Over the past two decades a growing number of communities have married light rail transit (LRT) and transit-oriented development (TOD) as part of an integrated strategy to revitalize American cities. Along the way LRT has evolved to become both a people-moving and a community-building strategy. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has come to recognize that link in elevating land use as an important consideration for New Starts recommendations. With the competition for federal funding at an all time high, land use can make a difference in which projects are recommended for federal funding. Yet transit-adjacent, not transit-oriented, development remains the norm in most communities. Capturing the opportunities and benefits of TOD has important implications for the planning, design, and implementation of LRT systems. The essential elements of a successful integrated LRT and TOD strategy--designing development-oriented transit and achieving supportive public policy--are examined along with the underlying market forces helping to drive a growing demand for transit-friendly compact, urban living. There is a wide diversity of TOD implementation approaches and agencies in a lead role across the country. A snapshot is provided of TOD implementation experience in Dallas, Texas; Portland, Oregon; Denver, Colorado; and San Jose and San Diego, California. Finally, communities interested in pursuing an integrated LRT and TOD strategy are offered five lessons learned and ten steps to success in planning for LRT and TOD. Over the past two decades a growing number of communities have pursued LRT and TOD as part of an integrated transportation and land use strategy to help revitalize American cities. This paper looks at the progress and implications of that journey for the planning, design, funding, and implementation of new LRT systems. The first wave of LRT systems was justified largely on conventional measures--ridership, efficiency, and energy savings. Broader community measures such as economic development and land use were not allowed as a consideration in the federal funding. To the consternation of many in the transit industry, the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) argued that those "secondary benefits" of transit were "captured in the single roll-up measure" of cost effectiveness. Times have changed. UMTA has become FTA, and the New Starts evaluation process has taken on a new character. Where it was once off the table, FTA now gives special consideration to land use in their New Starts evaluation. Subsequent generations of cities interested in implementing LRT systems have learned from the experience of early systems like Portland, Oregon, and San Diego, California. LRT in combination with land use planning can be a powerful tool to help shape growth. Land use is now playing an increasingly important role in local and federal decision-making for new LRT investments.
[1]
P. Calthorpe.
The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream
,
1993
.
[2]
R. Cervero,et al.
Transit villages for the 21st century
,
1996
.
[3]
G B Arrington,et al.
REINVENTING THE AMERICAN DREAM OF A LIVABLE COMMUNITY: LIGHT RAIL AND SMART GROWTH IN PORTLAND
,
2000
.
[4]
T Porter-O'Grady,et al.
Building a community
,
2002,
IEEE Des. Test Comput..
[5]
D Scott Hellewell.
NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN LIGHT RAIL.
,
1994
.
[6]
Robert Cervero,et al.
TRANSIT-BASED HOUSING IN CALIFORNIA: EVIDENCE ON RIDERSHIP IMPACTS
,
1994
.
[7]
Michael Duncan,et al.
Transit’s Value-Added Effects: Light and Commuter Rail Services and Commercial Land Values
,
2002
.
[8]
R. Cervero.
Rail Transit and Joint Development: Land Market Impacts in Washington, D.C. and Atlanta
,
1994
.
[9]
Robert T Dunphy,et al.
TRANSIT SPARKS REDEVELOPMENT IN ST. LOUIS AND CHICAGO.
,
1996
.