Free Resources: Article: Building Livable Communities with Transit

Newsletters
Articles
Fact Sheets
Reports
Presentations
Guidelines
Model Projects
Local Index of Transit Availability
Participation Toolkits

Currents
Case Studies & Fact Sheets
Funding Opportunities
Links

Guidebook
Other Resources

Free Resources | Land Use | Articles

Printer-Friendly Version

Building Livable Communities with Transit

by Paul Zykofsky, AICP, Director, LGC Center for Livable Communities

Livable communities are hot. In a speech on January 11, 1999, Vice President Gore unveiled the Administration's Livability Agenda while announcing a wide range of measures to assist state and local governments to plan for smart growth. Two days later Republican Senator Jeffords from Vermont and his Democratic colleague Carl Levin from Michigan followed up by announcing the creation of the Senate Smart Growth Task Force, a bipartisan, multi-regional working group dedicated to exploring and promoting community-focused development policies. Governors in over one dozen states led by Democrat Parris Glendening of Maryland and Republican Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey for some time now have also been speaking out on the need to improve the livability of the places where we live, work and play.

Of course, all of this augurs well for transit, since expanding transportation choices is considered one of the key features of a more livable community. Unfortunately, it doesn't always work that way. Building or expanding the transit line is key, of course, but, it takes more than that to create livable communities. This article will discuss some of the elements that are critical to insuring that development around transit stops does, indeed, contribute to creating more livable communities.

Elements of Good Transit-Oriented Development

During the past 50 years, as automobile-dominated, single-use districts have become the norm in most cities, we have forgotten how to design for the public realm. With the exception of a few central city districts and older neighborhoods, most new residential development, office complexes and shopping centers have been designed to facilitate access for the automobile. Garages and wide streets are the most prominent feature of most suburban residential developments. Commercial and retail centers have been surrounded by a sea of parking spaces. Access for pedestrians and transit vehicles, in many cases, is virtually impossible.

In recent years, transit agencies in cities across the country have been struggling with this issue. Building a light-rail line or putting in new bus service is often not enough to increase ridership especially in communities dominated by the automobile. In the words of G.B. Arrington, Director of Strategic Planning for Portland's Tri-Met: The Field of Dreams theory of development build it and they will come only works in the movies and at freeway interchanges. The challenge is to create environments in which people not only are able to, but want to take transit.

To address the issue of how to create transit-friendly development, numerous transit agencies have developed design guidelines. In a 1994 study on Transit-Supportive Development in the United States: Experiences and Prospects, University of California at Berkeley professor Robert Cervero, identified 38 transit agencies throughout the U.S. and Canada that had developed, or were in the process of developing, design guidelines. While the guidelines differ from community to community, there are many common themes addressed in these documents. Cervero organized these themes into the following three categories: 1) land use, 2) site design, and 3) pedestrian and transit facilities.

In this article we examine some of the key strategies for creating transit-supportive development which are contained in guidelines prepared by the following agencies: the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB), the Santa Clara County Transportation Authority (SCCTA), Portland's Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District (Tri-Met), New Jersey Transit, Snohomish County Transportation Authority (SNO-TRAN) and the Municipal Research and Services Center of the state of Washington.

Land Use

Encourage a Mix of Land Uses
The strict separation of uses that has characterized most of postwar planning in the U.S. has created an absurd situation in which we must rely on a 2,000 pound car to pick up a one-pound loaf of bread. The mixed use districts we find in older communities are not only conducive to walking and bicycling more, but they help make transit more attractive. As the San Diego guidelines explain: Mixed uses create opportunities to substitute walking for driving. Diverse uses along a street also create activity and a sense of security for those waiting for a bus. Current zoning regulations in many communities often require a strict separation of residential, retail and employment uses into large homogeneous areas. In these kinds of developments, the distances between home, work, and shops are too great, and there are often no direct pathways connecting them.... In contrast, mixed uses are a common attribute of our older neighborhoods. When different types of land uses are located in close proximity, it is possible to walk instead of having to drive. Moreover, the pedestrian environments which they create encourage people to walk to bus and trolley stops by providing interesting pathways and places to stop along the way. [MTDB Manual, p.9]

Provide Appropriate Densities
For transit to be viable it is essential that a sufficient number of people live or work close to the transit stop. Several studies conducted in different cities have found that increasing population density is one of the most effective measures to increase transit ridership. However, many communities and neighborhoods reject higher density housing because they associate it with unattractive apartments which are incompatible with lower density, single family homes. Because of traditional opposition to raising densities in many communities, it is essential that developers and city agencies engage residents in a dialogue on how to build attractive, compatible compact housing. There are more and more examples of well-designed, attractive and compatible higher density housing being built in different parts of the country. Densities of eight, ten and even twelve units per acre the minimum typically required to support bus service can be achieved through attractive single-family cluster, zero-lot line or small-lot single-family homes. Two-story townhouses and single family homes with accessory units can achieve densities of 12-20 units per acre. And attractively designed 3- to 4-story flats above parking have been built at densities of 30-70 units per acre.

Page: 1 | 2 | 3