In 2009 and 2010, the Office of Governor Ted Strickland and the Center for Neighborhood Technology formed a partnership with regional leaders in Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Columbus. The project, called BROADENING URBAN INVESTMENT TO LEVERAGE TRANSIT (BUILT) IN OHIO, sought to identify smart growth strategies for each region by building on existing urban assets. Leaders in Cincinnati convened twice to discuss the impact of recent development trends and a policy blueprint for a new way forward. This report is an outcome of those discussions.
The purpose of this white paper is to create a well-supported yet simple illustration of the relationship between household energy consumption and residential development patterns. For the purpose of this illustration, residential development patterns are generally described by housing location and housing type. The paper also takes into account energy efficiency measures in homes and vehicles as factors that aff ect household energy use.
Housing that is located in a walkable neighborhood near public transit, employment centers, schools, and other amenities allows residents to drive less and thereby reduces transportation costs. Development in such locations is deemed to be “location efficient,” given a more compact design, higher-density construction, and/ or inclusion of a diverse mix of uses. If American families can reduce their necessity to drive through better housing and transportation options, then commute times and household energy costs will drop.
On September 1, 2010, Virginia Tech’s Metropolitan Institute and Center for Housing Research brought together more than 50 national experts and policy advocates for a one-day research roundtable with leaders and staff from HUD’s Office of Planning, Development and Research (PD&R) and Office of Sustainable Communities and Housing (OSHC). Participants were tasked with identifying the top research priorities that would support HUD and the Federal Interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities as they develop and implement policies and programs that promote more sustainable communities.
Sustainability covers a wide range of potential policy and research topics. In light of Virginia Tech’s expertise and HUD’s policy and programmatic domains, the following three areas were selected as special breakout groups for the roundtable:
Accessible and Affordable Housing – strengthening the policy connections between transportation and housing;
Green and Energy…
This article examines changes in transport and land-use policies in Germany over the last 40 years that have encouraged more walking, bicycling and public transport use. It focuses on a case study of policy changes in the city of Freiburg, where over the last three decades, the number of bicycle trips tripled, public transport ridership doubled, and the share of trips by automobile declined from 38% to 32%. Since 1990, motorization rates have leveled-off and per-capita CO2 emissions from transport have fallen—despite strong economic growth. The analysis identifies policies that are transferable to car-oriented countries around the world.
More than $8 billion of new development has occurred in light rail station areas. A study of MAX Blue Line light rail station areas found that development occurring after light rail investment has an average development density or Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.65 more than the average FAR for development outside of station areas. This means that for every 1,000 square feet of land area developed, station area taxlots realized an additional 650 square feet of building area. The rate of development within Blue Line station areas was 69 percent higher than elsewhere within a one-mile corridor extending along the light rail alignment. Low and moderate value lots within Blue Line station areas redeveloped at twice the redevelopment rate reported for low value lots outside of station areas.
Even as transit has become an amenity with value to a growing market segment, we continue to be mindful of the critical assistance transit can provide low income households. Through its joint…
More than 3,000 transit-rich neighborhoods (TRNs) in U.S. metropolitan areas have fixed-guideway transit stations and hundreds more such neighborhoods could be created over the next decade if current plans for new transit systems and stations are realized. Americans are increasingly using transit and showing more interest in living in transit-rich neighborhoods. For neighborhood and equity advocates from Atlanta to Seattle and Minneapolis to Houston, however, this good news is tempered by a growing concern about gentrification and displacement. Will current neighborhood residents, many of them low income and/or people of color, benefit from planned transit stations? Or will they be displaced by wealthier and less diverse residents lured not only by transit but also by the other amenities that come with transit-induced neighborhood revitalization?
Boulder has a residential population density greater than Denver – and is 40% more dense than peer cities like Palo Alto, California and Madison, Wisconsin. Still, there are calls by some for much greater density in Boulder. The public debate about increasing Boulder’s density has been emotional and rife with misinformation. A comprehensive analysis of the facts surrounding density and growth in Boulder is desperately needed. This PLAN-Boulder County report examines density and growth from four important aspects: regional transportation, greenhouse gas generation, adequate public services, and affordable housing.
Background: The built environment can constrain or facilitate physical activity. Most studies of the health consequences of the built environment face problems of selection bias associated with confounding effects of residential choice and transportation decisions.
The “20-minute neighborhood” is often thought of as a place wherein daily needs can be met within a walkable area. With Portland•s recently adopted goal of increasing bicycle ridership to a 25% mode share by the year 2030, efforts to incorporate bicycles into this concept will become increasingly important. However, limited research has examined the mix of physical infrastructure and land uses that constitute a “bikeable” neighborhood or community. This paper explores a methodology for assessing a neighborhood•s bikeability based on its mix of infrastructure and destinations – essentially the 20-minute neighborhood for bicycles. The area of outer east Portland, an area east of 82nd Avenue with substantially lower bicycling rates than other Portland neighborhoods, is used as a case study and compared to an assessment of neighborhoods that are considered to be bike-friendly (downtown, inner-east and north Portland). The paper examines prior approaches to…
The report begins by describing “Ten Core Connections” among TOD, families, and schools relevant to creating complete communities and ensuring ensure high quality educational opportunities for all children. We then describe the unique demographic and policy context in which schools and school districts operate in California. From there, we present and analyze the experiences from five Bay Area TOD planning processes. These case studies illustrate a range of issues and represent different points in a planning and development time frame. Combined with our years of research in the region, these exploratory case studies guided our development of the “Ten Core Connections” between TOD and education, and informed the findings that conclude the paper.