Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Transit-oriented development

Transit-oriented development (TOD) is an urban planning strategy that concentrates high-density, mixed-use residential, commercial, and recreational spaces within approximately one-half mile of high-quality public transit stations to facilitate pedestrian access and encourage reduced automobile dependence.^[1]^[2] The approach emphasizes walkable streetscapes, integrated land uses, and connectivity to transit infrastructure, aiming to create vibrant, efficient communities that support economic activity and limit urban sprawl.^[3]^[4] Coined by architect and planner Peter Calthorpe in 1993, TOD draws from earlier new urbanist principles and has been adopted in policies worldwide to address traffic congestion and housing needs.^[5]^[6] Empirical studies show TOD implementations can lower car ownership and vehicle kilometers traveled, particularly in areas with strong transit service, as evidenced by reduced driving in case studies like Subiaco, Australia.^[7]^[8] However, outcomes vary, with density and walkability often driving behavioral shifts more than transit proximity alone, and successes in places like Arlington, Virginia, demonstrating sustained economic growth without proportional traffic increases.^[9]^[10] Critics highlight risks of gentrification, where influxes of higher-income residents raise property values and displace lower-income households, as documented in systematic reviews of transit investments.^[11]^[12]

Conceptual Foundations

Definition and Objectives

Transit-oriented development (TOD) is defined as a mixed-use community within an average walking distance of approximately 600 meters (2,000 feet) from a major transit stop, typically rail-based, that integrates housing, jobs, and services to promote residents' and workers' commercial needs while reducing reliance on automobiles.^[13] The concept was originated by urban planner Peter Calthorpe in his 1993 book The Next American Metropolis, emphasizing regional transit integration and neighborhood walkability to create compact urban forms supportive of public transportation.^[14] The primary objectives of TOD include fostering walkable environments that encourage short-distance travel on foot or by transit for daily activities, thereby aiming to shift travel modes from private vehicles to public transit.^[15] Empirical studies indicate that such proximity to transit stations correlates with higher ridership, with potential highest within one-third mile (about 500 meters) of stations, supporting land use efficiency by concentrating development where infrastructure can handle increased density without proportional road expansions.^[16] This mode shift is intended to lower greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, though research attributes part of the observed ridership gains to residential self-selection—individuals predisposed to transit use choosing TOD locations—rather than solely causal effects of the built environment.^[17] TOD distinguishes itself from transit-adjacent development (TAD), which involves construction near transit but lacks intentional design for connectivity, mixed uses, and pedestrian prioritization; TAD may incidentally benefit from proximity but does not actively shape land uses to reinforce transit viability, forming a spectrum where true TOD requires integrated planning to achieve its objectives.^[18]

Key Principles and Characteristics

Transit-oriented development incorporates mixed land uses to integrate housing, employment, retail, and services within a compact area, enabling residents and workers to access daily needs without relying on automobiles. This principle derives from urban economics, where spatial proximity reduces average trip distances and supports efficient public transit operations by generating sufficient ridership volumes.^[19]^[20] Central to TOD is achieving high densities around transit nodes, with residential development typically requiring at least 15-30 dwelling units per acre and employment densities of 50 or more jobs per acre in core areas to ensure economic viability of fixed-route systems. These thresholds stem from transport engineering analyses showing that lower densities fail to produce the passenger throughput needed for cost-effective service frequencies. Pedestrian and cycling connectivity is prioritized through safe, direct paths, wide sidewalks, and bike lanes linking stations to surrounding uses, fostering shorter, non-motorized trips.^[21]^[22]^[20] Key characteristics include station precinct planning, which concentrates growth within a half-mile radius of transit stops to leverage existing infrastructure and capture value from accessibility premiums. Reduced parking ratios, often achieved by eliminating or minimizing off-street requirements, discourage auto-centric behavior and free land for productive uses, as evidenced by studies demonstrating lower vehicle trip generation in such environments. Performance metrics emphasize jobs-housing balance, targeting ratios near 1:1 to causally shorten commutes and lower vehicle miles traveled, though empirical outcomes depend on local market dynamics. Compact layouts also limit impervious surfaces compared to sprawling suburbs, aiding stormwater infiltration without relying on unproven ecological benefits.^[23]^[24]^[19]

Theoretical Underpinnings

Transit-oriented development draws from the principles of New Urbanism, which emphasizes compact, pedestrian-friendly communities with mixed land uses to counteract automobile-dependent sprawl, and Smart Growth, which seeks to channel urban expansion toward infill and redevelopment sites proximate to existing infrastructure.^[25] These frameworks posit that aligning density with transit access harnesses network effects, wherein clustered activities amplify mutual accessibility and economic interactions without necessitating proportional increases in private vehicle infrastructure.^[26] Economically, TOD aligns with agglomeration theories, where spatial concentration of firms and workers yields productivity gains through mechanisms such as labor market pooling, shared inputs, and knowledge spillovers, as articulated in urban economics literature.^[27] Transit hubs facilitate these benefits by lowering generalized transport costs, thereby elevating land values at nodes and creating opportunities for value capture to recoup public investments, grounded in causal links between connectivity improvements and localized economic multipliers.^[28] However, this presupposes that density inducements do not merely relocate but enhance overall activity concentrations. Critiques rooted in causal realism highlight induced demand dynamics, wherein enhanced transit and accessibility generate additional travel across modes, potentially eroding anticipated reductions in congestion or emissions if not offset by stringent parking restrictions or pricing.^[29] Theoretical tensions arise with market-oriented perspectives, which view urban density as emerging from spontaneous order in land markets—driven by decentralized price signals and individual choices—rather than prescriptive planning, arguing that imposed densities risk misallocating resources by overriding emergent patterns shaped by heterogeneous preferences.^[30] Such views, informed by Hayekian insights, caution that planned interventions may suppress adaptive efficiencies observable in unregulated urban evolutions.^[31]

Historical Evolution

Origins in Early Urban Planning

The development of compact, transit-accessible settlements in the 19th century predated formal transit-oriented planning, emerging organically from railway expansions that enabled suburban growth while preserving walkable densities due to the limited reach of horse-drawn and early steam transport. In London, the rapid proliferation of commuter railways from the 1830s onward spurred laissez-faire suburbia, with stations serving as natural nodes for mixed residential and commercial clusters within walking distance, as developers capitalized on land value uplift without regulatory mandates.^[32]^[33] Similarly, in the United States, the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad facilitated the 1868 design of Riverside, Illinois, by Frederick Law Olmsted, recognized as the nation's first planned suburb, where curvilinear streets and green spaces converged on a central rail depot, fostering moderate-density housing oriented toward daily commutes to the city center.^[34]^[35] By the late 19th century, electric streetcars revolutionized urban form in American cities, replacing slower horsecars and extending viable commuting radii to several miles while incentivizing linear development patterns along tracks, with small-lot homes, shops, and amenities clustered at stops to minimize walking. Horse railways had appeared by the 1850s, but electrification from the 1880s—peaking with over 15,000 miles of track nationwide by 1910—drove the creation of "streetcar suburbs" in places like Philadelphia and Boston, where market forces produced mixed-use nodes without zoning separations, as residents relied on fixed routes for access to employment hubs.^[36]^[37] This era's patterns persisted because automobiles remained novelties—Henry Ford's Model T debuted in 1908, but registrations stayed below 20% of households until the 1920s—causally linking transit infrastructure to localized density amid technological constraints on personal mobility.^[38] Ebenezer Howard's 1898 garden city concept marked an early intentional shift toward transit-integrated planning, proposing self-contained communities of 32,000 residents ringed by greenbelts and linked via radial rail corridors to form polycentric "social cities," aiming to decongest industrial cores while embedding efficient public transport. Implemented first at Letchworth (1903) and Welwyn Garden City (1920), these emphasized radial transit spines for inter-city connectivity, blending rural amenities with urban functions in a deliberate precursor to modern TOD, though reliant on private rail operators rather than policy compulsion.^[39]^[40] Such developments contrasted with emerging automobile-era sprawl, as pre-1920s single-use zoning—first enacted in New York City in 1916—began eroding transit-induced compactness by prioritizing low-density separation.^[36]

Mid-20th Century Developments

In the decades following World War II, U.S. cities underwent extensive suburbanization driven by the Interstate Highway System, established under the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, which prioritized automobile access and single-family housing sprawl over public transit. This shift exacerbated the decline of urban rail systems, many of which faced deferred maintenance and abandonment; for instance, streetcar networks in over 40 cities were dismantled between 1945 and 1965 due to rising operational costs and competition from subsidized highways, leading to a 75% drop in total transit ridership from 1945 levels by 1970.^[41]^[42] Urban planners initially viewed highways as solutions to congestion, but by the late 1950s, emerging evidence of induced demand—where new roads generated additional traffic—began challenging this assumption, though policy responses lagged.^[43] The 1960s marked a turning point with widespread critiques of auto-centric planning, exemplified by Jane Jacobs' 1961 book The Death and Life of Great American Cities, which argued that highway-dominated urban renewal destroyed vibrant, walkable neighborhoods in favor of sterile, car-dependent environments. Jacobs and allied activists successfully opposed projects like New York City's Lower Manhattan Expressway, proposed in the early 1960s, helping to halt it by 1968 amid concerns over community disruption and economic inefficiency. Similar "freeway revolts" occurred nationwide, including in San Francisco where Embarcadero Freeway construction was blocked in 1959-1969, fostering a reevaluation of land-use policies that favored transit integration to preserve urban density and reduce reliance on private vehicles. These movements highlighted causal links between sprawl and rising pollution, with federal data showing urban smog episodes tripling in major cities from 1960 to 1970.^[44]^[45] By the 1970s and 1980s, declining transit viability—stemming from chronic underfunding and maintenance backlogs, such as New York City's subway system operating at only 65% on-time performance in the late 1970s—prompted initial experiments in coordinated land-use strategies. The Washington Metro, opening in 1976, exemplified this pivot; Arlington County's 1970s zoning reforms mandated mixed-use, high-density development within a quarter-mile of stations, resulting in office and residential growth that boosted ridership to over 100,000 daily by the 1980s without proportional highway expansions. This approach addressed deferred infrastructure needs by leveraging density to generate fare revenues, countering the fiscal crises that nearly bankrupted systems like the MTA in 1975.^[46]^[41] Such efforts laid groundwork for formalized concepts amid growing awareness of environmental costs, though widespread adoption remained limited until regulatory pressures intensified.^[47]

Contemporary Global Adoption

Transit-oriented development gained institutional momentum globally from the early 2000s, driven by escalating urbanization and climate mitigation imperatives that necessitated denser, transit-integrated urban forms to curb sprawl and emissions. By the 2010s, international bodies formalized TOD principles, with the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) releasing its TOD Standard in 2013—a framework assessing urban projects on density, diversity, design, distance to transit, and demand management—which received endorsements from UN-Habitat, GIZ, and ICLEI in 2014 to guide sustainable development in rapidly growing cities, particularly in the Global South.^[48]^[49] UN-Habitat's 2020-2023 Strategic Plan further embedded TOD by advocating compact, transit-oriented urbanism to reduce private vehicle reliance and greenhouse gas emissions, aligning with broader Sustainable Development Goals.^[50] In Asia, Japan intensified TOD integration post-2000 through railway-led urban projects, exemplified by expansions in areas like Shinagawa where station precinct developments combined high-density mixed-use with Shinkansen extensions, leveraging private rail operators' land-use control to sustain profitability amid suburban growth.^[51] European policies, while not always explicitly labeling TOD, advanced analogous compact-city strategies via the 2019 European Green Deal, which prioritized sustainable mobility and urban densification to achieve climate neutrality by 2050, indirectly fostering transit-hub clustering through investments in rail and public transport infrastructure.^[52] In the United States, federal backing accelerated in the 2010s via the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Pilot Program for TOD Planning, established under the 2012 MAP-21 legislation and expanded by the 2015 FAST Act, providing grants—totaling millions annually by the late 2010s—for local planning to integrate land use with transit, building on 1990s joint development precedents.^[53]^[54] Adoption remained uneven, constrained by local fiscal limitations, regulatory hurdles, and resistance to density increases, despite empirical evidence linking TOD to reduced per-capita transport emissions and efficient land use amid global urban population growth projected to reach 68% by 2050.^[55] Causal factors included policy responses to climate targets, such as emission reductions via modal shifts, but implementation faltered where upfront infrastructure costs outweighed value-capture benefits, highlighting the need for tailored financing amid varying municipal capacities.^[56]^[57]

Policy and Implementation Frameworks

Zoning and Regulatory Approaches

Transit-oriented development relies on zoning overlays or special districts superimposed on underlying land-use regulations to facilitate higher-density, mixed-use projects within approximately one-quarter to one-half mile of transit stations. These overlays typically permit elevated floor area ratios (FAR), often ranging from 2.0 to 6.0 or higher depending on proximity to stations, reduced setbacks, and allowances for vertical mixed-use structures combining residential, retail, and office spaces.^[58]^[59] Such provisions aim to concentrate development where transit infrastructure can absorb increased demand, thereby leveraging public investments in rail or bus rapid transit.^[60] Empirical analyses of TOD zoning implementations demonstrate that upzoning variances correlate with heightened development potential; for instance, case studies across U.S. transit corridors report residential density increases of 20 to 33% in rezoned areas compared to baseline zones, alongside shifts toward multifamily housing that boosts transit utilization.^[61] Regulatory adjustments often include lowered minimum parking ratios—sometimes to zero in core station areas—to disincentivize automobile dependency, though these must balance with provisions for accessible parking to avoid undue burdens on non-drivers.^[58] In practice, jurisdictions like Phoenix apply tiered TOD overlays with FAR bonuses scaling by distance from light rail, empirically tied to accelerated infill construction.^[62] Zoning for TOD entails trade-offs, such as relaxing height and bulk standards near stations to enable density while safeguarding single-family or low-density zones beyond the overlay boundary to preserve existing neighborhood stability and property values.^[63] This selective intensification internalizes transit's positive externalities—like diminished traffic congestion and localized economic activity—by reallocating development rights toward parcels best positioned to capture them, though it risks spillover effects such as shadow impacts or strain on adjacent infrastructure if not calibrated with traffic modeling.^[64]^[65] Form-based codes, increasingly integrated into TOD frameworks, prioritize urban design standards over rigid use separations, allowing flexible mixed uses but requiring empirical validation through site-specific impact assessments to ensure regulatory changes yield net societal benefits without eroding property rights excessively.^[60]^[58]

Financing and Value Capture Methods

Transit-oriented development projects face substantial upfront capital costs for transit infrastructure, often exceeding hundreds of millions of dollars per corridor, necessitating diverse financing strategies beyond traditional taxation.^[66] Value capture mechanisms aim to recoup a portion of the land value uplift generated by proximity to new or improved transit, which empirical analyses estimate at 20-30% increases in nearby property values depending on location and project scale.^[67] These methods include tax increment financing (TIF), where incremental property tax revenues above a baseline are dedicated to project debt service or improvements within a designated district, as implemented in Atlanta's BeltLine TAD districts to fund multi-billion-dollar rail and trail expansions.^[68] Special assessments impose one-time levies on benefiting properties to finance specific transit enhancements, while joint development allows public agencies to partner with private entities for air rights sales or leases over stations.^[69] Developer impact fees represent another targeted approach, charging new construction for its anticipated burden on transit capacity, with fees calibrated per unit or square footage to offset system expansions; for instance, some U.S. municipalities apply tiered fees favoring higher-density TOD to internalize growth costs without deterring investment.^[70] Public-private partnerships (PPPs) further enable value sharing, wherein developers finance station-area amenities or infrastructure in exchange for density bonuses or revenue streams from commercial leases, as seen in various U.S. transit agency collaborations that leverage private capital for up to 50% of site costs.^[71] Land value taxes (LVT) or betterment levies directly tax unearned increments in land values post-transit investment, theoretically aligning incentives by discouraging speculation and funding operations, though adoption remains limited outside select international contexts due to political resistance.^[72] Federal grants play a critical role in initiating TOD by covering planning and early capital phases, with the U.S. Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) pre-2024 Capital Investment Grants (CIG) program allocating billions annually to new fixed-guideway projects that catalyze adjacent development, such as light rail extensions.^[73] The FTA's Pilot Program for Transit-Oriented Development Planning, active since 2015 with awards like $2.5 million in FY2022 for multimodal station-area studies, supports feasibility assessments amid high initial outlays that value capture alone cannot immediately address.^[53] Despite these tools, studies indicate value capture typically recovers only 10-40% of total transit costs in practice, as uplift realization lags investment timelines and full monetization faces legal or market barriers, often requiring sustained public subsidies for operations and debt.^[74]^[75] This dependency underscores that while transit generates verifiable economic externalities, mechanisms to internalize them remain partial without complementary fiscal support.^[76]

Integration with Transit Infrastructure

Integration of transit-oriented development (TOD) with transit infrastructure emphasizes physical and operational linkages that facilitate seamless passenger flows from surrounding developments to transit vehicles. Station-area improvements often include enhanced pedestrian pathways, bicycle facilities, and real-time information systems to reduce barriers to access within a 800-meter radius of stations, promoting higher transit usage by minimizing walking times to under 10 minutes.^[77] Bus rapid transit (BRT) feeder lines connect peripheral developments to main corridors, providing dedicated lanes and signal priority to maintain speeds above 20 km/h, thereby extending effective catchment areas.^[78] Last-mile connectivity strategies, such as microtransit shuttles or e-bike docking stations, address gaps beyond fixed routes, with studies showing potential increases in transit mode share by up to 70% in compact station areas compared to suburban layouts.^[79] Success metrics for these integrations center on ridership thresholds that justify increased density and service levels, typically requiring residential densities exceeding 50 dwelling units per acre or employment densities over 25 jobs per acre to support headways of 5-10 minutes.^[80] Phased development approaches synchronize building timelines with transit expansions; for instance, initial low-density phases around new lines build ridership bases, enabling subsequent high-density infill as demand thresholds—often 20-30% mode share—are met, ensuring infrastructure scales with usage rather than preceding it.^[81] The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy's TOD Standard evaluates these linkages through 25 metrics, scoring projects on walkability, non-motorized access, and transit integration to quantify adherence, with gold-level certifications linked to observed ridership uplifts of 15-25% in assessed areas.^[82] Challenges arise from mismatches between development scale and transit capacity, where high-density projects outpace service improvements, leading to overcrowding or unreliable schedules that erode public confidence and result in underutilization rates exceeding 20% in poorly synced systems. Infrequent headways—beyond 15 minutes—discourage ridership in dense areas, as empirical models show threshold effects where density gains fail to boost station-to-station flows without corresponding frequency enhancements, often reverting users to private vehicles.^[83] Reliability issues, such as delays from mixed traffic or inadequate maintenance, compound these problems, with reviews indicating that without integrated signaling and dedicated rights-of-way, TOD investments yield suboptimal returns on transit usage.^[84]

Global Examples and Case Studies

North American Implementations

Arlington County, Virginia, represents a landmark case of transit-oriented development in the United States, centered on the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor along the Washington Metro's Orange Line. Starting in the 1970s, county officials pursued aggressive upzoning and mixed-use zoning reforms to concentrate high-density development within a quarter-mile of stations, transforming former low-rise commercial areas into vibrant urban nodes. This strategy yielded a 107% population increase in the corridor from 1990 to 2000, alongside office and residential growth that generated over $1 billion in annual tax revenue by the early 2000s. Transit mode share reached approximately 40% non-automobile trips, demonstrating how coordinated land-use planning can leverage existing rail infrastructure for walkable, transit-supportive communities.^[85]^[86]^[87] In Portland, Oregon, the streetcar system, launched in 2001, spurred significant private investment in mixed-use projects, with development within two blocks of the line totaling over $5 billion by 2015, including more than 10,000 housing units and 6 million square feet of commercial space. The regional Metro TOD Program, established in 1998, has allocated over $40 million in grants to support higher-density infill near light rail and streetcar stops, enabling the construction of 6,800 housing units while emphasizing sustainable design. Property values adjacent to the streetcar appreciated by up to 9% long-term, reflecting sustained demand but also highlighting dependencies on complementary public investments like infrastructure upgrades.^[88]^[89] Canadian implementations, such as around Vancouver's SkyTrain rapid transit network, have integrated provincial and regional policies to boost densities at stations, with Metro Vancouver's 2011 growth strategy designating commercial nodes for upzoning to floor area ratios exceeding 2.0 and heights up to 20 stories within 200 meters of stations. This has resulted in substantial residential and employment growth, such as in Surrey and Langley extensions, where integrated developments aim for 20,000+ units near new lines. However, rapid densification has exacerbated affordability challenges, with median home prices in TOD zones rising faster than regional averages, endangering low-income housing stocks despite mandates for density bonuses tied to affordable units under policies like Bill 47 enacted in 2023.^[90]^[91]^[92] Efforts in auto-dependent U.S. suburbs, including commuter rail stops in low-density exurbs, have frequently underperformed, failing to attract walk-up ridership or development without prior urban-scale reforms, as seen in systems where single-track lines limit frequencies and sprawl persists. The Federal Transit Administration's TOD Pilot Program, funding planning grants since 2015 with over $100 million awarded by 2023, has supported dozens of initiatives but revealed mixed outcomes, with successes tied to local upzoning victories amid resistance, while many pilots stalled due to entrenched single-family zoning and weak market signals in peripheral areas.^[16]^[93]^[53]

European Experiences

European transit-oriented development (TOD) frequently builds on established rail infrastructure in compact urban fabrics, facilitating denser integration of land uses around stations compared to automobile-centric legacies elsewhere. In the Netherlands, the Stedenbaan program in the Randstad Southwing region exemplifies regional TOD strategies, upgrading existing rail corridors to high-frequency services while coordinating spatial developments to concentrate housing and employment near stations, initiated around 2009 to enhance connectivity across multiple cities.^[94] In the Paris region, expansions of the RER network and complementary projects like the Grand Paris Express have driven TOD in edge-city areas, promoting compact, mixed-use growth within 800 meters of stations to leverage improved suburban rail access, with strategies emphasizing dense urban form to support regional mobility demands.^[95] Similarly, Dublin's Luas light rail system, operational since 2004, has induced moderate density increases along its corridors through zoning incentives, attracting residential and commercial builds that capitalize on tram proximity, though extensions remain phased amid funding constraints.^[96] Sweden's low-density contexts highlight retrofitting challenges for TOD, where efforts to intensify station areas in smaller city-regions face barriers such as municipal resistance to height limits and sparse settlement patterns that undermine walkability thresholds. Case studies in regions like western Sweden reveal enablers like coordinated planning but persistent hurdles in achieving viable densities without broader policy overrides.^[97] Empirical assessments indicate Europe's baseline transit modal shares—often 20-40% in major cities—bolster TOD economic feasibility by ensuring higher station catchment utilization, yet systems remain subsidy-dependent, with public funding covering deficits equivalent to 50-70% of operating costs in rail-heavy networks to maintain frequencies amid incomplete farebox recovery.^[98]

Asian and Developing World Cases

Hong Kong's Mass Transit Railway (MTR) Corporation exemplifies state-led integration of transit and property development through its Rail + Property (R+P) model, initiated in the 1980s, where the government grants development rights on land adjacent to stations to capture uplift in land values for funding rail extensions and operations.^[99] This approach, enabled by public land ownership, has financed over 50% of MTR's capital investments without direct subsidies, contrasting with market-reliant Western models by leveraging government control over leasehold land for seamless TOD implementation.^[100] In Taipei, the MRT system employs joint development agreements that capture value through transferable development rights, allowing up to twice the basic floor area ratio (FAR) around stations, which has supported sustainable financing amid rapid urbanization since the system's expansion in the 1990s.^[101] In developing contexts, Curitiba, Brazil, pioneered bus rapid transit (BRT) as a TOD analogue starting in 1974, with dedicated lanes and integrated land-use planning fostering high ridership of over 2.3 million daily passengers by concentrating mixed-use development along corridors, though scalability has proven challenging as replication in other cities often lacks equivalent institutional coordination and feeder network density.^[102]^[103] Jakarta's MRT Phase 1, operational since 2019, incorporates TOD principles at stations like Bundaran HI, promoting multimodal connectivity and density, yet uptake remains uneven with daily ridership averaging 100,000 passengers amid persistent issues in integrating informal feeders and last-mile access, highlighting scalability hurdles in high-density, low-income settings.^[104]^[105] Malaysia's KL Sentral, developed from 2001 as the nation's primary intermodal hub, integrates MRT, LRT, KTM, and high-speed rail within a 72-acre mixed-use precinct, driving economic activity through office, residential, and commercial nodes, but faces scalability limits from inadequate peripheral feeder systems that undermine broader network efficacy in sprawling urban peripheries.^[106]^[107] Across these cases, state-led land ownership facilitates value capture and integration more effectively than private-market approaches, yet in developing regions, failures often stem from underdeveloped secondary transit links, constraining TOD's expansion beyond core hubs.^[99]^[108]

Measured Impacts

Environmental Evidence

Transit-oriented development (TOD) has been associated with reductions in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through decreased reliance on automobiles. A 2025 policy brief by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) reviewed studies indicating that TOD residents generate approximately 39% less VMT compared to those in traditional auto-dependent (TAD) areas, driven by a 35% reduction in auto trips and higher use of sustainable modes like public transit and active transportation.^[109] Similarly, a modeling analysis estimated that TOD strategies could reduce GHG emissions and building life-cycle energy consumption by 9-25%, with potential overall GHG impacts lowered by up to 36% when integrated with efficient transit systems.^[110] These benefits stem from causal mechanisms such as higher residential densities near transit nodes, which shorten trip distances and elevate non-auto mode shares, though empirical outcomes vary by location-specific factors like transit frequency and regional sprawl patterns.^[111] However, these gains are partially offset by upfront construction emissions and embodied carbon in dense, mixed-use developments. Life-cycle assessments of TOD projects reveal that material-intensive building phases can generate significant initial CO2 equivalents, sometimes delaying net emission reductions for years until operational transport savings accumulate. Induced demand effects further complicate net impacts: while per-capita VMT declines, population influx into TOD areas can elevate total regional travel volumes, potentially eroding aggregate GHG cuts, particularly in corridors with suboptimal transit ridership or where new residents commute beyond the walkable zone. Empirical evidence on net GHG reductions remains mixed in lower-density or peripheral implementations, where transit underutilization limits mode-shift benefits and amplifies reliance on residual vehicle trips.^[112] TOD also yields stormwater management advantages through permeable surfaces, green infrastructure, and reduced impervious cover relative to sprawling alternatives. Integrated features like street trees and bioswales in TOD districts enhance infiltration, mitigating runoff and pollutant loads during storms, as demonstrated in urban planning toolkits emphasizing compact footprints. Air quality improvements from lowered vehicle exhaust are conditional on transit electrification; diesel or hybrid systems may sustain particulate and NOx emissions, whereas fully electric fleets amplify localized benefits by curbing tailpipe pollutants alongside VMT reductions.^[113]^[114] Overall, while TOD supports resource efficiency via modal shifts, its environmental efficacy hinges on complementary measures like low-carbon construction and high-capacity, zero-emission transit to realize causal reductions without unintended offsets.^[115]

Economic Evaluations

Econometric analyses of transit-oriented development (TOD) indicate modest property value premiums associated with proximity to transit stations, typically ranging from -7.4% to +9.6% according to a meta-analysis of rail impacts across global studies, with outcomes varying by factors such as rail type, transit frequency, local geography, and housing market characteristics.^[116] These uplifts reflect capitalized benefits of improved accessibility but are often smaller in suburban contexts, where TOD implementations yield neutral or minimal effects on surrounding home prices due to lower baseline densities and weaker agglomeration potential, as evidenced in case studies like Box Hill, Australia.^[117] In urban cores, premiums can support value capture for reinvestment, yet they do not uniformly translate to fiscal surpluses for public entities. TOD enhances job access by reducing commute times and facilitating denser employment clustering, potentially yielding agglomeration economies through better matching of workers to opportunities. However, causal econometric evidence, such as instrumental variable analyses of London's Jubilee Line Extension, reveals that metro investments increase employment by 6.6% within 750 meters of stations but decrease it by 1.6% in rings 750–2,000 meters away, resulting in no net regional growth—only localized displacement of economic activity from peripheral to central areas.^[118] Similar patterns in other studies suggest TOD may relocate low-value land uses without generating proportional expansions in overall productivity or GDP, as denser development substitutes for rather than supplements existing patterns.^[119] Fiscal returns from TOD remain challenged by high public infrastructure costs, with U.S. public transit operations generating fare revenues covering just 17.8% of expenses in fiscal year 2023 per Federal Transit Administration data, meaning subsidies exceed fare collections by a ratio exceeding 4:1 and often fail to yield positive net returns after accounting for capital outlays.^[120] While some local analyses project property tax revenue gains from uplifted values, broader econometric reviews find these insufficient to offset ongoing operational deficits, particularly in lower-density implementations where ridership and taxable activity gains are subdued.^[121] Pro-TOD projections from advocacy groups like the American Public Transportation Association claim GDP multipliers, but independent causal assessments prioritize displacement effects over expansive growth, underscoring limited net economic stimulus.^[122] Transit-oriented development has been associated with demographic shifts toward higher-income and more educated populations in station areas, as evidenced by U.S. Census data analyses from 1990 to 2010 showing increases in median household income and decreases in low-income shares in many TOD implementations.^[123] These changes reflect self-selection, where individuals preferring transit access move into such areas, leading to population influxes of younger professionals and families with dual incomes, though empirical reviews find limited evidence of widespread displacement of existing lower-income residents.^[124] Accessibility improvements from TOD enhance mobility for car-less households and aging populations, with surveys indicating higher public transit usage and out-of-home activities among older adults in dense, walkable station precincts compared to auto-oriented suburbs.^[125] For instance, studies in multiple-mode TOD environments show seniors gaining independence through proximity to varied transport options, reducing reliance on driving and correlating with sustained activity levels into later life.^[126] However, mode share benefits—such as elevated transit, walking, and cycling rates—are often more pronounced among new residents who self-select for these lifestyles, while existing populations exhibit mixed adoption unless affordability and reliability are prioritized.^[10] Higher walkability in TOD correlates with elevated subjective well-being, as measured by resident surveys linking pedestrian-friendly designs to reduced stress and improved life satisfaction through increased physical activity and social interactions.^[127] Equity outcomes remain mixed, with census-linked research revealing that while TOD boosts overall accessibility, low-income non-drivers may face persistent barriers if transit frequency or coverage proves unreliable, skewing net demographic gains toward those with higher socioeconomic resources.^[123]

Criticisms and Limitations

Gentrification and Equity Issues

A systematic review of 35 quantitative studies on transit-oriented development (TOD) found associations between TOD and gentrification indicators, such as rising property values, household incomes, and education levels in station areas, but weak evidence of net displacement of low-income residents through out-migration.^[11] Many of these studies, primarily from North American and European contexts, indicated that while socioeconomic upgrading occurs, actual displacement rates do not significantly exceed citywide averages, with local pre-existing conditions like poverty levels and policy environments playing larger roles than transit investments alone.^[128] Empirical analyses, including longitudinal data on evictions and mobility, further support that TOD rarely causes widespread involuntary displacement, challenging narratives of inevitable low-income exodus.^[129] Causally, TOD generates property value premiums—often 20-45% higher near rail stations—which incentivize affluent in-migration and subsequent rent increases, effectively excluding low-income households from benefiting even absent direct displacement.^[130] This exclusion arises from market dynamics where higher land values prioritize market-rate development, reducing affordable stock relative to demand; for instance, in U.S. cities like Portland and Atlanta, post-TOD rent growth outpaced non-TOD areas by 5-10% annually in early implementation phases.^[131] Mitigation policies like inclusionary zoning, which mandate affordable units in new projects, have shown limited success in TOD contexts, often suppressing overall housing production by 10-20% due to developer disincentives and increased costs passed to unsubsidized units.^[132] In California, reforms tightening inclusionary requirements led to diminishing returns in below-market-rate units while reducing total builds, highlighting tradeoffs where affordability gains are offset by supply constraints.^[133] In the Global South, TOD implementations have yielded equity benefits through enhanced transit access for low-income populations, as seen in Johannesburg's Corridors of Freedom initiative, where bus rapid transit corridors integrated with mixed-use nodes improved mobility for underserved townships starting in 2013.^[134] However, state-led land value capture for TOD financing carries risks of elite capture and corruption, particularly in contexts with weak governance, where public land allocations favor connected developers over broad-based affordability, as documented in Latin American cases like Bogotá's TransMilenio expansions.^[135] These dynamics underscore that while TOD can expand physical access, equitable outcomes depend on robust anti-corruption measures and decentralized implementation to prevent rents from low-income users funding disproportionate gains for higher-income groups.^[136]

Financial and Operational Challenges

The construction of transit infrastructure central to transit-oriented development (TOD) routinely faces severe cost overruns, exacerbating financial pressures on public entities. A statistical analysis of U.S. rail transit projects documented average overruns of 32.4% relative to initial alternatives analysis estimates and 7.3% relative to full funding grant agreement baselines, driven by factors including regulatory delays, labor costs, and scope changes.^[137] These escalations are compounded in TOD contexts by supplementary expenses for densification, such as site preparation, utility upgrades, and integration of mixed-use features, which can increase total project costs by 20-50% in urban settings without commensurate value capture.^[138] Specific cases, like Seattle's Sound Transit expansions, have seen overruns exceeding $35 billion, highlighting how TOD-adjacent rail investments often exceed budgets due to underestimated land acquisition and environmental compliance demands.^[139] Operationally, many TOD-supported transit lines suffer from ridership shortfalls when development densities fall below projections, leading to chronic operating deficits funded by taxpayer subsidies. U.S. transit agencies collectively reported farebox recovery ratios averaging under 30% even pre-pandemic, with post-2020 declines amplifying per-mile operating losses as fixed costs for maintenance and staffing persist regardless of usage.^[140] ^[141] In low-density TOD implementations, where zoning incentives fail to attract sufficient residential or commercial occupancy, daily ridership can lag 20-40% behind forecasts, as observed in select suburban extensions, necessitating ongoing public infusions to cover deficits that eclipse fare revenues by factors of 2-3 times.^[121] Maintenance burdens further strain finances, with aging infrastructure in TOD corridors requiring annual expenditures in the billions nationally, often unmitigated by development-generated funds due to fragmented governance and limited joint-use agreements.^[142] Empirical assessments reveal that while TOD boosts local property values—yielding tax uplifts of 10-30% in proximate parcels—these gains rarely yield net positive fiscal returns for jurisdictions without expansive tax bases or robust value capture tools like tax increment financing, which historically recoup only 10-20% of transit capital outlays.^[121] ^[76] Critics, drawing from case analyses, contend that such mechanisms overlook externalities like increased service demands from denser populations, potentially amplifying long-term deficits if ridership-dependent revenues falter amid economic downturns or competing transport modes.^[143] This disconnect underscores a causal gap: public transit subsidies in TOD frameworks persist as structural features, with operational viability hinging on densities seldom realized amid market volatilities and regulatory hurdles.

Ideological and Practical Critiques

Critics from libertarian and market-oriented perspectives contend that transit-oriented development (TOD) represents an infringement on private property rights through government-mandated zoning reforms that compel higher densities and mixed uses selectively around transit stations, while often preserving restrictive regulations elsewhere.^[144] Such interventions, they argue, distort market signals and favor top-down planning over voluntary landowner decisions, as evidenced by cases where developers in purported TOD zones still incorporate substantial parking to meet demand, undermining the model's anti-automobile premise.^[145] These viewpoints prioritize broad deregulation of land uses across entire jurisdictions to enable organic density where economically viable, rather than subsidizing transit via localized mandates that allocate development rights unevenly.^[146] On practical grounds, TOD has demonstrated limited efficacy in automobile-centric cultures, where entrenched preferences for personal vehicles persist absent profound behavioral changes, leading to underutilized transit infrastructure despite density incentives.^[147] For instance, in Perth, Australia, despite policy pushes for TOD since the early 2000s, implementation has largely faltered, with transit mode shares remaining low and residents continuing to rely on cars for the majority of trips due to service reliability issues and spatial mismatches.^[147] This mismatch highlights a causal disconnect: high-density nodes alone do not generate sufficient transit ridership without complementary factors like frequent, all-day service, which many implementations lack in sprawling, low-density contexts. The rise of telecommuting further erodes TOD's foundational assumptions by diminishing peak-hour commute volumes, thereby reducing the economic justification for concentrating jobs and housing around fixed transit lines.^[148] U.S. data from 2020–2023 indicate that remote work adoption correlated with transit ridership declines of up to 50% in major metros, as workers substituted home-based labor for daily travel, decoupling urban form from transit dependency.^[149] Proponents of alternatives, such as highway capacity enhancements or incentives for distributed work arrangements, assert these yield higher returns on investment by accommodating actual travel patterns more flexibly than rigid TOD frameworks, which presuppose centralized employment hubs increasingly obsolete in a decentralized economy.^[144]

Reception and Ongoing Debates

Academic and Expert Views

Scholars in transportation and urban planning have endorsed transit-oriented development (TOD) for its potential to improve accessibility and support compact urban growth. A 2020 review of over 200 studies in Transport Policy concluded that TOD advances sustainability by integrating high-density, mixed-use areas with efficient public transit, yielding measurable gains in walkability and reduced per capita vehicle miles traveled in select implementations.^[150] Similarly, empirical assessments in peer-reviewed journals emphasize TOD's role in enhancing multimodal connectivity, with metrics showing up to 20-30% higher transit mode shares in well-executed nodes compared to auto-oriented suburbs.^[151] Peter Calthorpe, who formalized the TOD concept in his 1993 work The Next American Metropolis, advocated for it as a first-principles approach to counter sprawl, prioritizing pedestrian-scale districts within a quarter-mile of stations to foster self-contained communities and minimize ecological footprints from commuting.^[6] Economic critiques, however, highlight overoptimism in projections of behavioral shifts, pointing to persistent auto reliance despite TOD incentives. Analyses reveal that induced demand dynamics—where transit enhancements draw additional trips without proportionally displacing car use—erode anticipated congestion relief, with elasticity estimates indicating only partial mode substitution in practice.^[152] Demographer Wendell Cox has contended, based on travel surveys from U.S. TOD projects, that over 70% of trips to such areas occur by automobile, attributing this to fiscal miscalculations in subsidizing rail-heavy systems that fail to capture latent demand for flexible mobility.^[153] These views underscore a scholarly divide, where transportation engineering literature often prioritizes accessibility metrics while economics journals stress causal evidence of limited VMT reductions, sometimes as low as 5-10% post-implementation after controlling for self-selection bias.^[16] Empirical research reveals further divides between Western-centric models and applications in the Global South, where institutional and cultural factors challenge TOD's transferability. Western studies focus on retrofitting established rail networks, achieving density premiums via zoning reforms, but Global South meta-analyses document mismatches, such as informal land markets and paratransit dominance that undermine station-area densification efforts.^[154] A 2020 qualitative synthesis of 28 case studies from developing countries identified core barriers including weak land-value capture mechanisms and governance silos, resulting in uneven implementation and equity gaps not foreseen in original Northern frameworks.^[108] This highlights a need for context-specific adaptations, as universalist assumptions from high-income contexts overlook causal pathways like rapid motorization rates that dilute TOD's transit-prioritizing effects.^[155]

Public and Political Responses

Public opinion surveys indicate substantial support for transit-oriented development principles, particularly enhancements to walkability and transit access. A 2018 HNTB survey found that 73 percent of Americans favored zoning or land-use changes in their communities to promote TOD.^[156] In New York, 67 percent of likely voters backed legislation encouraging TOD in a 2023 Data for Progress poll.^[157] Massachusetts residents echoed this, with 69 percent deeming TOD a positive approach statewide in a 2024 poll, though support often wanes for implementation in immediate neighborhoods.^[158] Resistance to the density typically required for TOD manifests as NIMBYism, where local stakeholders oppose upzoning near existing transit hubs despite broader polling approval. Neighborhood groups have frustrated state mandates for higher-density housing adjacent to transit, as observed in California where such policies failed to yield significant results amid localized pushback by 2022.^[159] This pattern reflects a preference for personal choice in housing and transport over compelled shifts toward denser, transit-reliant living, with surveys showing voters favor voluntary transit improvements but resist forced community changes.^[160] Politically, TOD garners bipartisan endorsement in densely populated urban settings, exemplified by Washington's 2023 bipartisan bill to incentivize housing near transit centers and California's 2025 legislation passing with cross-party votes to enable more homes adjacent to public transit.^[161]^[162] However, conservative critiques target mandates overriding local zoning, viewing them as encroachments on property rights akin to broader regulatory challenges in land-use planning.^[163] Debates over TOD equity highlight partisan divides, with progressive advocates framing it as a mechanism to integrate affordable housing for low-income groups near transit, as in efforts for "equitable TOD" blueprints emphasizing social inclusion.^[164] Conservative perspectives counter by stressing systemic market failures in transit operations, such as chronic underperformance and subsidies distorting efficient land use, rather than density alone resolving access issues.^[155] These tensions underscore opposition to top-down equity mandates that overlook operational realities and individual preferences.

Recent Developments and Trends

In October 2024, the U.S. Federal Transit Administration awarded $10.5 million in competitive grants to 11 transit-oriented development planning projects across 10 states, funding community-led efforts to integrate housing, transit, and land use.^[1] These grants, part of the Pilot Program for Transit-Oriented Development Planning, prioritized initiatives with a focus on affordable housing, allowing up to 100% federal funding for such components.^[1] In December 2024, the San Antonio City Council unanimously approved a transit-oriented development policy framework and zoning code updates, establishing new development standards along corridors for the city's planned Advanced Rapid Transit system.^[165] The policy aims to promote mixed-use, higher-density projects within walking distance of stations, marking a milestone following voter approval of transit funding in 2022.^[166] The Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) district released its Transit-Oriented Development Program Work Plan Update in August 2024, revising priorities for the next decade to address post-pandemic shifts, including updated station-area planning and affordable housing integration at sites like El Cerrito Plaza, where $39 million in state funding was secured for construction starting in 2025.^[167]^[168] Recent trends emphasize incorporating affordability mandates into TOD frameworks, as evidenced by a July 2025 Urban Institute analysis of Washington State municipalities, which found inconsistent planning for low-income housing near transit and recommended streamlined permitting and density bonuses to boost supply without exacerbating displacement.^[169] However, implementations in low-density suburban contexts continue to underperform, with historical data indicating limited real estate investment stimulation due to insufficient ridership thresholds and market demand.^[170] Projections for TOD trajectories incorporate emerging electric mobility integrations, such as enhanced charging infrastructure in station areas to support sustainable mode shifts, though empirical evidence remains preliminary.^[109] Subsidy reliance persists as a point of contention, particularly amid sustained remote work adoption—now affecting over 20% of U.S. workers—which has reduced peak-hour transit loads and prompted debates over reallocating benefits traditionally tied to commuting.^[171]^[172]

References

[1]
Transit-Oriented Development | FTA
Transit-oriented development (TOD) creates compact, mixed-use communities near transit where people enjoy easy access to jobs and services.
[2]
Transit Oriented Development (TOD) - Federal Highway Administration
Transit Oriented Development is compact, mixed-use development near transit facilities providing high-quality walking environments.
[3]
What is TOD? - Institute for Transportation and Development Policy
TOD, or transit-oriented development, means integrated urban places designed to bring people, activities, buildings, and public space together.
[4]
Transit-Oriented Development - TOD Standard – ITDP
TOD, or Transit-Oriented Development, is an approach to urban development designed to bring people, services, and activities together with quality public ...<|separator|>
[5]
A Twenty-Five-Year Biography of the TOD Concept - ResearchGate
Twenty-five years ago, Peter Calthorpe (1993, 9) coined ... San Diego: Calthorpe Associates. Calthorpe Associates. 2011. Transit-Oriented Development Impacts.
[6]
Perspectives on the Development of the TOD Concept - eScholarship
Peter Calthorpe codified the concept of Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) in the late 1980's and, while others had promoted similar concepts and ...
[7]
Transit-oriented development, ride-hailing, and car ownership
Our findings indicate that TOD design which aims to promote walkability/public transit and restrain driving, is associated with car ownership reduction. Whereas ...
[8]
Effectiveness of Transit Oriented Development in Reducing Car Use
By situating higher-density development around public transport hubs, TOD aims to maximize transit ridership and reduce car dependency. Empirical studies ...
[9]
Does Transit-Oriented Development Need the Transit?
May 26, 2017 · The key to less driving in TODs may not be the presence of rail, but other factors like higher density, greater walkability, and less parking.Tods May Not Need Their... · Does Rail Access Reduce Auto... · Conclusions
[10]
[PDF] TOD effects on travel behavior: A synthesis of evidence from cross
Apr 10, 2024 · Effectiveness of transit-oriented development in reducing car use: Case study of Subiaco, Western Australia. Urban Policy and. Research, 35(4) ...
[11]
Transit-oriented development and gentrification: a systematic review
This paper presents a systematic review of 35 quantitative research-based studies presenting evidence on gentrification outcomes resulting from transit-based ...
[12]
S101S: Explaining Transit-Oriented Development: Benefits and ...
Jul 24, 2023 · The negative effects of TOD include: decreased affordability and increasing property values, displacement of low-income and marginalized ...
[13]
[PDF] A quick introduction to Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
July 23, 2024. Page 2. TOD was introduced by the architect and urban planner Peter Calthorpe ... Definition (Transit oriented development (TOD) (Calthorpe ...
[14]
Transit Oriented Development (TOD) | Definition, Principles and ...
Aug 19, 2020 · Transit oriented Development emphasize the “integration of transit on a regional basis” and walkability in the neighborhood. Peter Calthorpe has ...
[15]
Transit Oriented Development - IIDA New England
Feb 9, 2023 · In this book, Calthorpe defines Transit Oriented Development as “a mixed-use community that encourages people to live near transit services and ...
[16]
[PDF] Transit-Oriented Development and Joint Development in the United ...
Empirical Evidence on Transit Ridership by Distance to Station. Ridership potential is highest within about one-third mile of a station, though Canadian ...
[17]
Transit-Oriented Development's Ridership Bonus: A Product of Self ...
Transit-oriented development is shown to produce an appreciable ridership bonus in California. This is partly due to residential self-selection.
[18]
Full article: From transit-adjacent to transit-oriented development
Dec 11, 2008 · While a TOD describes a station-area precinct that is compact, mixed-use, and facilitates transit connectivity through urban design, a TAD is “ ...
[19]
Transforming the Urban Space Through Transit-Oriented Development
Transit-oriented development (TOD) is a planning strategy that aims to concentrate jobs, housing, and services around public transport stations.Missing: key | Show results with:key
[20]
Eight Principles - TOD Standard – ITDP
The Eight Principles of TOD are WALK, CYCLE, CONNECT, TRANSIT, MIX, DENSIFY, COMPACT, and SHIFT. They illustrate the relationship between transport and land use ...
[21]
[PDF] 5. Transit Oriented Development Fact Sheet
Transit Oriented Development (TOD) is a planning approach that calls for high-density, mixed-use business/neighborhood centers to be clustered around transit ...
[22]
https://study.sustainability-directory.com/learn/what-are-the-typical-density-requirements-for-effective-tod/
[23]
TOD Principles - Transit Oriented Development
TOD principles include placing stations with high ridership, a 1/2 mile radius of higher density, and using the station as a catalyst for redevelopment.
[24]
Trip and parking generation at transit-oriented developments
This study aims to determine how many fewer vehicle trips are generated at transit-oriented developments (TODs), and how much less parking is required at TODs.
[25]
Smart Growth and Transit Oriented Development - IntechOpen
In this context, this paper explores the theory and international practice of New Urbanism, Smart Growth and TOD. It also examines the potential of TOD to ...
[26]
The Conceptual Framework of Smart TOD: An Integration of ... - MDPI
Mar 11, 2023 · TOD has formed the basis of new urbanism to achieve smart growth [35]. ... In the context of SC, future urban TOD areas will form a new ...
[27]
[PDF] Agglomeration Economics
Agglomeration economies are the benefits that come when firms and people locate near one another together in cities and industrial clusters.
[28]
[PDF] Agglomeration Economies: A Literature Review - Upjohn Research
Sep 25, 2020 · The benefits of agglomeration economies are best summarized through three mechanisms: sharing, matching, and learning. Sharing infrastructure ...
[29]
[PDF] Generated Traffic and Induced Travel
Sep 18, 2025 · Generated traffic is additional travel that occurs when road capacity expands, including diverted and induced vehicle travel.
[30]
Alain Bertaud Delivers Talk on Order vs. Planning - Marron Institute
May 19, 2021 · Spontaneous Order vs Utopian Urban Planning.” Bertaud commented on the disheartening trend of recent master plans in Africa. On the Lekki ...
[31]
The spontaneous rules of spontaneous development - Sage Journals
May 2, 2022 · Hayek distinguishes between spontaneous and planned order to oppose spontaneous development to centrally planned development. But not all forms ...
[32]
19th Century London and Victorian Transport
London's population grew rapidly in the 19th century as the railways and the underground began to expand out, reaching villages like Brixton, and further out ...
[33]
[PDF] The Heritage of Historic Suburbs
Most suburbs of the first half of the twentieth century are essentially railway suburbs.Though they have adapted themselves quite well to cars (through, for ...
[34]
Riverside, IL - Encyclopedia of Chicago
Riverside, on the Des Plaines River, was designed in 1868 by Frederick Law Olmsted, the nation's most famous landscape architect. The innovative street plan and ...
[35]
Frederick Law Olmsted's Riverside: the First Planned Suburb
Mar 1, 2013 · Riverside, Illinois was the first planned suburb, built based on a plan by the famed landscape architect Frederick Law Olmstead.
[36]
https://oxfordre.com/americanhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-28
[37]
A Streetcar City | National Museum of American History
Many white city dwellers moved to new trolley suburbs; streetcars made it easy to travel greater distances to work, shop, and socialize in town.
[38]
https://www.autolife.umd.umich.edu/Environment/E_Casestudy/E_casestudy.htm
[39]
Lessons from the garden city and one planner's plot to escape London
May 4, 2021 · Some clusters could be linked together into what he called a 'social city' of six or more garden cities, interconnected by a transit system with ...
[40]
Transit Villages: From Idea to Implementation - ACCESS Magazine
Sep 28, 2022 · They borrow from the visions of early city planners like Ebenezer Howard, who in 1898 advanced the idea of building garden cities that would ...<|separator|>
[41]
Why Did America Give Up on Mass Transit? (Don't Blame Cars.)
Aug 31, 2018 · Virtually every major American rapid transit system has had a service meltdown as a result of chronic deferred maintenance. But these high-tech ...
[42]
US Public Transit Has Struggled to Retain Riders over the Past Half ...
Jun 25, 2021 · In 1970, about 38 percent of US transit commuters lived in the New York City metropolitan area, while about 9 percent of employees nationwide ...Missing: deferred | Show results with:deferred
[43]
[PDF] HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE DECLINE OF THE TRANSIT ...
The transit industry declined due to inadequate understanding, financial issues, slow response to needs, conservative practices, and management inflexibility.Missing: deferred | Show results with:deferred
[44]
Jane Jacobs v Robert Moses, battle of New York's urban titans | Cities
Apr 28, 2016 · It was a salvo in a struggle between a man who had amassed vast bureaucratic powers and remade New York with expressways, parks and housing ...Missing: backlash dominance TOD
[45]
The woman who saved old New York - BBC
May 12, 2017 · A massive freeway would have destroyed Greenwich Village if not for one woman's efforts. Jane Jacobs can teach us about what makes cities ...Missing: backlash dominance TOD
[46]
History | MTA 20-Year-Needs Assessment
Deferred maintenance and lack of funding meant that the whole system was at risk. ... Just 65% of weekday trains reached their destinations on time, the lowest ...
[47]
[PDF] Histories of Transit-Oriented Development - Reconnecting America
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) is a mixed-use community that encourages people to live near transit services and decrease their dependence on driving.
[48]
About the TOD Standard
The TOD Standard is a policy brief, an assessment tool to score urban development, and a recognition system for projects embodying TOD principles.
[49]
Transit Oriented Development (TOD) and sustainable urban ...
In 2014, the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) launched the “TOD Standard” endorsed by UN-Habitat, GIZ and ICLEI. ITDP's report ...
[50]
[PDF] THE STRATEGIC PLAN 2020-2023 - UN-Habitat
promote compact and transit-oriented development, which will offer benefits in terms of reduced use of private vehicles and, consequently, reduced emissions.
[51]
[PDF] Japan's TOD -Guidebook
In the Shinagawa area, major transport projects have been carried out since the 2000s, including the extension of the station for the Tokaido Shinkansen.
[52]
The European Green Deal
The Green Deal invests in innovation, clean technology, and green infrastructure while ensuring a just transition for the communities most affected. Thanks to ...Missing: oriented | Show results with:oriented
[53]
Pilot Program for Transit-Oriented Development Planning
Oct 31, 2024 · On October 31, 2024, FTA announced the award of approximately $10.5 million to 11 projects in 10 states in FY24 TOD planning grants to ...
[54]
Federal Transit Administration Announces $25.8 Million for Transit ...
The TOD Pilot Program was established under the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) in 2012 and amended by the Fixing America's Surface ...
[55]
[PDF] Trends in Transit-Oriented Development 2000–2010
The objective of this study was to analyze the trends in transit regions and transit-oriented developments (TOD) from. 2000 to 2010, illuminating changes in how ...Missing: global adoption
[56]
Disentangling the drivers of success of transit-oriented development
This review identifies supportive policies, land use, transit design, environment, and neighborhood proximity as key drivers of success of TOD. Originality/ ...
[57]
[PDF] Transit Oriented Development - C40 Cities
Through adopting the principles of 'transit-‐oriented development' (TOD), cities can plan for and create vibrant, well-‐connected, people-‐focused ...
[58]
[PDF] BEST PRACTICES FOR TOD ZONING
Oct 26, 2023 · This section describes seven elements of successful zoning and regulations for transit-oriented development. The best practices are ...
[59]
Chapter 18.152 (TOD) TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT ...
The purpose of the (TOD) transit-oriented development overlay district is to create a compact and high intensity mix of residential, office, retail, service ...
[60]
Codes That Support Smart Growth Development | US EPA
Mar 25, 2025 · These regulations were intended to be used in conjunction with the Transit-Oriented Development Design Guidelines of the Land Development Manual ...
[61]
[PDF] Effects of TOD on Housing, Parking, and Travel 1
the case studies, parking ratios were selected from two different TOD zoning ... The case studies showed an increase in density for residential TOD of 20 to 33%.
[62]
662 Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District One (TOD-1)
The City of Phoenix' Transit-Oriented Development Overlay District (TOD-1) shall apply to lands delineated on the City's Official Supplementary Zoning Map ...
[63]
[PDF] Tensions and Trade-offs in Planning and Policymaking for Transit ...
California to support transit-oriented development (TOD), transit, and active transport. ... and preservation of lower-density, single family neighborhoods.
[64]
[PDF] Zoning and Market Externalities
This Article is the first to specifically explore the legitimacy of local governments regulating private economic activities that have an aggregate effect on ...
[65]
[PDF] Cities, Property and Positive Externalities
Ownership structures, as well as the laws of nuisance, servitudes, and zoning, are com- monly understood as means for internalizing negative externalities,5.Missing: transit | Show results with:transit
[66]
Financing Transit-Oriented Development with Land Values
Jan 15, 2015 · Development-based land value capture methods highlighted include: Land development sale/lease: governments sell or lease development rights ...
[67]
[PDF] Financing Transit Systems Through Value Capture
Dec 21, 2023 · Land value capture is becoming widely recognized as the preferred tool for financing transit-oriented development. A large number of empirical ...
[68]
[PDF] tools and techniques for facilitating effective tod value capture
Value capture strategies should be pursued because they enable transit agencies to benefit from the financial benefits that result from their investment in ...
[69]
Value Capture | FTA - Federal Transit Administration
Mar 12, 2025 · Examples of value capture strategies used for transit include: tax increment financing, special assessments, and joint development. Value ...Missing: methods | Show results with:methods
[70]
[PDF] Developer Impact Fees - Federal Highway Administration
Developer impact fees are based on per dwelling unit and trip generation, with lower fees for higher density housing. Fees are collected per project but used ...
[71]
[PDF] Public Land with Private Partnerships for Transit Based Development
The report reviews different purposes and intended uses for transit oriented development, as well as the importance of appropriate location, design and ...
[72]
[PDF] The Value Capture Approach To Stimulating Transit Oriented ...
This paper examines the proposition that a land value tax (LVT) is an effective method to promote transit oriented development (TOD) and raise revenue to ...<|separator|>
[73]
Capital Investment Grants Program - Federal Transit Administration
This FTA discretionary grant program funds transit capital investments, including heavy rail, commuter rail, light rail, streetcars, and bus rapid transit.Current Projects · 2024 CIG Policy Guidance · (CIG) Dashboard · Stops<|separator|>
[74]
[PDF] Land-value capture and public transport funding Background paper
The OECD argues that flexible regulatory approaches near transit stations give developers greater opportunity to adopt more complex and integrated approaches to.<|separator|>
[75]
[PDF] Opportunities for value capture to fund public transport
Many studies have shown that sufficient value is generated by public transport systems that if they had been implemented, value capture mechanisms could ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[76]
Addressing barriers to the use of value capture to fund transit ...
Transit agencies need to proactively engage with developers and local governments to create real estate value and to use VC tools to capture that value (Page et ...Missing: methods | Show results with:methods
[77]
[PDF] BUS RAPID TRANSIT SERVICE DESIGN GUIDELINES - NACTO
Developing TOD design guidelines,. Specific Plan overlay zones, or corridor plans. • Funding pedestrian improvements to encourage pedestrian access to stations.
[78]
33.2 Defining TOD - BRT Planning Guide
TOD is land development that is specifically designed to integrate, work with, and prioritize the use of public transport for daily urban mobility needs.
[79]
[PDF] First Mile Last Mile Options with High Trip Generator Employers
Dec 15, 2017 · In the scenarios, the increase in transit mode split is by 70% for the compact transit station area over suburban development. Transit core ...
[80]
[PDF] Transit-Supportive Densities and Land Uses
Policies and requirements that support efforts to build ridership through transit-oriented development, rather than driving and parking, should be implemented.
[81]
[PDF] Aligning Development and Transit:
“TOD 2.0” treats transit implementation as the first half of a sequential 6-Step TOD implementation process culminating in vertical real estate development.
[82]
[PDF] TOD_Standard_EN.pdf
Second, the TOD Standard is a unique assessment tool available to score the plans and products of urban development according to their adherence to the TOD ...
[83]
Exploring the long-term threshold effects of density and diversity on ...
This study applied the panel threshold model to explore the long-term threshold effects of station area density and diversity on metro station-to-station ...
[84]
[PDF] SEPTA Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Policy Research
Unsurprisingly, neighborhoods with a higher density of jobs and/or residents and higher-quality transit service have higher ridership rates than other areas.
[85]
Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor - Arlington County
The Results. The numbers attest to the success of the Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor. Between 1990 and 2000, population increased by nearly 107 percent within the ...
[86]
Encourage Transit-Oriented Development
The Rosslyn-Ballston corridor in Arlington County, Virginia is well-known for its investments in transit-oriented development, with nearly 40% of trips in this ...
[87]
[PDF] Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Success Stories
The following case studies illustrate how transit-supportive policies, planning and coordinated investment in land use and transportation can create ...Missing: Canada | Show results with:Canada
[88]
Transit-Oriented Development Program - Oregon Metro
Since 1998, the program has invested over $40 million dollars along greater Portland's transit system, supporting the construction of over 6,800 housing units ...
[89]
[PDF] Portland Streetcar Case Study - Build America Center
• Price effect decreases over time and appears to stabilize at 9% after 15 years. • Sustained impact due to permanence from streetcar and other investments ...
[90]
The Evolution of Transit-oriented Development in Canada - NAIOP
Many cities have seen investment in new rapid transit lines or the expansion of existing systems to address congestion arising from rapid population growth.Missing: America | Show results with:America<|separator|>
[91]
Vancouver to allow more density at all SkyTrain stations beyond ...
Jun 22, 2024 · TOAs emanating from SkyTrain stations have an 800-metre radius, with the Tier 1 inner radius of 200 metres enabling residential building heights of at least 20 ...
[92]
[PDF] If you build it, who will come? Exploring the effects of rapid transit on ...
Mar 11, 2024 · At the same time, Jones and Ley (2016) found low-income housing in the suburbs along Vancouver's SkyTrain corridor to be endangered by ...
[93]
Mass Transit Expansion Goes Off The Rails In Many U.S. Cities
Mar 14, 2016 · In reality, rail transit has been a financial and policy failure outside of a handful of cities. In 23 metropolitan areas that have built new ...
[94]
(PDF) From concept to projects: Stedenbaan, The Netherlands
Feb 22, 2017 · From concept to projects: Stedenbaan, The Netherlands. January 2009. In book: Transit Oriented Development: Making It Happen (pp.75-90) ...
[95]
Successfully developing the station areas: toward a “TOD” strategy ...
Apr 2, 2024 · TOD aims at developing dense and compact urban development within a radius of 800 meters (10 minutes by foot) around railroad or major bus stations.Missing: edge | Show results with:edge
[96]
[PDF] the dublin transportation initiative
Ι Tram capacity being increased in response, with all 26 trams on the. Red ... Ι LUAS has generated TOD. Ι The Development industry can see the benefit. Ι ...
[97]
Challenges of delivering TOD in low-density contexts: the Swedish ...
May 23, 2022 · The aim of this article is to discuss ways to promote TOD in lower density contexts, in this article exemplified by TODs in Sweden.
[98]
[PDF] Size, structure and distribution of transport subsidies in Europe
In addition, government subsidies to specific modes of transport encourage the use of some modes over others, because the resulting drop in user costs leads.Missing: oriented | Show results with:oriented
[99]
[PDF] The Case of Hong Kong Rail + Property Model.
The Hong Kong Rail + Property (R+P) model uses Land Value Capture (LVC) and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) to fund railway systems.
[100]
(PDF) Rail and Property Development in Hong Kong - ResearchGate
Aug 7, 2025 · Hong Kong has aggressively pursued transit value capture to finance railway infrastructure through its 'Rail + Property' development programme, or R+P.
[101]
Transit-oriented development strategy in Taiwan: An application of ...
Value capture, an important funding mechanism for public transport infrastructure, has been implemented in Taipei City's TOD strategy to provide a sustainable ...
[102]
Curitiba: 50 Years of Lessons from the World's First 'Bus Rapid Transit'
Oct 17, 2024 · Curitiba's BRT has inspired and served as a reference for cities worldwide, including roughly 200 that have implemented similar models.
[103]
Bus Rapid Transit and Urban Development in Latin America
Jan 1, 2013 · The case of Curitiba suggests that the success of BRT can increase with the presence of concentrated land development along the transit corridor ...
[104]
Lessons in urban development from Jakarta's mass rapid transit ...
Dec 1, 2023 · Jakarta MRT has embedded TOD principles in its development of stations, prioritising connectivity with other transport modes and innovative ...
[105]
The case of Jakarta MRT Phase 1, Indonesia - ScienceDirect
When the tools are in place, the implementation of TOD will be structurally embedded in the urban planning process, allowing integrated land use and transport ...
[106]
[PDF] the significance of transit-oriented development (tod) towards the ...
According to Buang (2018), the first successful and largest TOD hub in. Malaysia is Kuala Lumpur Sentral, best known as KL Sentral. It contains all the major ...
[107]
Trans-oriented developments environmental wellbeing
Nov 21, 2023 · KL Sentral is a 72-acre (29.14ha) TOD designed by Dr Kisho Kurokawa which encompasses residences, office blocks, hotels, shopping malls and ...
[108]
Transit-oriented development in developing countries: A qualitative ...
This study seeks to systematically identify the most significant challenges for Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) in Developing Countries (DCs).<|control11|><|separator|>
[109]
[PDF] Transit-Oriented Development - California Air Resources Board
Pricing policies, such as for parking, can help reduce auto-dependency, as can transportation demand management strategies, such as employer-provided transit ...
[110]
Dynamics of Transit Oriented Development, Role of Greenhouse ...
TOD can help in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and building life-cycle energy consumption by 9%–25%. The overall impact of GHG can be reduced by 36%, ...
[111]
[PDF] A Longitudinal Analysis on the Environmental and Travel Behavior ...
Oct 7, 2025 · Transit-oriented development (TOD) is an established method for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). TOD ...
[112]
Investigating the impacts of transit-oriented development on ...
This study examines transport-related CO 2 emissions of TODs in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Individual-level CO 2 emissions were calculated for three types of trips.
[113]
[PDF] Transit-Oriented District (TOD) Toolkit: - LA County Public Works
street trees and assist in storm water management. Street trees reduce the heat island effect, reduce storm water runoff, improve air quality by absorbing ...
[114]
[PDF] Electric public transport fosters green transit-oriented development
A so-called 'green transit-oriented' urban development is advocated as a policy that can deal with this dilemma (Cervero & Sullivan, 2011). High density, mixed ...
[115]
Reducing Transportation Emissions through Land-Use Policy and ...
Aug 6, 2024 · Densifying the built environment can reduce transportation-related emissions and complement the shift toward public transit and vehicular electrification.
[116]
A meta-analysis of the impact of rail stations on property values
This study finds that factors pertaining to geography, housing type, race and ethnicity, rent control policies, rail type, transit cost, and transit network ...
[117]
[PDF] The impact of transit-oriented development (TOD) on residential ...
TODs will decrease the value of their properties. This study addresses that issue by estimating the impact of one suburban TOD – Box Hill – on the prices of ...
[118]
Metros, agglomeration and displacement. Evidence from London
Areas within 750m of metro stations see a positive effect, while areas within 2000m experience a negative impact, with no overall growth, only displacement.Missing: oriented | Show results with:oriented
[119]
[PDF] Transit-Oriented Development or Transit-Oriented Displacement ...
Abstract. The intent of this paper is to determine causal effects of transit- oriented developments, or TOD's, on the neighborhoods they are im-.
[120]
Subsidizing Transport | Cato Institute
Jan 30, 2025 · Assuming constant costs, the operator would need some combination of higher fares and greater subsidies to operate profitably. Indirect ...Subsidizing Transport · Policy Recommendations · Rail And Transit
[121]
[PDF] Fiscal Impacts of Transit-Oriented Development Projects
Transit-oriented development (TOD) is a responsible fiscal choice for local governments and can actually save local governments money, as detailed in Fiscal ...
[122]
[PDF] ECONOMIC IMPACT OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT
At current wage rates, the GDP increase by the year 2030 is equivalent to approximately 400,000 more jobs. ... Transit-Oriented Development in the United States:.<|control11|><|separator|>
[123]
(PDF) Evaluating the unintended impacts of socioeconomic and ...
Jul 7, 2016 · Using 1990 and 2010 census data, this research investigated the unintended consequences of TOD policy on mode choice and equitable accessibility ...
[124]
Influence of Transit Station Proximity on Demographic Change ...
However, aside from anecdotes, there seems to be little empirical evidence that transit station area development leads to large-scale displacement, though some ...
[125]
A tale of two aging nations: How do urban designs impact older ...
Our results suggest that dense and accessible neighborhood designs can enhance older people's mobility with more out-of-home activities.
[126]
https://www.jtlu.org/index.php/jtlu/article/view/2152
[127]
Walkability and Its Relationships With Health, Sustainability, and ...
Walkability is a core urban design element because of being advantageous onto three fronts: health, livability, and sustainability.
[128]
Transit-induced gentrification and displacement: The state of the ...
This chapter outlines the theoretical arguments for why and how transport, specifically rail transit, is expected to impact the socioeconomic composition of ...Missing: critique | Show results with:critique<|separator|>
[129]
[PDF] Investigating Transit-Induced Displacement Using Eviction Data
Oct 7, 2020 · The empirical evidence on the relationship among transit, gentrification, and displacement has been less alarming than the critical literature ...
[130]
Evaluating the impacts of transit-oriented developments (TODs) on ...
The property-value effects of TOD may create an affordability paradox: low-income households who rely more on public transit cannot afford living close to ...
[131]
[PDF] How does transit-oriented development affect a neighborhood?
Transit-oriented development can improve neighborhoods but also increase property values and rents, potentially causing gentrification and displacement of low- ...<|separator|>
[132]
[PDF] Modeling Inclusionary Zoning's Impact on Housing Production in ...
Recent California reforms have increased pressure on cities to produce more below market-rate (BMR) homes, and inclusionary zoning (IZ) is viewed as one.
[133]
The Tradeoffs of Inclusionary Zoning: A Closer Look - California ...
Apr 23, 2024 · The findings reveal that increasing IZ requirements resulted in diminishing returns in BMR housing production – and substantial reductions in overall housing ...
[134]
Analyzing Johannesburg's Ambitious Inclusionary Transit-Oriented ...
Aug 28, 2019 · In 2013, the Mayor of Johannesburg announced the ambitious Corridors of Freedom (CoF) initiative to transform the city's socio-spatial ...
[135]
[PDF] Transit-Oriented-Development-An-Appraisal-of-Trends-and ...
In recent years, Transit Oriented. Development (TOD) is increasingly accepted due to its great potential for leading cities towards more sustainable.<|control11|><|separator|>
[136]
The travel, equity and wellbeing impacts of transit-oriented ...
This paper critically reviews and concisely summarizes the research findings pertaining to the travel, equity and wellbeing impacts of TOD in the Global South.Missing: corruption | Show results with:corruption
[137]
Cost Overruns in U.S. Rail Transit Projects: A Statistical Analysis
Nov 9, 2020 · It was found that the average cost overruns against AA and FFGA estimates are 32.4% and 7.3%, respectively. The accuracy of cost estimates at ...Missing: United | Show results with:United
[138]
Financing Transit Oriented Development by Value Capture
In many countries around the world, financing of TOD strategies is often based on some sort of negotiated developer obligations (NDOs) as a value capture ...Missing: methods | Show results with:methods
[139]
Billions of dollars in cost overruns may finally bring a day of ...
Jul 29, 2025 · Sound Transit $35B cost overrun calls for state audit · Bob Pishue; Sep 13, 2025. Cost for Seattle's Sound Transit rail program balloons to $185 ...Missing: United | Show results with:United
[140]
Finding a route to fiscal stability for US transit agencies - McKinsey
Dec 13, 2024 · Much of the farebox revenue decrease in the industry is a result of reduced ridership, since fewer passengers means fewer fares paid. Transit ...
[141]
Public Transportation Ridership: Implications of Recent Trends for ...
Nov 10, 2022 · A near-term issue for public transportation funding is the sustained operating deficits that are likely to result from greatly reduced fare ...
[142]
Analyzing Rail Transit Project Costs and Delays
Jan 24, 2022 · But in California (and throughout the US), transit infrastructure projects have long suffered from cost overruns and deployment delays that ...Missing: United States
[143]
Overcoming Financial and Institutional Barriers to TOD: Lindbergh ...
This study examines Atlanta's Lindbergh Station TOD to understand how a real-world development was able to overcome the substantial development barriers that ...
[144]
Debunking Portland: The City That Doesn't Work | Cato Institute
Jul 9, 2007 · And developers have found that so–called transit–oriented developments only work when they include plenty of parking. ... Randal O'Toole.Missing: critique | Show results with:critique
[145]
[PDF] Debunking Portland - Cato Institute
Jul 9, 2007 · And developers have found that so-called transit- oriented developments only work when they include plenty of parking. Portland-area residents ...
[146]
Hard Truths About Why Conservatives and Libertarians Hate ...
Nov 20, 2010 · But highway spending is also often absurdly wasteful and transit-oriented development is not a prelude to communism. Adhering to rigidly ...Missing: critiques | Show results with:critiques
[147]
(PDF) Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) and Its Problems
Jan 20, 2022 · 14 2 Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) and Its Problems. The idea that transit might orient development is certainly not new.
[148]
Does Remote Work Put Transit-Oriented Development in Jeopardy?
Mar 3, 2021 · While remote work is reducing the need for some knowledge workers to commute every day, cities are still important activity hubs for their metro ...Missing: telecommuting | Show results with:telecommuting
[149]
(PDF) Impacts of remote work on vehicle miles traveled and transit ...
Apr 10, 2024 · Our study systematically examines the impacts of remote work on vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) and transit ridership in the United States from April 2020 to ...<|separator|>
[150]
Transit-oriented development: A review of research achievements ...
Among the attempts made worldwide to foster urban and transport sustainability, transit-oriented development (TOD) certainly is one of the most successful.
[151]
A framework to measure transit-oriented development around ... - NIH
Jan 6, 2023 · Transit-oriented development (TOD) is a tool that aids in achieving sustainable urban development. It promotes economic, environmental, ...
[152]
[PDF] Latest evidence on induced travel demand: an evidence review
Induced demand is new traffic from network improvements. A 10% capacity increase may lead to 2% induced demand, with higher demand in urban areas.
[153]
Part 3: The Impacts of TOD | Transit-Oriented Development in the ...
In a paper written for the Heritage Foundation, Wendell Cox wrote Transit-oriented development increases congestion. The overwhelming majority of travel to ...
[154]
Emerging evidence on transit-oriented development in the Global ...
Transit-oriented development (TOD) generally denotes a type of urban planning strategy and model to create compact and mixed-use communities centered around ...
[155]
What the newcomers to transit-oriented development are confronted ...
The travel, equity and wellbeing impacts of transit-oriented development in Global South. 2022, Transportation Research Part D Transport and Environment.
[156]
HNTB America THINKS Survey: Transit Oriented Development
Nearly three in four Americans (73 percent) would support changes in land use or zoning regulations in their community that encourage transit oriented ...Missing: polls | Show results with:polls
[157]
Voters Support Transit-Oriented Development in New York State
Mar 6, 2023 · A new poll from Data for Progress finds that 67 percent of likely New York voters support legislation that promotes transit-oriented development ...
[158]
Poll: Massachusetts residents feeling the squeeze from housing and ...
Jul 23, 2024 · Three-quarters support making regional bus service free; 69% think transit oriented development is a good idea for the state; half think state ...
[159]
Local Resistance Hinders Transit-Oriented Development - Planetizen
Jan 24, 2022 · As states move to boost housing production near transit, opposition from neighborhood groups frustrates efforts to build new developments.
[160]
[PDF] VOTERS WANT A BETTER TRANSIT SYSTEM FOR AMERICA
voters do not necessarily believe their own communities need better public transit, voters overwhelmingly believe the country at large would. CARS ARE AN.
[161]
Bipartisan legislation would spur development near transit centers
Jan 23, 2023 · Marko Liias (D-Everett), prime sponsor of the legislation. “By creating more housing near transportation centers, we can shorten commute times, ...
[162]
Landmark Bill To Build More Homes Near Public Transit Heads To ...
Sep 12, 2025 · SAN FRANCISCO – In a bipartisan vote, the California State Senate gave final approval to Senator Scott Wiener's (D-San Francisco) landmark ...
[163]
When Did Property Rights Drop Off the Conservative Agenda?
Jul 14, 2025 · Property rights no longer seem to be a big part of the Republican agenda. The Supreme Court cares much more about other issues like guns.
[164]
Ensuring Equity in TOD: A Blueprint for State-Level Reform in New ...
This report proposes both an advocacy agenda for Fair Share Housing Center and New Jersey Future and a definition of what eTOD should be in the Garden State.
[165]
San Antonio's Next Stop: Transit-Oriented Developments
Dec 19, 2024 · The City of San Antonio has reached a significant milestone as the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) plan received its final approval by City Council.
[166]
San Antonio City Council adopts transit-oriented development policy
Dec 26, 2024 · San Antonio City Council has taken a step forward in implementing an Advanced Rapid Transit System by adopting a transit-oriented development policy and ...
[167]
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) | Bay Area Rapid Transit - BART
August 29, 2024: We are pleased to present the BART Transit-Oriented Development Program Work Plan: 2024 Update (2024 TOD Work Plan Update). It identifies ...
[168]
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) AT EL CERRITO PLAZA BART ...
The project will be developed in 6 phases over approximately 4 years. The first building (Parcel A South) is expected to start construction in November 2025.Missing: developments | Show results with:developments
[169]
Generating Affordable and Abundant Transit-Oriented Development ...
Jul 1, 2025 · Transit areas in high-housing-cost cities have experienced substantial construction and population growth, particularly of people with high ...Missing: census | Show results with:census
[170]
Transit Oriented Development; Where it Occurs and Why it Does Not
This paper identifies those conditions necessary for successful new development and provides case studies of both successful and unsuccessful outcomes.
[171]
[PDF] The Future of Work and the Transit Benefit Subsidy
Transit benefit subsidy and remote work. Generally speaking, remote workers are not eligible to receive the transit benefit subsidy. The transit benefit ...
[172]
Expert Voices 2024 | Remote Work: Its Impact on Cities - Penn IUR
Jan 8, 2024 · In the new world of remote work, commuting cost is the enemy of cities because it is a force against in-person work. Transit remains essential ...