Land Impacts of Rapid Transit: Implications of Recent Experience Executive Summary December 1977
Land Impacts of Rapid Transit: Implications of Recent Experience Executive Summary December 1977
Land Impacts of Rapid Transit: Implications of Recent Experience Executive Summary December 1977
Land Use
Impacts
of
Rapid
Transit
Implications of
Recent Experience
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
December 1977
Prepared for
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Policy,
Plans, and International
Affairs
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DISCLAIMER
DOT-TPI-10-77-31
4. Title and Sub!itle
D e Leuw, C a t h e r E, Company
1 2 0 Howard S t r e e t , P . O . Box 7991
L
1I-
11. Contract or Grant No.
I
15. Supplementary Notes
F u l l F i n a l R e p o r t a l s o a v a i l a b l e from DOT; B i b l i o g r a p h y a v a i l a b l e s e p a r a t e l y
from C o u n c i l o f P l a n n i n g L i b r a r i a n s , M o n t i c e l l o , I l l i n o i s .
16. Abstract
I I
19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. o! Pages 22. Price
none none
17
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8.72)
Land Use
Impacts
of
Rapid
Transit
Implications of
Recent Experience
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
December 1977
Prepared for
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Policy,
Plans, and International
Affairs
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
i ’
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
i r *v!- . --r7
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
In recent years many conflicting claims and hopes have been heard concerning the ability of
major new rapid transit improvements to generate or encourage desirable changes in urban land
development. To aid in judging these different views, this office recently commissioned De Leuw,
Cather & Company to conduct a detailed study of the ways which modern rapid transit
improvements have actually been found to affect land use.
The study involved a review of most of the major rapid transit projects completed in the past 30
years in the United States and Canada. It analyzed the impact of transit improvements on (1) the
overall growth of a metropolitan area relative to competing areas: (2) land use patterns; and (3)
the strength of central business districts. Its conclusions emphasized the importance of the
relationship of transit improvements to local land use policies and other factors, such as land
availability and developability.
The study’s full final report is available from our office. However, becauseof the important urban
transportation policy implications of its findings, we have asked the consultants to prepare this
brief Executive Summary for wider distribution to p o k y makers and the public. It emphasizes
major findings and key policy implications for future puiblic investments in the different transit
modes.
We believe that interested citizens and public officials at all levels will find this to be a very
valuable and informative document.
Chester Davenport
Assistant Secretary for Poiicy Plans
and International Affairs
1
2
About the Study
This study was undertaken for the Office of the models of land use change. This study has sought to
Secretary, U S . Department of Transportation, and discover which factors are consistently important,
was completed in mid-1977. Its purpose was to help how thley interact, and how powerful transit im-
improve policies and planning methods for urban provements are in comparison to other factors.
transit by identifying the extent and kinds of land use
changes which have actually occurred due to major
rapid transit improvements. “Rapid transit” as used Methods
here refers not only to conventional rapid rail transit
(CRT) but also to light rail, commuter rail, and The study made use of a wide variety of evidence. A
busways. Both United States and Canadian ex- major (effort wa!; devoted to the assembly of
periences were included in the study, covering available literature on the impacts of actual rail
wholly new rapid transit systems and other major transit systems, including historical, descriptive,
improvements built during the past 25 years. Some analytical and policy sources. (The resulting exten-
European experiences were also described. sive bibliography is available both in the Final
Report ,and also as a separate document; see inside
The need for such a study was great. In recent years back cover.) Further information was sought
new or expanded rapid transit systems have been through site visits, interviews with local officials and
considered in an increasing number of metropolitan land developers, ilnd descriptive statistical data.
areas. Very high costs are involved in such
decisions, so those responsible must have the Most clf the stuidy’s attention was directed to
greatest possible assurance that the investment’s conventional rapild rail transit improvements, since
benefits are accurately predicted. The promotion of most new rapid transit investments have been of this
new or intensified land development has often been type. Study of coinmuter rail, light rail and busway
suggested as an important benefit of rapid transit, improvements was necessarily limited due to the few
but evidence to support or refute this has been examples available. The available light rail im-
fragmentary and inconclusive. Land use impact provements were particularly limited and also not
forecasting methods have been correspondingly representative of those now being planned or built in
weak. several cities.
With this lack of information and planning tools, All information W i l S combined into a series of city-
local planners and decision-makers face severe by-city evaluations, and submitted to all the persons
problems in trying to select an optimal transit interviewed in each city for their review. The final
alternative. Similarly, Federal authorities charged report, ,which combined these city-specific studies
with, responsibility for apportioning the limited with an analysis of their similarities and a derivation
funds for such transit improvements among cities of polic,y implications, was reviewed by an indepen-
find it almost impossible to evaluate and compare dent panel of leading transportation researchers.
different projects. Debate over land use impact These included David Boyce (University of Illinois),
continues, with extreme positions often taken.. William Garrison (University of California), and
According to some, a new rapid transit system will Vukan Vuchic (university of Pennsylvania).
almost automatically lead to a m ructuring of
the city, while others contend th t’s effect on
auto-dominated travel patterns is toosmall to have
any significant land use consequences.
3
Systems Studied
Rapid Rail:
Smaller Systems and Improvements
Philadelphia Lindenwold
Boston Red, Orange, and Blue Line
Extensions
Chicago Congress, Dan Ryan, Milwaukee
(Kennedy) Lines
Cleveland RTS
New York PATH, Crosstown Subway
Washington METRO (incomplete)
Commuter Rail
Toronto GO
Philadelphia Center City Commuter
Connection
Chicago General service improvements
Light Rail
Boston Green Line
Chicago Skokie Swift
Busway
Los Angeles El Monte Busway
Seattle Blue Streak Bus
Washington Shirley Highway Express
I Miami Blue Dash
4
Issues
Impacts of Different Types of Transit: Are land use impacts limited to conventional rapid
transit, or are other modes such as light rail,
commuter rail and buslbusway capable of such
effects:?
Role of Land Use Policy: What role do public land use policies, such as zoning
or tax incentive:;, play in this process either as a
cause or as a result?
6
such as the lack of consumer demand. Typical of Implications
such investments are the Malden Government
Center in that Boston suburb, the Federal It is clear that rapid transit improvementscan help to
government’s Social Security complex near BART’S induce increased d o w n t o w n develop ment ,
Richmond station, the Oakland Museum and Laney However, the presence of other supportive factors is
College at the same system’s Lake Merritt station, essential. Perhaps most important is the presence of
the Canadian government’s large office complex effective demand; if business centers throughout a
now being completed at Toronto’s York Mills metropolitan area are stagnating, there is little
station, and the convention center planned near reason, to expect that transit service to one of them
Metro Center in old downtown Washington, D.C. will generate development. In a period of slow or no
economic growth, little impact can be expected
Formal urban renewal activities coordinated with under the best of circumstances.
transit development have been an important aspect
of this public investment in several cases. Even The availability of land feasible for development is
without the construction of public facilities the an important factor which may easily be overlooked.
simplification of land assembly for private In particular, assembly of a viable site from,the
developers has in some instances led to redevelop- available parcels is crucial. Complexities of
ment, as in downtown Oakland. In others, such as ownership of surrounding land should be con-
Oakland’s Lake Merritt and downtown areas, the sidered a serialus detriment. This should be a
combination of publicly-assembled land and the consideration in the early stages of transit planning,
presence of new public buildings has proven particularly in the location of stations.
attractive to private developers. This is especially
significant since the areas involved were otherwise The location of other public facility investments
deteriorated and without significant development should be coordinated with transit improvements in
for many years. order ‘to encourage concentrated development. The
public sector’s awn need for offices and other high-
Similar efforts at public-private renewal activity density facilities is a form of leverage which could be
around transit stations have been attempted used inore in leasing as well as construction. The
elsewhere, notably Washington. Although develop- location of publicly-funded urban renewal projects
ment appears inevitable, a variety of forces in- is another. Development resulting from such coor-
cluding lack of economic demand and the general dination within the public sector should help to
unattractiveness of the specific areas involved have generate the confidence needed among private
restrained action by developers. developers to follow suit, particularly in marginal
Iocat io ns .
a
In Cleveland, much of the rapid transit line parallels of this incentive. Since the region‘s demand for such
a wide railroad switching area, substantial earth development was strong, much of it then had to
embankments and a heavy industrial corridor. occur around the station - where transit access
Development in these station areas is as yet nil, with provided an important added inducement. Thus
the main potential for activity resting in the station’s transit and land use policy were fully complemen-
parking lot air rights. tary.
Whether influenced most by neighborhood The views and knowledge of the land development
preferences nfrastructure capacity, or other forces; industry should also be incorporated into com-
the local government’s public land use policies prehimive urban planning as well as into transit
concerning the preferred or permissible forms of planning. -Early involvement of the developmfit
station-area development has in some cases been a perspective- in the transit system location process
particularly powerful determinant of what land use would ensure proper con, deration of a number of
impacts actually occur. In Toronto, allowance of key factors in land use impact which are n - ‘ now
very high densities of development (up‘to 12:l in commonly included. Someof these, as noted earlier,
floor area ratio) in many areas around transit include the ease of land assembly for redevelop-
stations provided a strong incentive to intensive ment, access to the site, cost of site preparation, and
development. The fact that relatively small and well- development potential of the immediate surroun-
defined areas were so designated, in contrast to the dings. Federal policy should s ongly encourage
low densities allowed throughout most of the rest of this use of knowledgeable land development exper-
the Metropolitan area, further enhanced the power tise wherever lend use impacts are sought.
9
Regional Growth
10
Impacts of Different Types of Transit
11
Role of Land Use Policy
12
improvements. In the Boston suburb of Quincy, objectives prior to consideration of rapid transit.
zoning was changed specifically to complement the This is typically done now in a general way through
transit system’s potential to induce more intensive adoption of comprehensive land use plans at the
development. In Washington, many of the com- regional level. However, greater specificity is
munities to be served have conducted studies of required. In too many of the cases reviewed, a rapid
METRO’Sland use impact potential and altered their transit system was built with its stations in
zoning in response. neighborhoods which were actually unwilling to
aIlow co mp Iement ary i nt ens if icat ion of deveI o p-
Not all of these transit-induced land use policy ment. The typical result is either underutilization of
changes have been complementary to transit. the station, serious station access problems, or
Downzoning has been mentioned for BART’S both. 1-0 avoid such misuse of the costly transit
Rockridge station, and has occurred elsewhere as resource, planning - both as a continuing com-
well. In fact, the power of zoning is most significant prehensive process and in the specific studies in
when it is used in ;this manner, since its effect is preparation for a major transit improvement -
absolute: development is forbidden, no matter how it should include ,assessments of the feasibility of
may be encouraged by other forces including land use intensification in thesmall, specific areas to
transit. This is asubstantial loss in potential regional be proposed for transit access.
development impact, and suggests that locations
likely to have such constraints should be avoided as Land use policies have often been instrumental in
transit station sites wherever possible if major new the generation or prevention of land use change
station-area development is a central objective. around transit stations. Policies regarding provision
of infrastructure (such as streets, sewerage and
Implications water), property taxation, and plan approval
procedures have had similar effects. These specific
The coordination of transit and land use should not policies should support overall urban development
be restricted to a one-time rapid transit development objectives; if for example a stated objective of
planning effort. If rapid transit is to be an effective focusing future development into subcenters is
policy instrument for shaping the city, its application contradicted by zoning regulations which allow
should be based on urban development objectives equally intensive development in many locations
which are themselves accepted policy and which are outside the subcenters, the objective is not likely to
compatible with rapid transit. Such objectives tend be met successfully.
to involve a focusing of development and inten-
sification of density near transit stations or in In most cases reviewed, the presence of a transit
corridors served by transit rather than a more station was not enough to attract a major share of
spreadout, lower density pattern. new developmeint when in competition with an
1.
It is conceivable that rapid transit planninglnight be
excess of other similarly zoned tocations. Federal
policy’ should urge the rationalization of land use
done specifically to prevent rather than enf,ouragea andaotlher local policies with transit-related land use
focusing of development. This could be elone fairly impact objectives as much as possible within legal
easily by locating the system to avoid colnplemen- constr,aints. At the very least, zoning and infrastruc-
tary factors and by blocking such effects VI a land use ture provision in most transit station areas should
policy, infrastructure limitations,. and c ther con- allow intensive development, and efforts to further
I
straints. In a few specific station areas thil; might be liberaliize zoning in other areas counter to growth-
reasonable. In general, however, it seems snrealistic focusing objectives should be denied as a matter of
to seek the benefits of rapid transit sei; ice for an consistent local policy.
area without also encouragimg the intensive nearby
development which complements the transit capaci-
ty with large numbers of potential patroiis.
Implications
A consistent set of factors is involved in the
generation of transit’s land use impacts. Once local urban development objectives are
These form an empirical model on which defined, supporting policies and programs - in-
predictions of impact may be based. cluding rapid transit - can be developed. These
should be focused on influencing the land
developers’ investment decisions. This study’s
results indicate that rapid transit can be used as one
Formal and informal theories abound regarding the factor to help shape land use patterns. This appears
relationship of land use and transportation. None is to be largely a process of influencing the location
of adequate scope, precision, and empirical and nature of development in a metropolitan area
relevance for practical use in the study of transit’s rather than its net amount. However, transit cannot
land use impact. From among these, this study has create desired land use patterns by itself if other
adopted the hypothesis that such impacts are powerful factors oppose it.
dependent on many non-transportation factors in
addition to the access, travel time and cost benefits Land use objectives are difficult to meet largely
of the transit improvement. Moreover, the study has because of all the diverse forces which influence
focused on the decision-making process of the land development. Federal policy must acknowledge
developer rather than the ultimate consumer. Thus these many forces and the need for their coordina-
the study has sought to identify the factors of tion. This is not an abstract goal; if land use, energy,
significance to the developer and the combinations and environmental objectives are to be met, it is a
of factors under which development is likely to practical necessity. Without coordination, urban
occur or not occur. development will continue to be essentially un-
planned and the land use impacts sought from
As described earlier, recent experience with transit’s transit improvements w i II sddom be real ized.
apparent land use impact was found toexhibit some
commun properties from city to city and case to Clearly the relative importance of each factor varies
case. Many of the same causal factors w d e found from one case to another. In general, however, the
again and again despite many differences in specific study’s findings indicate that none can be ignored,
conditions from one example to another. These for a serious deficiency in any one appears to be
recurring factors may be combined to suggest a capable of limiting or even preventing land use
general model of the land use impact process. impacts. Thus, all the factors should be made as
favorable as possible. In some cases this may
A diagrammatic view of such a model is shown on involve moving a proposed transit station to a more
the following page. Each major factor which was advantageous location; in others there may be a
found in this study to encourage land use change need to coordinate policies in land use, taxation,
following a transit improvement is shown with its urban renewal, and infrastructure with the transit
various components. The model illustrates clearly investment.
the scope of such factors in addition to the transit
improvement itself. With such an approach, various transit alternatives
can be evaluated on the basis of their ability to take
All these factors act to influence the developer of advantage of each of these factors and their
land, whose decisions are the immediate “causes” of consequent relative likelihood of land use impact.
land use impacts. As the model indicates, the Even more important, an understanding of the
developer is free to choose whether or not to invest workings of these factors permits the use of rapid
in a particular location. If these factors are not transit as an effective component in the continuing,
favorable in comparison with other choices, the integrated process of planning and guiding the
inveFtment will be made somewhere else. development of urban areas.
14
Public
Urban
Renewal
(Young
Assembly
Amendment)
AVAILABILITY OF
DEVELOPABLE LAND
I I
PHYSICAL
Public Access
Facilities Blight
Compatible
Land Uses Social
Crime
Social
Character
NEAREY LAND
INVES- MENTS 1
ATTRACTIVENESS
Development OF SITE FOR
DEVELOPMENT
01
COMMITMENT
TO SPECIFIC
IMPROVEMENT IMPLEMENl ATlON IMPACT
OF TRANSIT
IMPROVEMENT ACCESSIBILITY
r
REGIONS
Neighborhood DEM_AND FOR NEW
Att it udes DEVELOPMENT
L
’
with other
Public Piograms
Environmental
Impact Review
Equal
Opportunity
Conclusions
Clearly Federal policies such as those derived and implemented from day to day. Finally, there is no
presented here must not be so unrealistic at the local reason that the private land development perspec-
level as to be impossible to implement. There are tive could not now be incorporated into public land
real limitations to the immediate success of even use and transportation planning.
these modest proposals. The fragmentation of local
authority in most cities, the ever-present conflicts These implications must be used with great care in
among jurisdictions and the differences in the the making of Federal policy toward support of local
priorities of their constituencies, natural though initiatives in urban development and transit im-
they are, loom large as frustrations in the achieve- provement. The Federal government already places
ment of meaningful regional objectives and en- many requirements on local authorities seeking
forceable, consistent policies. In the face of these financial aid for such initiatives; this study’s results
realities, the Federal government’s policies must be should not be interpreted simply as a call for more
realistic. difficult, slow and costly analyses prior to a Federal
commitment. There are other ways to encourage the
The thrust of the policy implications which have needed attention to land use impact. For example,
been presented here is straightforward: The Federal the recommended transit station site analyses can
government should use its influence to encourage be done in stages as projects are planned and
every possible means of local coordination of the implemented, beginning with a screening of general
factors which this study has found necessary to locations and a review of other factors such as local
achieve desired land use impacts from major transit policy during initial alternatives analyses. More
improvements. Complete control over these factors precise site selection studies and initial local policy
is not a possibility nor is it ever likely to be in this coordination could be made during preliminary
society - nor should it. But much can be done now to engineering, after an initial Federal commitment.
improve the chances of achieving desired land use Demonstration of previously-promised progress in
impacts - where they are desired - simply by local land use-transit policy coordination could be
stressing the early identification of situations in made a condition of initial and continued construc-
which the needed factors are favorable or not. tion funding, based on periodic review. In this way
Beyond this, local policies in fields such as land use the implications of this study could be implemented
and infrastructure can be better coordinated with without delaying implementation of the transit
transit planning, at least by realizing and avoiding system.
further inconsistencies as policies evolve and are
16
. /
NOTICE
I
Knighi. R. L. and L. L. Trygg. Land Use Impacts of Rapid Transit: Implications of Recent
Experience. Final Report, DOT-OS-60181. Washington. D.C.: US. Government Printing
Office! 1977.
Trygg, L. L. and Sgourakis, A. Land Use Impacts of Rapid Transit, Bibliography No. 1377.
Monticello, Illinois: Council of Planning Librarians, 1977.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
POSTAGE AND F E E S P A I D
Washington, D.C. 20590 DEPARTMENT O F
TRANSPORTATION
OWcial Business
DOT 518
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300