read the entire page →
From page 17... ... Chicago; Northern California; Southern California; New Jersey; Portland, Oregon; and Washington, D.C. Approximately 60 professionals who have been working directly with TOD in these regions at various agencies were contacted by telephone and email numerous times and asked to complete an anonymous online questionnaire.3 (Appendix B includes a copy of the questionnaire and complete results from the survey) Read the entire page →
From page 18... ... responses to this survey provide good insights from across the country and across levels of government, although a random sample design was not used. Findings In the survey, professionals were given a randomized list of TOD success indicators (as described in the previous section) Read the entire page →
From page 19... ... 5. Whether there were any important indicators not listed on the survey and what they were. Read the entire page →
From page 20... ... Ease of Collection While it is important to know what the most useful indicators are, it is also important to know how easy or difficult it is to collect data for each indicator. Table 11 depicts the perceived easiest indicators to compile. Read the entire page →
From page 21... ... dicators of TOD success are going to require special efforts to compile. This challenge is addressed in the suggestions given in the last section of this digest. Read the entire page →
From page 22... ... would be especially useful, because planners could then begin to quantify not only localized outcomes but also regional impacts on traffic congestion and air quality as well. Rankings Respondents were asked to list the three to five most important and least important indicators. Read the entire page →
From page 23... ... Conclusion and Suggestion 3 Surprisingly, the value of environmental factors was downplayed by the respondents to the opinion survey of transportation professionals. And though transportation professionals may not see reduction in fuel consumption as a useful indicator, it is widely considered to be an important public benefit. Read the entire page →
From page 24... ... more financial support, more expertise, and more formal reporting are needed to help them do this successfully. REFERENCES Boarnet, Marlon G., and Randall Crane. Read the entire page →
From page 25... ... A PPEN D IX A A g en cies Stud ied Agency Name TOD-Related Material on General Website TOD Specific Website TOD Report Telephone Interview Contacted with no reply Agency Name TOD-Related Material on General Website TOD Specific Website TOD Report Telephone Interview Contacted with no reply Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) X New Jersey Transit X X X San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) Read the entire page →
From page 26... ... 26 Agency Name TOD-Related Material on General Website TOD Specific Website TOD Report Telephone Interview Contacted with no reply Agency Name TOD-Related Material on General Website TOD Specific Website TOD Report Telephone Interview Contacted with no reply Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CA) X X Charlotte, NC: Planning Dep Seattle, WA artment X Los Angeles, CA: Dept. Read the entire page →
From page 27... ... 27 Agency Name TOD-Related Material on General Website TOD Specific Website TOD Report Telephone Interview Contacted with no reply Agency Name TOD-Related Material on General Website TOD Specific Website TOD Report Telephone Interview Contacted with no reply San Diego, CA: Centre City Development Corporation * X Southeast Michigan COG X Salt Lake City, UT: Redevelopment Agency X East-West Gateway Coordinating Council X Sacramento, CA: Economic Development Dept. Read the entire page →
From page 28... ... 28 Agency Name TOD-Related Material on General Website TOD Specific Website TOD Report Telephone Interview Contacted with no reply Agency Name TOD-Related Material on General Website TOD Specific Website TOD Report Telephone Interview Contacted with no reply First Coast MPO (Jacksonville, FL) X Oregon X North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority X Georgia X Sarasota Manateo MPO (FL) Read the entire page →
From page 29... ... APPENDIX B Survey Design and Results 29 Cover Letter You have been selected to provide input on a national study on Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Read the entire page →
From page 30... ... P.S. For a link to research on transit-oriented development at the Voorhees Transportation Center, including a full evaluation of the New Jersey Transit Village Initiative, please visit: http://www.policy.rutgers.edu/vtc/tod Questionnaire What region are you from? Read the entire page →
From page 31... ... Increase in disposable household income Number of affordable housing units Number of parking spaces for shoppers Qualitative rating of streetscape (i.e., pedestrian orientation/human scale) Length of improved streetscape Number of improved intersections/street crossings for pedestrian safety Length of facade improvement Mileage of bicycle lanes Pedestrian activity counts Number of parking spaces for employees Number/acreage of brownfield properties remediated Number/size of vacant buildings rehabilitated or replaced Number/amount of underutilized vacant lots reclaimed for construction or green/recreation space Amount of improved public park area/public space Number/square feet of mixed-use structures Population/housing density Amount of municipal funds spent or dedicated to TOD Amount of state grants or loans spent or dedicated to TOD Amount of federal grants or loans spent or dedicated to TOD Total public investment Amount of tax abatements given Amount/number of new or substantially rehabilitated retail/office space Estimated amount of private investment Estimated amount of property taxes generated Number of substantially rehabilitated housing units Estimated amount of private investment by type of land use Estimated amount of new property taxes generated Estimated increase in property value Number of subsidized housing units Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) Read the entire page →
From page 32... ... These digests are issued in order to increase awareness of research results emanating from projects in the Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) Read the entire page →

From page 1...

... Research Results Digest 294 February 2005 C O N T E N T S Summary, 1 Introduction, 2 Background on Indicators of TOD Success, 3 Review of TOD Benefits and Indicators, 11 Survey of TOD Indicators, 14 Conclusions and Suggestions for Evaluating TOD, 22 Appendices, 25 SUMMARY This digest offers a strategy to systematically evaluate the potential success of transit-oriented development. The digest identifies and evaluates various indicators of the impacts of transit-oriented development, provides the results of a survey of transit-oriented development indicators, and identifies ten indicators that can be used to systematically monitor and measure impacts.