Preserving Affordable Housing Near Transit

In a recent report, my day job with the National Housing Trust looked at the number of expiring section 8 and 202 units near fixed guideway transit stations in 8 cities. In these cities, 63% (65,000) of the units that are located within a half mile of the station will have their section 8 and section 202 housing contracts expire in 2012.

This is only eight cities with rail transit but when you think about the mobility that transit allows for people who already have a hard time, it's an even bigger deal when it disappears. A recent Center for Housing Policy report found that low and moderate income families spend as much or more on transportation than they spend on housing. So you can see why it would be important to preserve housing such as this near transit stations in order to give folks more opportunities than they would have if they lived on the periphery. There should be a concerted effort to preserve these affordable units near transit.

So imagine my hope rising when the MacAurthur Foundation along with Enterprise Community Partners pledged $3.5 million dollars to fund new and preserve affordable housing units in the Denver region near transit corridors.

ULC — a nonprofit group affiliated with the Denver Foundation that buys, preserves and develops urban real estate — is expected to be the sole borrower of the fund, and will be responsible for buying property for the TOD housing and partnering with local companies for site redevelopment.

For the TOD housing project, the ULC will target three types of properties — existing, federally assisted rental housing; unsubsidized rental properties; and properties that currently are vacant or used for commercial purposes that have desirable locations for new affordable housing.

This is a way to get out in front of the market. If used intelligently, much of the money could be used for landbanking along future transit corridors then provided to affordable housing developers who could never get in on the market later on. I hope this is replicated in other cities soon.

Stealth Developer

There's an op-ed on Planetizen discussing the MTA in Los Angeles as a stealth development agency. I don't know if I would go that far. I think most people know they have eminent domain power and that they can redevelop property close to the stations but it's not as powerful as say the rail agencies in Hong Kong or Japan.

If any transportation agency was going to be a true development agency it would have even more power to land bank and develop properties than is currently allowed in the United States. In fact, this is how transportation worked during the streetcar era. Property was the main money maker rather than transportation, the transportation was the hook. But it created some great places such as the inner ring suburbs we now love. I would love to see transit agencies have more power to develop, but surely that won't happen because of property rights activism among other barriers.

Transit Hub Tax Credits

I forgot about this, but New Jersey has a program which they give tax credits to companies that locate near transit. To me this is a great idea, since it creates a situation where existing infrastructure is taken advantage of and people have an option as to how they get to work.

H +T Revisited

The place where Transit Oriented Development has thrived since the decision to build in a subway instead of down the center of a freeway is now the location of the most affordable option for living in DC.

The report, prepared in partnership with the Center for Housing Policy and the Center for Neighborhood Technology, measures combined housing and transportation costs for 22 areas within the DC region. Close-in Arlington County recorded the lowest combined costs, at 39 percent, while outlying areas such as Clarke County recorded the highest costs, at 58 percent.

One wonders what might have happened if the Orange Line had not been built as it was. With all the extra density, would all those people have moved further out to the suburbs? Would they be driving more? How much more energy would be expended? Yet I imagine if that line were considered today, it would not even come close to passing the cost effectiveness measure set in front of every transit project to trip it up. It shows what we should be trying to do. National metro subway plan anyone?

Grocery Store Proximity

So the last few times I went into the Bell Market on 24th street in Noe Valley I noticed the selection of items getting worse and worse each week. This was down from an already small selection of groceries due to the fact that it was rather small for a grocery store.

It is only a quarter mile from my house and the best part is that its a flat walk. Being so close, I would not worry about forgetting something because I could just run back and get it in no time without having to hop in my car. In fact, getting in my car would be the worst idea ever because I would spend more time looking for a place to park than walking there, shopping, and walking back home. Now I'll have to go either 1 mile North or South to the Safeways' located at both of those locations.

In any event, I just learned today that Bell Market was closing and would be replaced with a Whole Foods. I'm not really sure what I think about that. Whole Foods tends to be overpriced and will in all likelihood turn 24th street into a fun traffic jam on Saturday mornings (Not that it matters to me since I walk, but I'm sure others will complain). Some merchants have called for it to be turned into a parking lot, but in all actuality having WF as an anchor will bring more foot traffic to the other businesses on the street.

During the time period I have lived here, I noticed that one of my biggest trip generators is groceries. Work trips are the largest with trips to the grocery store the second largest and trips to hang out with friends third. It made me realize just how important grocery stores located close by are for my and more than likely everyone's transit oriented lifestyle.

TOD Still Going

Despite the downturn, developers in Dallas are still moving forward with development near transit. Though in Farmers branch took a few false starts after pulling property together.

Over the years, Farmers Branch has spent nearly $10 million to accumulate land and set up zoning for the roughly 144-acre station area. Of that, the city owns about 50 acres, about 18 of which are available for development.

McDougal Cos., which is also working with Irving on a development project, would buy the land from Farmers Branch.

And city officials say they believe that this, the third time, is the charm. Farmers Branch had memorandums of understanding with two previous developers for projects in the station area, but both fell through.

After 20 years of hoping, they might get their town center. And all it took was a transit connection.

Using What You Purchase

Looks like Norfolk Southern is going to be asking a bit more for the ROW between Virginia Beach and Norfolk. Half of it will be used for the existing light rail line. It would be pretty worthwhile to buy now though because it will only get more expensive.

Though I would hope that they don't use the whole thing, at least further east towards the beach. The closer the ROW gets to the beach, the closer it gets to a large Naval Air Station, which is likely not too great for mixed use development unless at some point it is shut down and the property is redeveloped. Close by however is a major shopping district that could be recast after its useful life as a new center for Virginia Beach. Currently it has a lot of parking spaces ripe for redevelopment. You can see the difference between the two probably paths below.

You can also see in the aerial below that there is a wide median for ROW. However such a large street could use a boulevard reconfiguration to calm traffic and create better pedestrian scale development.


The extension to Virginia Beach also seems like a good line from a job connection standpoint as well. Three miles from the end of the current line under construction and west of the Naval Air Station above is this job and entertainment center below called Virginia Beach Town Center.

The point however is that while this is a good line, they need to look long and hard into where it goes, and might want to think about how much the ROW is worth beyond the Naval Air Station. It's probably worth buying and keeping for the future because if the NAS is decommissioned, a rapid streetcar could connect the station with the beach and start and end at light rail stations as well as circulation. But it's something to look into.

Transfer of Development Rights

I've always thought this could be used for TOD, but never knew exactly how it would be implemented. In any event, Greater Greater Washington has a meaty post on TDR.

No Chump Change

If only we could link land use and transit better here in the United States. In Hong Kong and other places, development is part of the transit plan. Vancouver is about to hire some real estate folks to take care of its property development strategy.

TransLink intends to appoint a committee of local real estate experts to advise it on how best to make money developing land along future rapid transit corridors.

It's the latest wrinkle in TransLink's strategy to amass a major real estate portfolio in partnership with local developers that officials hope would generate at least $30 million a year and possibly much more.

Walk & Train

Ryan says:

It's easier to support a carbon tax if you have a grocery store within walking distance and can take the train to work.

Absolutely. I would likely be skeptical if I were living in Austin still and knew that I had to drive to get most places. Now that BART and the Grocery store are a half mile in each direction, I don't worry about it anymore. I fill up my car maybe once every month and a half, sometimes even longer. Think about if everyone was able to move from once a week to once every two months. More money for local business, more money for alternative energy and more money for housing near transit. Winners all around.

When Chickens and Eggs = Omelettes

Some want reversible carpool lanes, City Council members want light rail. This discussion ensues:

Regional transportation planners want to remake Foothill Drive to help carpools and express buses speed students and workers to and from the University of Utah. It's not enough for some Salt Lake City Council members, who heard the plan Tuesday but said they want light rail -- and not just up Foothill, but all the way to Park City. "Anything that encourages more cars is short-sighted and yesterday's planning," Councilman J.T. Martin said.
...
Martin and others said the plan focuses too much on moving cars through. Switching to light rail could help reshape land uses, leading to denser housing and new development east of the road, they said.

"What a wasted opportunity," Councilman Luke Garrott said of the Wasatch Front study. He agreed that the plan would cement the current landscape and promote cars instead of using light rail to reshape a major gateway to the city.

I don't know if I would say yesterday's planning, more like Highway Era. If we go back a little further, we did do it right. But semantics aside, he's got the right idea. But then here comes the study.

But in its study, the regional council dismissed light rail for the foreseeable future, partly because current land uses wouldn't support it, said Wasatch Front Deputy Director Doug Hattery.

So which is it? Will light rail shape the gateway or is the land use insufficient for light rail? In my experience it's both. If they put light rail there and hope for growth without any other interventions in land use or development policy, the train will end up being a worthless park and ride route to the city and university (Congrats Utes BTW).

But transportation decisions drive development policy as well. If there is no light rail, there is no reason to get away from business as usual in development. The organizing principle and parking reduction impetus is gone. Express buses and buses in general are land use serving. That is, they will follow the development instead of shaping it. I'm not sure if there is enough of a ridership base to support light rail in this corridor so don't count me committed to one opinion yet and I really don't like light rail in freeway medians, but if they design intelligently with the future in mind, or figure out a way to get what they want, they'll smartly come out of it with something better than business as usual, scrambled eggs and chicken soup.

Where's the Housing Action?

On the blue line in Charlotte.

Development in the Charlotte region has slowed for sure, but real estate analysts say persistent developers are still making things happen.

Look no farther than the Lynx Blue Line, where the Charlotte Apartment Report says 10 communities totaling nearly 3,000 apartments are in various stages of development along the tracks paralleling South Boulevard.

This along with similar reports in Phoenix and Denver has been telling us what everyone needs to hear. If you want a strong region, there needs to be a range of opportunities for people to live. I feel like part of the reason for this continued construction on housing near transit is not only that its strong in a storm, but rather there is a lot of catching up to do in order to provide the actual product that people want. The market is so saturated with the same dreck, the pendulum swing is going to be long and hard. I hope it goes far to the other side, but I'm not holding my breath.

Transit Can't Do All the Work

Just because a place has transit doesn't automatically mean it's going to turn into TOD. Case in point in Dallas at the Parker Road Station. Transit can shape growth if all of the players and policies are setting the scene for the market to drive growth, but if that isn't there, we can't expect transit to do all the work.

Friday Night Linkfest: Stimulus & Transit

Folks in Atlanta are looking at a massive transit program to build out their system called Concept 3, but how are they going to get $40 billion dollars?
~~~
Congressman Oberstar has our back. He wants to spend more on transit, and if the highway junkies don't like it, tough.
~~~
Ahem. Advocates are not split Boston Globe. We want transit, walking, and biking projects. There is no dichotomy of we have to build roads because they will create jobs and the other projects won't. That is complete and utter bs.
~~~
Tunnel lovers just won't give up (I wish there was a tunnel). Shouldn't this project have been built years ago? Get it started already!
~~~
The Cinci NAACP is opposing a streetcar project complaining about potholes in neighborhoods. Seems to me like they should be opposing all those suburban road projects. This is exactly how the Madison streetcar died, except that time, it was police coverage. The trade off shouldn't be transit or streets or police.

A Strong Market

Apparently there is still a market out there for condos near transit. In Phoenix, a developer next to the light rail line has just 10 units left and is planning to go for more. Like they say in the video, people want to have a drink and be able to walk home.

Illegal in Tulsa

During a planning session in Tulsa, many people played the usual game of looking at maps and discussing what they thought the future should look like. The problem? Most of what they wanted is illegal, meaning the zoning won't allow it.

"What we got out of that (the citywide workshops) is a pretty different view of Tulsa than the forecast we've seen for Tulsa," Fregonese said. "In fact, what was put on the maps is in many cases illegal; in fact, most of it is illegal, most of it is not permitted, let alone not planned for and not anticipated and not desired."

As Ryan mentions, in order to optimize these changes people want, we need to make the institutional changes to the zoning codes and planning that backs up our infrastructure spending.

Buildings of Yore

I don't know why but there's something just plainly attractive to me about these buildings in Louisville. After seeing them, and the lego buildings over at Greater Greater Washington, it made me wonder why its so hard to build like this anymore. I mean if you can do it with legos... Granted the lego buildings are a little bit over the top, but who could complain about density that looks so clean as that strip in Louisville.

Speaking of Louisville, its an interesting case. It's not a city I hear much about but Broken Sidewalk has brought it to life. The only other contact I've come in with Louisville was when I was looking over thier long range transit plan a few months ago. They have a robust plan, but thats all it is. A plan on a shelf. In fact, they must have taken out the maps that show the transit corridors because I can't find them now. "Waiting until funding is available." Here is another place that needs a bit of a push. If offered funding for a complete system through a better federal match, perhaps that would get the wheels rolling. Some places need a bigger push than others.

Ricky Williams' Urban Adventure

Apparently good urbanism is important to even sometimes NFL running backs.

via Transit in Utah

$1.8 Billion

That's how much the development along the Charlotte light rail line adds up to. No small, change, that's over 250% return on the initial investment of just under $500 million. That's just on the development and doesn't include these savings:

Morgan said new mixed-use transit-oriented development has sprung up along the line. There’s numerous anecdotes about lifestyle changes, he said, including downtown workers living in condos or apartments near rail stations who have sold their cars and avoided insurance, gas and other costs while getting transit subsidies from their employers.

Pent Up Demand, Synergy, & The Market

Chris Leinberger is hopping on the urban train so to speak. Brad Plummer's post over at TNR's The Vine has already gotten some coverage at Greater Greater Washington and The Bellows but here's the money quote that discusses the lacking supply of walkable communities people want but can't afford.

By his count, some 30 to 50 percent of residents in U.S. metropolitan areas want to live in a walkable urban environment—a trend fueled by the growing number of single and childless couples, who will constitute 88 percent of household growth through 2040. Trouble is, he estimates there are currently only enough walkable neighborhoods to satisfy about 5 to 10 percent of metro residents, which is why rents in transit-accessible areas are so exorbitant.

The other side of this as both blog posts noted above is the issue of land use and zoning. I'm going to throw another wrench in and say there has to be a market. There have been a few rail projects that hope the build it and they will come system will work but there needs to be a concerted effort and existing market to make it work precisely because of the problems with our zoning code. An example of this is Cascade Station in Portland. On the way to the airport, the Bechtel company traded building the line for the land at the station. Unfortunately 911 hit a few days close to the opening of the line and the market dropped out from under the developers.

There's also the synergy issue. Places like the Pearl District and the South End in Charlotte were the next places to grow and close to the downtown urban market. I would say the transit was able to shape the development intensity. Further down the South Corridor has been a bit slower to take off. Over time as the prime properties are expanded, I expect the development to move further south along the line.

So while I see there is demand for walkable urbanism as Chris calls it, there are timelines of implementation that should be mentioned as well so that people don't expect overnight change. The Rosslyn Ballston corridor didn't take off over night either. I feel like the synergy point is an important one that gets missed from time to time when people expect TOD everywhere once the line opens. It's a long term investment with long term results. It will be interesting to see what happens in Denver as the opening of the whole transit system almost at once under the Fastracks program. I have heard some state that the push and focus that happened along the Southeast Corridor won't be replicated because the demand will be spread out among all the opening stations. It makes for an interesting test of the synergy idea and whether transit will be able to focus the intensity as it has in other corridors that had all the attention.

On the issue of paying for lines, I think developers will get a major boost from the infrastructure investment and should pitch in, or at least not be able to keep the massive windfalls from the investment that was made by everyone. But its also dependent more on vacant and extremely underutilized property appreciation. More money will be generated through vacant to build out than the appreciation of properties that already exist. Too many people think value capture will always be the answer when sometimes it will not, because the increment is too small to generate the funding needed. These issues and a ton more are discussed in a recent paper on Value Capture by the Center for TOD. We'll discuss that piece another time.

Also, a while ago I covered some key quotes in Chris Leinberger's book, The Option of Urbanism. Here's the series post by post.

Series Intro
The Favored Quarter
The Endless Landscape
Real Development Subsidization
Metro Brings Change
Subsidizing the Rich