Increasing Job Densities an Appropriate TOD Strategy

It might seem like a duh moment, but Prof. Gary Barnes paper discusses in a paper he wrote for the Journal of Public Transportation that it's not just residential density that determines transit usage, but rather where people are going.

Using regression analysis, he showed that in Minneapolis, aside from developing residential densities, transit share can be increased by building up commercial centers. In the regression, he showed that for every 1000 people per square mile that the residential density grew, the increase in transit's share to downtown increased 2.4% versus .6% increase when people went to suburban jobs. The same thing happened for increases in low income users. For every 1% increase in low income population per square mile, increases were noted. The chart that shows the results is below.



He also relates the concentration of regional jobs in major centers directly to how much transit people take. An example from the article is below.


There are a few caveats including the need for quality transit and parking regulations in these centers that encourage transit ridership. But just having a center of commerce isn't good enough. Places that have a lot of jobs like Pleasanton need to be better organized and less suburban office park.

Recently however, many people have been focused really heavily on residential densities, which are important, but I haven't seen many programs that create a regional job placement and growth strategy. This could be part of the key for increasing transit's use for work trips.

I have a feeling as well that pushing for dense commercial centers with mixes of retail and office then connecting them with high capacity transit will go a long way towards increasing transit's ability to cut congestion in the peak hours. It might also be a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts, creating a cycle of more transit and more office development in the cores of a region.

I know that this is kind of a 'duh' post. But having numbers to quantify the effects of connecting residential areas to large employment centers is really important in moving forward with policies that promote transit ridership. Thanks Prof Barnes for this paper and for your conclusion:

Planners and policymakers hoping to manage urban traffic congestion through increased transit use are limited in the short term by the strong influence that existing land use exerts on mode choice. While this point has been widely acknowledged, most research and policy discussion on this topic has focused on increasing residential densities. However, the conclusion of this article is that the development and expansion of very large, high-density job centers is the best tool available for most cities to achieve substantial increases in transit use.

While there are many ways to improve transit use, achieving the substantial increases necessary to impact congestion levels will probably ultimately require greatly improved service frequency or higher costs of driving, such as parking charges. Higher parking charges will be politically infeasible in the absence of adequate transit service as an alternative; however, improved transit service is hard to justify in the absence of a sufficiently large market.

Creating a large market appears to reduce to two options: the well-known solution of increasing residential density and the less-considered option of focusing on the work end of the trip. While both of these tactics appear to be effective in principle as well as practice, it is, for a variety of reasons discussed in this article, very difficult to have impacts on residential density that are large enough to have regional significance.

The constraints that limit the use of residential density increases as a tool are not in force to nearly the same extent for commercial development. A gradual transition of a relatively small amount of office space from isolated or low-density settings into a few large dense centers could lead to sizable increases in regional transit use in a relatively short time.

The Twin Cities area illustrates the possibilities of this approach. There are two downtowns, but Minneapolis is much larger and is geographically in the center of the developed area. Downtown St. Paul is relatively small and close to the edge by comparison, yet still attracts a substantial transit share. This hints at the possibility that even suburban locations, if they are developed to a sufficient size and density, can become major transit attractors.

Increased densities at the work end of the trip, by making improved transit service frequency more viable, could also help to increase nonauto access to retail and other nonwork opportunities. While higher density residential development can also have an impact, the effect is much larger when the increased density occurs in or around high-density commercial areas, both because more trips will be made to these high-transit attractors and because these areas support relatively good transit service going out as well as coming in. Increased commercial densities, especially in the suburbs, may be the only tool available for inducing significant transit use from the vast suburban areas of most cities that are already developed at low densities, and which will probably stay that way forever.

Texas DMR Sets World Record

Holy cow! My guys, 3 of whom I used to help coach at Texas, set a World and American record in the Distance Medley Relay tonight in Fayetteville Arkansas. Man I'm proud of these guys. Way to go Kyle, Leo, and Jacob. You all are my heroes.

Stealing from the Transit Fund Again

I hope this doesn't keep happening every year. Apparently last years $1.3 B in transit money shifted to the general budget wasn't enough.

Transbay Blog | Rescue Muni

If you live here in California, call your rep and let them know this won't fly again.

Why Buy the Cow When You Get the Milk for Free

Dallas business leaders seem to love rail, but they don't want to pay for it. This is about investing in the future, so it annoys me when people complain about high taxes when it would directly benefit them to pool resources. People are complaining about their mobility and traffic, but if they aren't willing to pay for a change, where is it going to come from? All of this emphasis on tolls and private company operation is just a way to shift taxes to make a small group of people money, not about solving problems or serving the taxpayers.

But many of those ideas are already being explored by the transit systems, and won't produce the nearly $200 million a year it would cost to operate the expanded rail network, proponents said Thursday. "This is not a plan to build out the rail system by 2025," said DART board member Mark Enoch, referring to the position paper distributed by Mr. Ritter. "It's a plan for how to avoid raising the sales tax rate." Voters want rail more than they want lower costs for businesses, and that is a fight they may have to take to the Legislature again, Mr. Enoch said.

Lance Armstrong to Open Commuter Bike Shop in Austin

News from my third home of Austin. What a great push for commuting by bike. If only other transit modes had such a well known and authoritative ally. From the Austin American Statesman:

It's not about the bike sales. That from Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong, who plans in May to open a bike shop, commuting center, training facility and cafe in a 1950s-era building at the northwest corner of Fourth and Nueces streets.

"This city is exploding downtown. Are all these people in high rises going to drive everywhere? We have to promote (bike) commuting," Armstrong said Wednesday, gazing up at the towering 360 condos rising next to the site of his new shop. "This can be a hub for that." Mellow Johnny's, named for the nickname Armstrong earned while wearing the Tour de France leader's "maillot jaune," or yellow jersey, will be housed in a yellow- and red-brick building next to the music venue La Zona Rosa. It is a block north of the Lance Armstrong Bikeway, a path that will cut east-west through downtown Austin.

...

Armstrong predicted that Mellow Johnny's will be "the coolest bike shop in the world," but said he's not trying to put any other Austin bike shop out of business. "It's not us versus them," he said. "We're all about the cycling culture."

I'm glad that they believe in the bike community of Austin as well and acknowledge there are other bike shops in Austin that are awesome. Here's a plug for my boys Jack & Adam and their shop, a part of that community.

Free Rides

Lots of talk about fare free transit lately...

Muni says it would be too popular, so they probably won't do it.

Bill King, the former Mayor of Kemah, a city outside of Houston says perhaps Houston should try. Rad Salee at the Chronicle says, perhaps its a bad idea.

There has also been much talk about the Kheel plan in New York City also, taking money from congestion pricing to pay for free transit.

What's your take?

Utah - Prison - TOD

Which one of these is not like the other one? Draper City Council (Outside Salt Lake City) decided to move a prison. The reason? The land at the end of the line where a prison sits was getting valuable. Double bonus, the Draper Trax line ending there.

Salt Lake City-based Realtor Tom Cook, of Commerce CRG, agrees that the land may have grown more valuable. Depending on the zoning and amount of commercial space, the 673 acres the prison sits on could be worth $4-$5 per square foot, he said. The 2005 study found the land to be worth $2.50 per square foot.

Cook is currently working with a client developing land immediately adjacent to the prison site and said that land, zoned for commercial use, is priced in the double digits per square foot.

However, Draper could have trouble brining in additional commercial developments unless additional housing is built, Cook said. Housing built on prison land would increase the area's population and make big-box retail more feasible, he added.

...

The Draper and county resolutions contain clauses that suggest the site could be used for state university facilities or research-based centers. The resolutions also mention the possibility of mixed-use development and recommend a commuter rail line be planned to stop in the area. A sentence recommending using 100 acres of the land, perhaps for a state sports complex, was added to the Draper city resolution at the last minute.

A light-rail line to end at the point of the mountain — where the prison sits — is already planned.

I sure hope they don't build a bunch of big box stores at the end of the line. I do like the idea of University or research institutions. But the future will show what comes out of this situation.

Any Type of Rubber Tire Can Go on Concrete

I know I give BRT a hard time here. I've been trying really hard to see how BRT works and know that if done right, BRT can be a very effective tool. Cleveland seems to be proving that an investment in true BRT with its own lanes can be very powerful. $4.3 Billion dollars has been invested on the Euclid corridor in Cleveland. Plain Dealer:

One big reason for the energy is the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority's $200 million Euclid Corridor project, which is reshaping Euclid Avenue around a bus rapid transit line. Pundits have long derided the project, funded primarily by federal money, as a boondoggle. Media coverage has focused primarily on businesses that failed during construction, along with the hassle of negotiating a sea of orange traffic cones.

The mortgage-foreclosure crisis, which has left as many as 12,000 homes vacant in Cleveland neighborhoods, has also obscured the impending rebirth of Euclid Avenue. But the developers say they see what's coming. With the RTA project due for a ribbon-cutting in October, they're rushing to renovate empty buildings and buy vacant lots.

But in the back of my mind I'm always worried about the folks who are pushing the technology as an alternative to rail on corridors that need a higher capacity mode. A lot of these folks just want to stall the process or just don't like transit at all. They even complain that higher density development will result. Oh the horror! From the Washington Post:

Cuccinelli, Marshall and other state leaders, including Virginia House of Delegates Speaker William J. Howell (R-Stafford), acknowledge that they are in the minority. But they have long criticized the rail line to Dulles. Its costly, four-station diversion through Tysons Corner, they say, is more about helping developers reap the profits of high-density development than about moving people to the airport. Its dependence on revenue from the Dulles Toll Road to cover a huge chunk of construction costs would put the burden of any future cost escalations on commuters.
...

Howell and other critics of the project believe the solution for the Dulles corridor is in a type of service known as bus rapid transit, an express bus service with dedicated lanes and stations, allowing commuters to move as quickly as they would on a rail line without getting stuck in traffic.

This type of bus service was ruled out by local officials and business leaders because of the difficulty of building dedicated lanes through Tysons Corner and because of the increased number of riders that a true rail line would draw. But it is so much cheaper that it should be revisited, boosters say.

But here is where the wheels on the bus come off for me. Officials in Miami Dade County are discussing the possibility of expanding the South Busway to four lanes to allow for carpoolers and HOT lanes. This is the dream of every road warrior that wants to build a busway instead of a rail line. The idea that they can co-opt the line for cars is always in the back of their minds. While this is not the thought of well intentioned Mayors like Jaime Lerner of Curitiba and Enrique Penalosa of Bogota, it is the thought of many in the United States including Florida County Commissioners. From the Miami Herald:

Imagine widening the Busway from two lanes to four and giving buses and carpoolers with at least three passengers a free ride. Then sell the excess capacity to solo drivers willing to ''buy'' their way out of congestion with a variably priced toll that would rise when lanes are crowded and drop when they aren't.

Instead of encountering dozens of incredibly looooooong lights at the busy cross streets on today's Busway, imagine flying over all the major intersections as the government guarantees a reliable 50-mph journey from Dadeland to Florida City or the turnpike interchange near Southwest 112th Avenue. It may sound pie-in-the-sky today, but that pie could be baking in the near future.

At the urging of County Commissioner Dennis Moss, the Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority are jointly studying ways to bring ''managed lanes'' to the Busway. ''It's the most exciting thing I've worked on in quite a while,'' MPO planner Larry Foutz said.

BRT is built on roads. Cars go on roads. So therefore...

Transfer and Land Taxes for Transit

After getting more funding from the legislature for transit, Chicago went after a real estate transfer tax, which was highly opposed by who else but the real estate lobby. Well Mayor Daley held aldermen's feet to the fire and they eventually voted yes. Thanks to CTA Tattler for the coverage. More here from the Chicago Tribune.

What is interesting is that I've been hearing more about the transfer tax and land taxes lately. While the transfer tax is basically a mechanism that taxes the transfer of property, a land tax would be a tax on the land for transit, not the buildings or improvements. It makes a lot of sense for transportation given that accessibility is one of the factors which improves land values. I was also shocked to read something that made a lot of sense from the Heartland Foundation (A conservative think tank home to our favorite Wendell Cox) on using a land tax for transit.

Only part of transit's benefit goes to those who pay fares. The whole community benefits from transit. Where do those benefits show up in the economy?

As dozens of studies across the globe have shown, the benefits of transit show up as increased land values. Land served by public transportation is worth more than land not served. The amount varies, of course, depending on the quality of service, type of development, general standard of living, etc., but the effect is large.

A study published in 1997 for RTA, "The Effect of CTA and Metra Stations on Residential Property Values," by Gruen Gruen & Associates, implies that just the existing rail system adds land value in excess of $1.6 billion a year.

I'm wondering also if a land tax would be enough to pay for improvements on a specific line. So if improvements were made such as a light rail line, would the increase in revenue from a land tax in the area around the improvement be enough to offset the investment over time? It's certainly an idea worth exploring.

West Corridor Could Be in Trouble

I wrote a post previously about the takings issue in Denver. It looks like things are getting a bit heated and the line could be in trouble if it loses its ability to build parking garages. These folks think that parking garages aren't part of building the line, but the FTA thinks otherwise and without them, the ridership models drop and the Cost-Effectiveness measure kicks the Full Funding Grant Agreement out.

House Bill 1278 would allow RTD to acquire property by eminent domain only for "public transit purposes." Under the bill, RTD could not take land for park-n-Rides or retail or residential development near train stations. Rep. Frank McNulty, R-Highlands Ranch, a House sponsor of the bill, said legislators introduced it because "of significant concerns about the misuse" of eminent domain by RTD.

An RTD plan to acquire properties at Wadsworth Boulevard and West 14th Avenue in Lakewood has galvanized landowner opposition to the agency's power of eminent domain. If RTD can't acquire land for parking, FasTracks cannot proceed, said RTD general manager Cal Marsella.

Hopefully this gets worked out, but the way things have been going recently I'm cautiously optimistic.