TYPOLOGY CASE STUDIES APPENDIX B

Transcription

1 TYPOLOGY CASE STUDIES

2

3 INTRODUCTION TOD Typologies have been used in regions around the country, and typologies have been used to answer a variety of questions relating to planning for transportation and land use around a transit node. In some cases, they have helped define a high level vision for station areas. Others have focused on identifying the critical activities that are necessary to implement a vision for TOD. In other cases, they have focused on the question of how to plan for mixedincome communities. The following examples illustrate how some regions and corridors have used the typology approach to answer questions about their station areas and identify some key takeaways for the Bottineau Typology. SOUTHWEST LRT, TWIN CITIES In the Twin Cities, CTOD and Stantec worked together to incorporate a development assessment into a corridor-wide station area typology for the Southwest LRT. With an approved transit alignment and some station area planning already complete, this corridor was ready to gain a deeper understanding of the market and development potential at the corridor scale and how development activity is likely to play out at different stations over different time frames. In order to reach that understanding, this typology explored different aspects of the planned stations, including their role in the transit network (origin vs destination), the scale of change expected (comparing existing uses to future uses), and how market timing, development opportunity and the scale of investment came together to identify opportunity sites and key activities to support or strengthen market activity. Typology Case Studies B-1

4 Table B.1 - The Southwest Typology (or station characterizations) identified how the market for development, development opportunity and other factors interacted along Southwest LRT stations. STATION Origin/ Destination Existing Uses Scale of Transformation Future Uses Market Strength/ Timing Development Opportunity Scale of Access Investment Interchange/ Target Field Destination Commercial/Entertainment Major Urban Center Short-Term Major Opportunity Minor Royalston Destination Primarily Industrial Major Urban Center Long Term Major Opportunity Key Access Routes Van White Destination Primarily Industrial/ Recreation Major Urban Center Long Term Major Opportunity Key Access Routes Penn Origin Primarily Residential (Mostly Single Family) Urban Neighborhood Short-Term Infill Minor 21st Street Origin Primarily Residential (Mostly Single Family) + Recreation Urban Neighborhood Long Term None Minor West Lake Mix Mix of Commercial And Residential Major Urban Center Short-Term Infill Key Access Routes Beltline Mix Mix of Commercial/Industrial And Residential Urban Center Mid-Term Major Opportunity/ Infill Key Access Routes 21st Street Mix Mix of Commercial, Institutions And Residential Urban Neighborhood Mid-Term Major Opportunity Key Access Routes B-2 Typology Case Studies

5 CITY OF DENVER, COLORADO Denver developed a TOD typology to provide a vision for the density and land use mix that would be appropriate in each of the City s existing and planned light rail station areas. The typology was a part of a broader TOD Strategic Plan and served as a guide for subsequent station area planning studies. The City used a qualitative approach to develop this typology. Figure X shows the information that was used to define each of Denver s place types, which included not only desired land use mix but more specific direction on desired housing types, employment types, proposed scale, and how stations fit into the transit system. The aspirational place types defined in the typology were a building block for future planning efforts, giving the City a sense of the different kinds of places that would be connected by transit before station area planning could be completed for all stations. And in some cases, the typology helped the City identify where to prioritize more in-depth station area planning. For example, 10th and Osage was identified as an immediate priority because of the market opportunity and potential for gentrification in the station area. Table B.2 - Denver s TOD Typology identified the key land use characteristics of different types of stations throughout the city. TOD Typology Downtown Major Urban Center Urban Center Urban Neighborhood Community Town Center Desired Land Use Mix Office, retail, residential, entertainment, and civic uses Office, retail, residential, entertainment Office, retail, residential Residential, neighborhood retail Office, retail, residential Desired Housing Types Multi-family and loft Multi-family and townhome Multi-family and townhome Multi-family townhome, small lot single-family Multi-family townhome, small lot single-family Commercial/ Employment Types Prime office and shopping location Employment emphasis, with more than 250,000 sf office & 50,000 sf retail Limited office. Less than 25,000 sf office. More than 50,000 sf retail Local-serving retail. No more than 25,000 sf Local and commuter- serving. No more than 25,000 sf Proposed Scale 5 stories and above 5 stories and above 3 stories and above 2-7 stories 2-7 stories Transit System Function Intermodal facility/transit hub. Major regional destination with high quality feeder bus/ streetcar connections Sub-Regional destination. Some Park-n-ride. Linked with district circulator transit and express feeder bus. Sub-Regional destination. Some Park-n-ride. Linked with district circular transit and express feeder bus. Neighborhood walk-up station. Very small Park-n-ride, if any. Local bus connections. Capture station for inbound commuters. Large Park-n-ride with local and express bus connections. Denver will be updating the TOD Strategic Plan and station typology in with an emphasis on developing a typology that is focused around a set of implementation activities. Main Street Residential, neighborhood retail Multi-family Main street retail infill 2-7 stories Bus or streetcar corridors. District circulator or feeder transit service. Walk-up stops. No Transit parking. Campus/Special Events Station University Campus, Sports Facilities Limited multi-family Limited office/retail Varies Large commuter destination. Large parking reservoirs but not necessarily for transit. Typology Case Studies B-3

6 Figure B.1 - This map, coupled with an assessment of market conditions, prioritized station area planning and other investments at key stations. B-4 Typology Case Studies

7 WEST CORRIDOR, DENVER METRO REGION Along the West Corridor, multiple jurisdictions came together to develop a TOD typology focused on implementation. Ultimately, the typology helped city staff identify the set of priority actions different station types needed to undertake to move TOD from planning to implementation. The typology also helped the jurisdictions along the line understand how stations had progressed in relation to the City of Denver s aspirational typology. The West Corridor will open in 2013 and passes through three cities and two counties. When the West Corridor Planning process was underway, almost every station had already completed a station area plan with a detailed vision for the kinds of housing, land uses, street design, etc that were desired at each station. The station area plans were ambitious in their vision, but did not link to the tools and set of activities that would help make that vision a reality. These three implementation types: transformational, intensification, and neighborhood infill were linked to strategies and next steps that made sense for each implementation type. For instance, transformational stations, with the greatest development potential on the corridor and some of the greatest market strength, are to create TOD master plans and finance or create detailed plans for pedestrian and bicycle connections. The activities prioritized at other stations were smaller in scale. Thus, the focus of the corridor planning effort was on identifying priority station areas and what those implementation activities should be. Ultimately, the typology used some baseline analysis to identify three implementation types. The baseline analysis looked at the residential and employment concentrations in station areas to identify the scale of potential change and available land, market interest and existing services to show development potential. Figure B.2 - The three different implementation types along the West Corridor were attached to a different set of implementation activities and next steps. I-70 hway State Hig 58 I-25 Jefferson County Oak O ak ak Jefferson effff rs eff ef effe Co. Government G overnme v C Center e terr Auraria Aurra aria a We West W e t ay 40 US Highw Red Re ed Rocks R ck CC CC G rriso Garrison i o on n Wad Wadsw Wa W adsw wo orth rtth th Lamar mar US Highway 6 Legend Knox Knox Federal/ derra ra all/ De De ec ecatur catur urr Osage O sa age ea and nd 10th 1 h State Highway 88 State Highway 121 Federal F edera deral Center de Cen e State Highway 391 She She eridan er rid da da an n Pe Perry e ry Denver County Implementation Types I-70 State High way 470 County border Transformational Station Intensification Half-Mile Buffer Transit Rail Line State Highways Freeways Neighborhood Infill Source: LEHD 2008, Claritas 2010, CTOD 2010 January 2011 N [ Typology Case Studies B-5

8 BAY AREA, METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (MTC) In the Bay Area, MTC, the regional transportation planning organization, created a regional TOD typology to assist with the planning local cities and counties were doing around their new and existing transit stations. This planning was mostly in response to MTC s 2005 TOD Policy, which required jurisdictions to plan for specified amounts of housing in exchange for MTC funding the new transit lines. MTC offered grants to support that local planning work but found that local jurisdictions wanted more direction in understanding the scale and types of development they should anticipate near their stations. The place types were developed to give local jurisdictions and planning staff a range of options for what TOD in their communities could look like. They were defined by both existing and future characteristics, including land use mix, the type of transit service, and the scale of new development. City-staff self-selected their place types, which gave them a starting place for approaching station area planning. The place types were also linked to a set of development guidelines that local staff could use to plan for the types of housing, the number of jobs, minimum FAR and density requirements. Ultimately, MTC s goal was to ensure that the regional transit investments they were making would be as efficient as possible and would attract the riders that the system needed to sustain itself. The typology, which helped local jurisdictions to focus growth around transit nodes, was one key approach to that goal. Table B.3- The places types developed for the Bay Area region ranged from Regional Centers to Transit Neighborhoods and were defined by the land uses, densities, and other characteristics of station areas. Key Identifying Questions What are/will be the characteristics of the Station Area? What is/will be the transit mode in the Station Area? What is/will be the land use mix and density in the Station Area? What are/will be the characteristics of retail in the Station Area? What are/will be major planning and development challenges? Example [2] T STATION AREA PLANNING MANUAL PLACE TYPE IDENTIFICATION Regional Center Primary center of economic and cultural activity. All Modes High-density mix of residential, commercial, employment, and civic/cultural uses. Regional-serving destination retail opportunity; need for local-serving retail Integrating dense mix of housing and employment into built-out context. Downtown San Francisco, Oakland & San Jose Centers City Center Suburban Center Transit Town Center Significant center of economic and cultural activity with regional-scale destinations. All Modes Moderate- to high-density mix of residential, commercial, employment, and civic/cultural uses. Regional-serving destination retail opportunity; need for local-serving and communityserving retail Integrating high-density housing into existing mix of housing and employment to support local-serving retail. Downtown Hayward, Berkeley, Redwood City & Santa Rosa Significant center of economic and cultural activity with regional-scale destinations. All Modes Moderate- to high-density mix of residential, commercial, employment, and civic/cultural uses. Regional-serving destination retail opportunity; need for local-serving and communityserving retail Introducing housing into predominantly employment uses and improving connections/access to transit. Pleasant Hill BART, Dublin/Pleasanton BART Local center of economic and community activity. Commuter Rail, Local/ Regional Bus Hub, Ferry, Potentially BART Moderate-density mix of residential, commercial, employment, and civic/cultural uses. Community-serving and destination retail opportunity; need for local-serving retail. Increasing densities while retaining scale and improving transit access. Hercules Waterfront, Suisun City, Napa, Livermore B-6 Typology Case Studies

9 SOMERVILLE, MA (BOSTON REGION) In Somerville, an inner-city suburb outside of Boston, a new rail investment (the Green Line) was planned that would drastically increase the number of transit stations in the city and make it easier to reach other regional destinations in Boston. In response to this transit planning, a social equity-focused community group developed a typology to identify where displacement and gentrification might occur. This group (the Somerville Community Corporation) wanted to ensure that when the transit line came to their town, that people of all incomes could access the transit and benefit from the connections to employment, services, and housing that it could provide. Somerville s typology identified five different neighborhood types, as seen in Figure 6, based on market strength, land opportunity, access needs, and the potential for displacement. Each place type was linked to a set of affordable housing strategies that made the most sense in that neighborhood (preservation of affordable housing vs production.) Figure B.3- Somerville s typology was focused on the different effects transit might have on neighborhoods in the city and how affordable housing strategies could prevent displacement. Typology Case Studies B-7

10 CENTRAL MARYLAND (BALTIMORE) In the Central Maryland/Baltimore region, another equity group had a similar idea. The TOD typology aimed to answer a couple of key questions: where market rate development was most likely to occur and how neighborhoods might change in the future and be vulnerable to displacement. Figure B.4- The Baltimore Typology and TOD Strategic Plan evaluated development and demographic characteristics to define future investment priorities. Central Maryland Transit-Oriented Development Strategy / Executive Summary: Regional Investments for Transit-Centered Communities ES-11 The answers to these questions then identified station area investment needs and assigned next steps to a broad range of TOD actors and stakeholders, including affordable housing developers, the State of Maryland, the City of Baltimore and its surrounding counties, and non-profit and philanthropic groups. This typology was folded into a broader TOD Strategic Plan that has enabled Baltimore to more systematically fund transitsupportive projects, rather than continuing in a less effective, piecemeal fashion as was historic practice. The typology also identified a set of high priority locations and low priority locations for TOD throughout the region. TOD OPPORTUNITY TYPE SHORT-TERM DEVELOPMENT LONG-TERM DEVELOPMENT EMERGING MARKET OWINGS MILLS INNER HARBOR EAST DEVELOPMENT FACILITATION MARTIN STATE ABERDEEN AIRPORT MARKET PRIMING WHITE MARSH TOWSON ODENTON WOODBERRY NEIGHBORHOOD BAYVIEW REINFORCEMENT CAMPUS HUNT VALLEY FELLS POINT STATE CENTER ROGERS AVE EDMONDSON VILLAGE HOPKINS HOSPITAL PROACTIVE EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT REISTERSTOWN PLAZA PENN STATION W BALTIMORE MARC MARKET CATALYST CHERRY HILL WESTPORT PROACTIVE MIXED-INCOME STATIC MARKET BWI STATION COLDSPRING LANE MONITOR & RESPOND CMS QUALITY-OF-LIFE IMPROVEMENTS I-70 EAST EMPLOYMENT CENTER STABLE COMMUNITY VULNERABLE COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD SCREEN CHALLENGED COMMUNITY B-8 Typology Case Studies

11 KEY LESSONS LEARNED FOR BOTTINEAU These typologies offer a range of examples for the Bottineau Corridor. Knowing what question the typology is being used to answer will guide how the typology is defined and what characteristics and analysis are important inputs. One of the larger questions along Bottineau relates to wanting to better understand and articulate what kinds of TOD might occur or make sense around planned stations. This was the case in Denver and the Bay Area, where aspirational typologies focused on future land uses and scales of development were used. Keeping it simple is another key lesson, especially at the onset of a project. The more approachable a typology is for staff, elected officials, advocates, and the public, the more likely it will be useful in future planning work. A typology is a tool that is not static. It can be updated and tailored as transit planning moves through the lengthy process to implementation. The timing and status of the transit investment also feeds into what the typology will look like. Again, when the planning around the transit investment is still in preliminary stages, identifying the range of place types around future stations is an important step for land use planning. Looking at existing conditions while envisioning future uses is another common element to many of these typologies. Comparing what is near a planned station today to what is desired for that station area in the future illustrates the scale of the change necessary, which can be transformational and require a deeper level of planning and public leadership, or it could be smaller scale, in which case basic zoning changes and pedestrian improvements may be sufficient. Table B.4- Residential Densities along the Bottineau Transitway RESIDENTIAL DENSITY Brooklyn Park Crystal Robbinsdale Golden Valley Minneapolis (approximate) Low < 3 du/acre < 5 du/acre Single Family detached Single Family N/A Low-Medium/ Moderate N/A N/A Single Family, townhomes Up to 8 du/acre < 20 du/acre Medium 3 to 9 du/acre 5 to 12 du/acre Up to three stories of multi-family du/acre 20 to 50 du/acre High 9 to 25 du/acre 12+ du/acre Multi-family 4 stories + Over 12 du/acre 50 + du/acre Typology Case Studies B-9