The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 14-50

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 15... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……..B-1 2.0 Overview of Findings.......................................................................................................................................... B-1 3.0 The Joint Development Practice: Who's Doing What ........................................................................................ Read the entire page →
From page 16... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies ii 5.2 Developer Procurement and Negotiations ................................................................................................. B- 30 5.2.1 Solicitation methods (Question 17) Read the entire page →
From page 17... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-1 SURVEY OF TRANSIT AGENCIES 1.0 Introduction The research team for TCRP Research Report 224: A Guide to Joint Development for Public Transportation Agencies ("the Guide") undertook a targeted stakeholder outreach program. Read the entire page →
From page 18... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-2 Table B-1: Summary of Transit Agencies Surveyed Co m m . Read the entire page →
From page 19... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-3 The 32 selected agencies are listed in Table B-1 (preceding page) , which summarizes some of their salient characteristics along with the method in which they participated and the date.2 Eighteen agencies were interviewed, either in-person or by telephone; wherever possible, these interviews were conducted by research team members familiar with the agency. Read the entire page →
From page 20... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-4 joint development practice -- "who's doing what". The summary then addresses the questions related to: • advancing the state of the practice (Section 4.0) Read the entire page →
From page 21... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-5 Table B-2: Outline of the Findings Section 3.0 The Joint Development Practice: Who's Doing What 3.1 Scope and Capacity 3.1.1 Extent of JD activity (Question 1) 3.1.2 Agency JD policies (Question 4) Read the entire page →
From page 22... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-6 3.0 The Joint Development Practice: Who's Doing What 3.1 Scope and Capacity The first set of findings concerns the scope of JD activity in which transit agencies are engaged and several measures of their capacity to do so. These include: • whether agencies have adopted JD policies; • the extent of their existing real estate portfolios; • for those agencies planning new corridors, the degree to which their alignment, station location, and right-of-way strategies contemplate JD opportunities; • how they assemble the specialized skills and capacities required to undertake JD; and • how they go about determining which sites should be advanced as JD priorities -- a capacity question as well as a policy choice. Read the entire page →
From page 23... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-7 3.1.2 Agency joint development policies (Question 4) The decision to publish a JD policy, or to update an earlier one, is a defining feature of an agency's approach to joint development. Read the entire page →
From page 24... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-8 3.1.4 Land assembly strategy for new corridors (Question 2b) In the longer term, joint development is not necessarily confined to existing transit corridors. Read the entire page →
From page 25... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-9 their specialized nature and, in several responses, as a matter of policy so as to enhance credibility and impartiality. • Agencies may use consultants to draft the content of solicitation documents (Requests for Qualifications, Requests for Proposals) Read the entire page →
From page 26... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-10 3.2.1 Enabling Act or equivalent authorization (Question 3) An Enabling Act (or equivalent charter document) Read the entire page →
From page 27... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-11 • BART's Enabling Act was amended in 2018 (AB 2923) to substantially exempt BART lands from local zoning for purposes of JD.10 • The Miami-Dade Code creates a Rapid Transit Zone ("RTZ") Read the entire page →
From page 28... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-12 Between lesser capacity, greater reliance on cars, and a less welcoming view of density, suburban and rural zoning was generally seen as less TOD-friendly. That said, several transit agencies cited particular suburban jurisdictions as being invested in TOD zoning, and New Jersey Transit, as co-sponsor of the state's Transit Village Program, cited the 33 municipalities designated thus far as having, or working toward, TOD-friendly plans and codes. Read the entire page →
From page 29... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-13 a couple of exceptions, these agencies indicated that they are comfortable with their role and satisfied with the outcomes. The other half reported that they remain actively involved, continuing to lead, coordinate, or at least share the stakeholder and inter-governmental roles, and are more actively available to the developer in the entitlement process. Read the entire page →
From page 30... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-14 Table B-7: Special Features of Affiliated Transit Agencies Transit Agency Relationship to Affiliated Entity Observation Caltrain A Joint Powers Board consisting of San Mateo, San Francisco, and Santa Clara Counties; managed by SamTrans. • Caltrain and SamTrans JD co-managed. Read the entire page →
From page 31... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-15 • navigating the subset of JD opportunities that trigger the involvement of the Federal Transit Administration; • expanding the "footprint" of joint development beyond TOD on transit agency land, through a variety of transactional models involving other public land-owners, adjacent property owners, development at non-station facilities, and new forms of value capture; • enhancing the economics of joint development and mitigating the tradeoffs that limit the ability of transit agencies to achieve an acceptable financial return and other JD goals; • bringing best practices to bear on two issues that increasingly confront JD projects in US cities: affordable housing and parking. 4.1 Joint Development Involving FTA The nexus of issues involving FTA jurisdiction in joint development is a high-priority topic and one of the stated reasons for TRB's undertaking this project. Read the entire page →
From page 32... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-16 FTA is seeking to expand the use of the FTA/JD process. Question 26 asked the 29 US agencies responding to the survey which method they have preferred to pursue and why. Read the entire page →
From page 33... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-17 undertaken, or are currently advancing, at least one JD project involving land assembly partnerships with other public agencies. Several more said that they are interested in pursuing such opportunities. Read the entire page →
From page 34... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-18 • Cap Metro's two proposed Red Line stations near The Domain development district and Austin's new major league soccer stadium; • the new Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority ("NFTA") light rail station headhouse built by SUNY Buffalo as part of its Allen Medical Campus expansion. Read the entire page →
From page 35... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-19 use planning, then this transaction arguably constitutes a form of joint development or at least closely resembles it. Fifteen of the 30 US agencies reported some application of district value capture that was used, or will be used, to directly fund transit agency infrastructure in TOD settings. Read the entire page →
From page 36... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-20 • financial goals, including monetizing the real property asset (the actual sale or lease proceeds from the JD project) , generating ridership and farebox revenue, or off-loading costs by assigning them to a developer; • non-financial goals, such as producing affordable housing, enhancing station-area safety, influencing development in the larger station area, and gaining a seat at the table with local or regional planners. Read the entire page →
From page 37... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-21 that among the agencies choosing "multi-criterion best value", some use criteria that focus primarily on price, ridership, and other agency-focused considerations, while others also include extrinsic criteria like affordable housing or overall station area development. Table B-10: Structure of Developer Selection Criteria (Question 15) Read the entire page →
From page 38... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-22 other business terms, its Enabling Act might or might not allow such an outcome, and the board might or might not accept it, depending on the agency's hierarchy of JD goals (see section 4.3.1 above) Read the entire page →
From page 39... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-23 Dade -- have zoning powers of their own with respect to their own JD properties (see the Enabling Act discussion in section 3.2.1) Read the entire page →
From page 40... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-24 each municipality under New Jersey's Mount Laurel litigation) Read the entire page →
From page 41... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-25 involving not only the revenue from the park & ride itself and its associated ridership, but the revenue and ridership to be generated by different TOD scenarios and the cost of the replacement garage. Question 13 asked the agencies how they address the replacement issue. Read the entire page →
From page 42... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-26 As for residential and commercial parking, the TOD development community, many transit agencies, and an increasing number of zoning jurisdictions have come to broadly agree that traditional minimum parking ratios are excessive; they take insufficient advantage of the transit resource and impose unnecessary costs on station-area development. Because much contemporary TOD is mixed-use, there is also an opportunity to design shared parking and to anticipate trips that will be made on foot; traditional zoning may ignore these possibilities.30 Transit agencies undertaking JD may have both a philosophical and a financial interest in pushing TOD parking requirements as low as the market will accept, with as much shared parking as is practicable for a given project. Read the entire page →
From page 43... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-27 13, they were asked how they define a particular joint development site with respect to park & ride or other operating facilities (sections 4.3.3 and 4.4.2) Read the entire page →
From page 44... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-28 5.1.2 Land disposition method (Question 14) An important question in asset stewardship is whether the transit agency should maintain ownership of its joint development properties through long-term lease, rather than selling them outright. Read the entire page →
From page 45... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-29 entitlement and permitting process. (As one respondent said, "we don't get into the plumbing or the aesthetics.") Read the entire page →
From page 46... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-30 5.2 Developer Procurement and Negotiations The mechanics of soliciting joint development proposals and concluding agreements with developers is critical to successful project execution. In Appendix I, the research team examines a sampling of procurement documents and development agreements, so that examples of successful practice can be noted in the Guide and made available to readers. Read the entire page →
From page 47... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-31 The agencies were asked (Question 17c) if they have official, published policies with respect to unsolicited joint development proposals. Read the entire page →
From page 48... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-32 The Joint Development Practice: Who's Doing What • Most of the agencies surveyed have undertaken or are actively planning one or more joint development projects. Most have undertaken or are planning multiple projects, and most consider their JD activity to constitute an ongoing program, requiring specialized technical capacities. Read the entire page →
From page 49... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-33 develop such sites, agencies have a choice (in consultation with FTA) of how to address the FTA interest: either by engaging the FTA-assisted joint development (FTA/JD) Read the entire page →
From page 50... ... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies B-34 requirements. Nine transit agencies in our survey, including several of the largest systems with the most robust JD programs, have done so. Read the entire page →

From page 15...

... Appendix B Survey of Transit Agencies i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……..B-1 2.0 Overview of Findings.......................................................................................................................................... B-1 3.0 The Joint Development Practice: Who's Doing What ........................................................................................