Examine individual changes

'[[File:Arlington County - Virginia.jpg|thumb|300px|The local government of [[Arlington County, Virginia]] encourages transit-oriented development within {{convert|1/4|to|1/2|mi|m}} from the County's [[Washington Metro]] [[rapid transit]] stations, with [[mixed-use development]], [[bikesharing]] and [[walkability]].]] A '''transit-oriented development''' ('''TOD''') is a [[Mixed-use development|mixed-use]] residential and commercial area designed to maximize access to [[public transport]], and often incorporates features to encourage transit ridership. A TOD neighborhood typically has a center with a transit station or stop ([[train station]], [[metro station]], [[tram stop]], or [[bus stop]]), surrounded by relatively high-density development with progressively lower-density development spreading outward from the center. TODs generally are located within a radius of one-quarter to one-half mile (400 to 800 m) from a transit stop, as this is considered to be an appropriate scale for [[pedestrian]]s, thus solving the [[Last mile (transport)|last mile problem]]. {{TOC left}} {{-}} ==Description== Many of the [[new town]]s created after [[World War II]] in [[Japan]], [[Sweden]], and [[France]] have many of the characteristics of TOD communities. In a sense, nearly all communities built on [[Land reclamation|reclaimed land]] in the [[Netherlands]] or as [[exurban]] developments in [[Denmark]] have had the local equivalent of TOD principles integrated in their planning, including the promotion of [[bicycle]]s for local use. In the United States, a half-mile-radius circle has become the de facto standard for rail-transit catchment areas for TODs. A half mile (800 m) corresponds to the distance someone can walk in 10 minutes at {{Convert|3|mph|abbr=on}} and is a common estimate for the distance people will walk to get to a rail station. The half-mile ring is a little more than {{Convert|500|acres|km2|abbr=on}} in size.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.uctc.net/access/42/access42_halfmiletods.shtml|title=Is a Half-Mile Circle the Right Standard for TODs?|author=Erick Guerra and Robert Cervero|work=ACCESS, [[University of California, Berkeley]]|date=Spring 2013|number=42|accessdate=2013-06-07}}</ref> Transit-oriented development is sometimes distinguished by some planning officials from "[[transit-proximate development]]" (see, e.g., comments made during a Congressional hearing <ref>[http://edf.org/documents/2698_Testimony03_03.pdf ]{{dead link|date=December 2013}}</ref>) because it contains specific features that are designed to encourage public transport use and differentiate the development from [[urban sprawl]]. Examples of these features include mixed-use development that will use transit at all times of day, excellent pedestrian facilities such as high quality [[pedestrian crossing]]s, narrow streets, and tapering of buildings as they become more distant from the public transport node. Another key feature of transit-oriented development that differentiates it from "transit-proximate development" is reduced amounts of [[parking]] for personal vehicles. Opponents of compact, or transit oriented development typically argue that Americans, and persons throughout the world, prefer low-density living, and that any policies that encourage compact development will result in substantial [[utility]] decreases and hence large social welfare costs.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Moore|first1=Adrian.T.|last2=Staley|first2=Samuel.R.|last3=Poole|first3=Robert.W.|title=The role of VMT reduction in meeting climate change policy goals|journal=Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice |date=2010|volume=44|issue=8|pages=565-574|doi=10.1016/j.tra.2010.03.012|accessdate=16 November 2014}}</ref> Proponents of compact development argue that there are large, often unmeasured benefits of compact development<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Winkelman|first1=S.|last2=Bishins|first2=A.|title=Planning for economic and environmental resiliance|journal=Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice|date=2010|volume=44|issue=8|pages=575-586|doi=10.1016/j.tra.2010.03.011}}</ref> or that the American preference for low-density living is a misinterpretation made possible in part by substantial local government interference in the land market.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Levine|first1=Jonathan|title=Markets and Choices in Transportation and Metropolitan Land Use|date=2006|publisher=Resources for the Future|location=Washington|isbn=978-1933115153}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Boarnet|first1=Marlon|title=A Broader Context for Land Use and Travel Behavior, and a Research Agenda|journal=Journal of the American Planning Association|date=Summer 2011|volume=77|issue=3|pages=197-213|doi=10.1080/01944363.2011.593483|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2011.593483|accessdate=16 November 2014}}</ref> ==TOD in cities== Many cities throughout the world are developing TOD policy. [[Portland, Oregon|Portland]], [[Montreal]], [[San Francisco]], and [[Vancouver]] among many other cities have developed, and continue to write policies and strategic plans which aim to reduce [[automobile dependency]] and increase the use of public transit. ===Latin America=== {{Multiple image|direction=vertical|align=right|image1=Curitiba 04 2006 19 RIT.jpg|image2=Curitiba Panorama Eixo e densidades 02 2006 47.JPG|caption1=[[Rede Integrada de Transporte|Curitiba's BRT corridors]] run along high-density developed areas|caption2=Land use planning allowed high density to develop along [[Rede Integrada de Transporte|Curitiba's BRT corridors]]}} ====Guatemala City, Guatemala==== In an attempt to control rapid growth of [[Guatemala City]], the long-time Mayor of Guatemala City [[Álvaro Arzú]] implemented a plan to control growth based on transects along important arterial roads and exhibiting transit-oriented development (TOD) characteristics. This plan adopted POT (Plan de Ordenamiento Territorial) aims to allow the construction of taller, mixed-use building structures right by large arterial roads; the buildings would gradually decrease in height and density the farther they are from arterial roads.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://pot.muniguate.com/ |title=:::... Plan de Ordenamiento Territorial - Tú eres la Ciudad, Municipalidad de Guatemala, cumple ...::: |language=Spanish|publisher=Pot.muniguate.com |date= |accessdate=2009-07-08}}</ref> This is simultaneously being implemented along with a [[bus rapid transit]] (BRT) system called [[Transmetro]]. ====Curitiba, Brazil==== One of the earliest and most successful examples of TOD is [[Curitiba]], [[Brazil]].<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.ippuc.org.br/pensando_a_cidade/index_zoneamento_ingles.htm | title = Citizine Information, Zoning and Land Use in Curitiba (Ingles) |date=January 2006 | accessdate = 2008 }}</ref> Curitiba was organized into transport corridors very early on in its history. Over the years, it has integrated its zoning laws and transportation planning to place high-density development adjacent to high-capacity transportation systems, particularly its [[Rede Integrada de Transporte|BRT corridors]]. Since the failure of its first, rather grandiose, city plan due to lack of funding, Curitiba has focused on working with economical forms of infrastructure, so it has arranged unique adaptations, such as bus routes (inexpensive infrastructure) with routing systems, limited access and speeds similar to subway systems. The source of innovation in Curitiba has been a unique form of participatory city planning that emphasizes public education, discussion and agreement.{{Citation needed|date=November 2012}}. {{clear right}} ===North America=== {{Multiple image|direction=vertical|align=right|275px|image1=ArlingtonTODimage3.jpg|caption1=Aerial view of [[Rosslyn-Ballston corridor]] in [[Arlington County, Virginia|Arlington, Virginia]]. High density, mixed use development is concentrated within ¼–½ mile from the [[Rosslyn (WMATA station)|Rosslyn]], [[Court House (WMATA station)|Court House]] and [[Clarendon (WMATA station)|Clarendon]] [[Washington Metro]] stations (shown in red), with limited density outside that area.|image2=Ballston TOD.jpg|caption2=Street-level view of the area around the [[Ballston–MU (WMATA station)|Ballston Metro Station]] — also in Arlington, Virginia. Note the mixed-use development (from left to right: ground floor [[retail]]under apartment building, office buildings, shopping mall (at the end of the street), apartment building, office building with ground floor retail), [[pedestrian]] oriented facilities including wide sidewalk, and [[bus stop]] facility in the center distance. [[Parking]] in this location is limited, relatively expensive, and located underground.}} ====Arlington County, Virginia==== For over 30 years, the government has pursed a [[Urban planning|development strategy]] of concentrating much of its new development within {{convert|1/4|to|1/2|mi|m}} from the County's [[Washington Metro]] [[rapid transit]] stations and the high-volume bus lines of [[Virginia State Route 244|Columbia Pike]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.arlingtonva.us/Departments/CPHD/planning/CPHDPlanningSmartGrowth.aspx |title=Smart Growth : Planning Division : Arlington, Virginia |publisher=Arlingtonva.us |date=2011-03-07 |accessdate=2011-11-04}}</ref> Within the transit areas, the government has a policy of encouraging [[mixed-use development|mixed-use]] and [[Walkability|pedestrian-]] and transit-oriented development.<ref name="arlingtonva.us">http://www.arlingtonva.us/departments/CPHD/planning/powerpoint/rbpresentation/rbpresentation_060107.pdf</ref> Some of these "[[urban village]]" communities include: [[Rosslyn, Arlington, Virginia|Rosslyn]], [[Ballston, Arlington, Virginia|Ballston]], [[Clarendon, Arlington, Virginia|Clarendon]], [[Courthouse, Arlington, Virginia|Courthouse]], [[Pentagon City, Arlington, Virginia|Pentagon City]], [[Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia|Crystal City]], [[Lyon Village, Arlington, Virginia|Lyon Village]], [[Shirlington, Arlington, Virginia|Shirlington]], [[Virginia Square, Arlington, Virginia|Virginia Square]], and [[Westover, Arlington, Virginia|Westover]] In 2002, Arlington received the [[United States Environmental Protection Agency|EPA]]'s National Award for Smart Growth Achievement for "Overall Excellence in [[Smart Growth]]" — the first ever granted by the agency.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/arlington.htm|title=Arlington County, Virginia – National Award for Smart Growth Achievement – 2002 Winners Presentation|publisher=Epa.gov |date=2006-06-28 |accessdate=2011-11-04}}</ref> In September 2010, [[Arlington County, Virginia]], in partnership with [[Washington, D.C.]], opened [[Capital Bikeshare]], a [[bicycle sharing system]].<ref name=grist>{{cite web|url=http://www.grist.org/article/2010-09-20-washington-d.c.-launches-the-nations-largest-bike-share-program/|title=Washington, D.C., launches the nation’s largest bike share program|author=Matt Martinez|date=20 September 2010|publisher=[[Grist (magazine)]]|accessdate=14 April 2011}}</ref><ref name=NYT092010>{{cite news|work=[[New York Times]]|url=http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/bike-sharing-expands-in-washington/|title=Bike Sharing Expands in Washington|author=J. David Goodman|date=20 September 2010|accessdate=14 April 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/traffic/arlington-joins-dc-in-bike-sharing-program-092010|title=Arlington Joins DC in Bike-Sharing Program|publisher=MyFoxDC.com|date=20 September 2010|accessdate=14 April 2011}}</ref> By February 2011, Capital Bikeshare had 14 stations in the [[Pentagon City, Arlington, Virginia|Pentagon City]], [[Potomac Yard]], and [[Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia|Crystal City]] neighborhoods in Arlington.<ref name=grist/> Arlington County also announced plans to add 30 stations in fall 2011, primarily along the densely populated corridor between the [[Rosslyn, Arlington, Virginia|Rosslyn]] and [[Ballston, Arlington, Virginia|Ballston]] neighborhoods, and 30 more in 2012.<ref name=expansion>{{cite web|title=Arlington votes (sort of) to expand CaBi; more places likely to follow|url=http://www.thewashcycle.com/2011/10/arlington-votes-to-add-more-cabi-stations-sort-of.html|work=TheWashCycle|accessdate=17 October 2011}}</ref> ====San Francisco Bay Area, California==== The [[San Francisco Bay Area]] includes nine counties and 101 cities, including [[San Jose, California|San Jose]], [[San Francisco]], [[Oakland, California|Oakland]] and [[Fremont, California|Fremont]]. Local and regional governments <ref>[http://www.bayareavision.org/index.html San Francisco Bay Area Vision Project]. Bayareavision.org. Retrieved on 2013-12-06.</ref> encourage transit-oriented development to decrease traffic congestion, protect natural areas, promote public health and increase housing options. The region has designated [http://www.bayareavision.org/pda/ Priority Development Areas] and [http://www.bayareavision.org/pca Priority Conservation Areas]. Current population forecasts <ref>[http://www.abag.ca.gov/planning/currentfcst/ Projections 2009]. Abag.ca.gov (2008-05-15). Retrieved on 2013-12-06.</ref> for the region predict that it will grow by 2 million people by 2035 due to both the natural birth rate and job creation, and estimate that 50% of this growth can be accommodated in Priority Development Areas through transit-oriented development. Major transit village projects have been developed over the past 20 years at several stations linked to the [[Bay Area Rapid Transit]] (BART) system. In their 1996 book, ''Transit Villages in the 21st Century'', [[Michael S. Bernick|Michael Bernick]] and [[Robert Cervero]] identified emerging transit villages at several BART stations, including [[Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa Centre (BART station)|Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa Centre]], [[Fruitvale (BART station)|Fruitvale]], [[Hayward (BART station)|Hayward]] and [[Richmond Station (California)|Richmond]].<ref>{{cite book |title=Transit Villages in the 21st Century |author=Michael Bernick, Robert Cervero |year=1996 |publisher=McGraw Hill |location=University of California, Berkeley }}</ref> ====Salt Lake City Metro Area, Utah==== The [[Salt Lake City metropolitan area|Salt Lake City Metro Area]] has seen a strong proliferation of transit-oriented developments due to the construction of new transit lines within the [[Utah Transit Authority]]'s [[TRAX (light rail)|TRAX]], ''[[FrontRunner]]'' and streetcar lines. New developments in [[West Valley City, Utah|West Valley]], [[Farmington, Utah|Farmington]], [[Murray, Utah|Murray]], [[Provo, Utah|Provo]], [[Kaysville, Utah|Kaysville]], [[Sugarhouse (Salt Lake City)|Sugarhouse]] and [[downtown Salt Lake City]] have seen rapid growth and construction despite the economic downturn. The population along the [[Wasatch Front]] has reached 1.7 million and is expected to grow 50% over the next two decades. At 29.8%, Utah's population growth more than doubled the population growth of the nation (13.2%), with a vast majority of this growth occurring along the Wasatch Front. Transportation infrastructure has been vastly upgraded in the past decade as a result of the [[2002 Olympic Winter Games]] and the need to support the growth in population. This has created a number of transit-oriented commercial and residential projects to be proposed and completed. ==== New Jersey ==== New Jersey has become a national leader in promoting transit oriented development. The [[New Jersey Department of Transportation]] established the Transit Village Initiative in 1999 offering multi-agency assistance and grants from the annual $1 million fund to any municipality with a ready to go project specifying appropriate mixed land-use strategy, available property, station-area management, and commitment to affordable housing, job growth, and culture. Transit village development must also preserve the architectural integrity of historically significant buildings. Since 1999 the state has made 28 Transit Village designations, which are in different stages of development: [[Pleasantville, New Jersey|Pleasantville]] (1999), [[Morristown, New Jersey|Morristown]] (1999), [[Rutherford, New Jersey|Rutherford]] (1999), [[South Amboy, New Jersey|South Amboy]] (1999), [[South Orange, New Jersey|South Orange]] (1999), [[Riverside, Paterson, New Jersey|Riverside]] (2001), [[Rahway, New Jersey|Rahway]] (2002), [[Metuchen, New Jersey|Metuchen]] (2003), [[Belmar, New Jersey|Belmar]] (2003), [[Bloomfield, New Jersey|Bloomfield]] (2003), [[Bound Brook, New Jersey|Bound Brook]] (2003), [[Collingswood, New Jersey|Collingswood]] (2003), [[Cranford, New Jersey|Cranford]] (2003) [[Matawan, New Jersey|Matawan]] (2003), [[New Brunswick, New Jersey|New Brunswick]] (2005), [[Journal Square]]/[[Jersey City, New Jersey|Jersey City]] (2005), [[Netcong, New Jersey|Netcong]] (2005), [[Mid-Town Historic District (Elizabeth, New Jersey)|Midtown]] [[Elizabeth, New Jersey|Elizabeth]] (2007), [[Burlington City, New Jersey|Burlington City]] (2007), [[Orange, New Jersey|Orange]] (2009), [[Montclair, New Jersey|Montclair]] (2010), [[Somerville, New Jersey|Somerville]] (2010), [[Linden, New Jersey|Linden]] (2010), [[West Windsor, New Jersey|West Windsor]] (2012), [[Dunellen, New Jersey|Dunellen]] (2012), and [[Plainfield, New Jersey|Plainfield]] (2014).<ref>{{cite web | title = FAQ | work = Transit Village Initiative | publisher = NJDOT | date = February 25, 2009 | url = http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/community/village/faq.shtm | accessdate = 2012-08-08}}</ref><ref>http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/about/press/2014/032814.shtm</ref> ====Vancouver, British Columbia==== Greater Vancouver has had a strong history of creating new development around its [[SkyTrain (Vancouver)|SkyTrain]] lines and also created the concept of regional town centres on the major stations and transit corridors. Of note is the Metrotown area of the suburb of [[Burnaby]], [[British Columbia]] near the [[Metrotown Station|Metrotown SkyTrain Station]]. The areas around stations have spurred the development of billions of dollars of high-density real estate, with multiple highrises near the many stations. ====Toronto, Ontario==== [[Image:Yonge-Churchill.jpg|right|thumb|Vicinity of [[Finch (TTC)|Finch subway station]], Toronto]] Toronto has a longstanding policy of encouraging new construction along the route of its primary [[Yonge–University–Spadina line|Yonge Street subway line]]. Most notable are the development of the [[Yonge and Eglinton]] area in the 1960s and 1970s; and the [[North York Centre|present development]] of the 2&nbsp;km of the Yonge Street corridor north of Sheppard Avenue, which began in the late 1980s. In the period since 1997 alone the latter stretch has seen the appearance of a major new [[Empress Walk|shopping centre]] and the building and occupation of over twenty thousand new units of [[condominium]] housing. Since the opening of the [[Sheppard line|Sheppard subway line]] in 2002, there is a [[condominium]] construction boom along the route on Sheppard Avenue East between Yonge Street and Don Mills Road. {{clear right}} ====Calgary, Alberta==== [[Image:Bridgeland.JPG|right|150px|thumb|Bridgeland, Calgary]] Calgary is home to a very successful TOD community called The Bridges, located in the community of [[Bridgeland, Calgary|Bridgeland]]. The Bridges is home to a diverse range of condos, shops, services, and parks. Some other TODs currently being constructed are London and [[Westbrook (C-Train)|Westbrook]], both high rise condo and retail communities in [[suburb]]an areas of the City. The City continues to create TOD policy for other Calgary communities. Calgary City Council has allocated funding for the creation of six Station Area Plans around the city, to guide increasing development pressure around some of the light rail transit stations. On June 9, 2008, Calgary City Council approved the first station area plan in Calgary's history. {{clear right}} ====Edmonton, Alberta==== Most of the suburban high rises were not along major rail lines like other cities until recently, when there has been incentive to do so. [[Century Park, Edmonton|Century Park]] is a growing condo community in southern Edmonton at the south end of [[Edmonton Light Rail Transit|Edmonton's LRT]]. It will include low to high rise condos, recreational services, shops, restaurants, and a fitness centre. Edmonton has also had a transit-proximate development for some time in the northeastern suburbs at [[Clareview (ETS)|Clareview]] which includes a large park and ride, and low rise apartments among big box stores and associated power center parking. Edmonton is also looking into some new TODs in various parts of the city. In the northeast, there are plans to redevelop underutilized land at two sites around existing LRT, Fort Road and [[Stadium (ETS)|Stadium Station]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/planning_development/old-town-fort-road-redevelopment.aspx |title=Old Town Fort Road Redevelopment |publisher=City of Edmonton |accessdate=2010-10-21}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/planning_development/stadium-station-transit-oriented-development.aspx |title=Stadium Station Transit Oriented Development |publisher=City of Edmonton |accessdate=2010-10-21}}</ref> In the west, there is plans to have some medium density condos in the [[Glenora, Edmonton|Glenora neighbourhood]] along a future LRT route as well as a TOD in the southeast in the [[Strathearn, Edmonton|Strathearn neighbourhood]] along the same future LRT on existing low rise apartments. ====Winnipeg, Manitoba==== There is currently one TOD being built in Winnipeg beside the [[Winnipeg RT|rapid transit corridor]]. In phase two of the southwest rapid transit corridor, there will be four more TODs.<ref>{{cite web|title=Transportation Master Plan|url=http://transportation.speakupwinnipeg.com/files/2011/11/2011-11-01-TTRWinnipegTMP-Final-Report.pdf|accessdate=27 July 2014}}</ref> ====Montreal, Quebec==== According to the Metropolitan Development and Planning Regulation<ref>[http://www.voirvert.ca/nouvelles/actualites/un-premier-plan-d%E2%80%99amenagement-durable-pour-le-grand-montreal Un premier plan d’aménagement durable pour le Grand Montréal | Voir vert - Le portail du bâtiment durable au Québec]. Voirvert.ca. Retrieved on 2013-12-06.</ref> of late 2011, 40% of new households will be build as TOD neighbourhoods. ====Aurora, Colorado==== The city has developed within its plan as of 2007 standardization measures. For instance, streets' width has been set according to the position of the site.<ref>[https://www.auroragov.org/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=621 Missing Page or Old Bookmark @]. Auroragov.org. Retrieved on 2013-12-06.</ref><ref>[http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/codeexamples.htm#street Examples of Codes That Support Smart Growth Development | Smart Growth | US EPA]. Epa.gov. Retrieved on 2013-12-06.</ref> ===Asia and Oceania=== ====Hong Kong==== In the mid-20th century, no railway was built until an area was well developed. However, in recent decades, [[Hong Kong]] has started to have some TODs, where a railway is built simultaneously with residential development above or nearby. Examples include: *[[LOHAS Park]] *[[Olympian City]] *[[Tung Chung]] ====Milton, Queensland==== [[Milton, Queensland|Milton]], an inner suburb of [[Brisbane]], has been identified as Queensland's first transit-oriented development under the Queensland Government’s [[South East Queensland Regional Plan]]. [[Milton railway station, Brisbane|Milton railway station]] will undergo a multi-million dollar revamp as part of the development of [[The Milton Residences]] to promote and encourage residents to embrace rail travel. This will include a new ticketing office, new public amenities, increased visibility across platforms and new and improved access points off Milton Road and Railway Terrace.<ref>[http://www.themilton.com.au/transit-oriented-development.html Transit Oriented Development, Sustainable City Living] The Milton. Retrieved on 2013-11-20.</ref> ====Melbourne, Victoria==== {{main|Melbourne 2030}} [[Melbourne]], [[Victoria (Australia)|Victoria]] is expected to reach a population of 5 million by 2030 with the overwhelming majority of its residents relying on private automobiles. Since the turn of the century, sporadic efforts have been made by various levels of government to implement transit-oriented development principles. However, a lack of commitment to funding public transport infrastructure, resulting to overcrowding and amending zoning laws has dramatically slowed progress toward [[Sustainability|sustainable development]] for the city. ===Europe=== [[File:Ørestad Karen Blixen Parc.jpg|thumb|Karen Blixen Park, [[Ørestad]] (Copenhagen), Denmark]] The term transit-oriented development, as a US-born concept, is rarely used in Europe, although many of the measures advocated in transit-oriented development are also stressed here. Many European cities have long been built around transit systems and there has thus often been little or no need to differentiate this type of development with a special term as has been the case in the US. An example of this is Copenhagen's [[Finger Plan]] from 1947, which embodied many transit-oriented development aspects and is still used as an overall planning framework today. Recently, scholars and technicians have taken interest in the concept, however.<ref>https://www.colloquium.fr/ei/cm.esp?id=565&pageid=_3ET0UVLVD</ref> ====Paris, France==== Whereas the city of Paris has a centuries-long history, its main frame dates to this 19th century. The [[Paris Métro|subway network]] was made to solve both linkage between the five main train stations and local transportation assets for citizens. The whole area of Paris City is closer than 500 metres from the next subway station. Recent bicycle and car rental systems ([[Velib]] and [[Autolib]]) also ease travel, in the very same way that TOD emphasizes.So do the new trams linking suburbs close to Paris proper, and tramline 3 around the edge of the city of Paris. ====Stedenbaan, The Netherlands==== In the Southern part of the [[Randstad]] will be built a neighbourhood according to the principles of TOD.<ref>http://www.thinkdeep.nl/documents/Papers/Hoeven.pdf</ref> ==Equity and housing cost concerns== One criticism of transit-oriented development is that it has the potential to spur [[gentrification]] in low-income areas. In some cases, TOD can raise the housing costs of formerly affordable neighborhoods, pushing low- and moderate-income residents farther away from jobs and transit. When this happens, TOD projects can disrupt low-income neighborhoods.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.dialogue4health.org/pdfs/wf1/transit-oriented-policylink.pdf | title = Equitable Development Toolkit: Transit Oriented Development | year = 2008 }}</ref> When executed with equity in mind, however, TOD has the potential to benefit low- and moderate-income (LMI) communities: it can link workers to employment centers, create construction and maintenance jobs, and has the potential to encourage investment in areas that have suffered neglect and economic depression.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.frbsf.org/publications/community/investments/1008/index.html | title = Community Investments: Transit-Oriented Development | year = 2010 | author = Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco }}</ref> Moreover, it is well recognized that neighborhood development restrictions, while potentially in the immediate neighborhood's best interest, contribute to regional undersupply of housing and drive up the cost of housing in general across a region. TOD development reduces the overall cost of housing in a region by contributing to the housing supply, and therefore generally improves equitability in the housing market. TOD also reduces transportation costs, which can have a greater impact on LMI households since they spend a larger share of their income on transportation relative to higher-income households. This frees up household income that can be used on food, education, or other necessary expenses. Low-income people are also less likely to own personal vehicles and therefore more likely to depend exclusively on public transportation to get to and from work, making reliable access to transit a necessity for their economic success.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.frbsf.org/publications/community/investments/1008/pdf_soursourian.html | title = Equipping Communities to Achieve Equitable Transit-Oriented Development | year = 2010 | author = Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco }}</ref> Another criticism aims the marginal percentage of people actually using public transportation.<ref>[http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/1638/what-is-transit-oriented-development-supposed-to-be/ Not "The Great Transit Oriented Development Swindle?"]. Fog City Journal (2009-02-05). Retrieved on 2013-12-06.</ref> ==See also== * [[Americas Energy and Climate Symposium]] * [[Auto-oriented development]] * [[Principles of Intelligent Urbanism]] * [[Smart growth]] * [[Streetcar suburb]] * [[Transit-proximate development]] * [[Transit village]] * [[Urban consolidation]] * [[Value capture]] ==References== {{Reflist}} == External links == * [http://www.transit-oriented.com/ Transit-Oriented Development] * [http://www.transitorienteddevelopment.org/index.html Transit Oriented Development] * [http://www.calgary.ca/todplanning Transit Oriented Development in Calgary, Alberta, Canada] * {{fi icon}} [http://www.kaleva.fi/plus/index.cfm?j=698874 Transit oriented development growing in USA] * [https://go.itdp.org/display/live/TOD+Standard TOD Standard: Version 2.0], [[Institute for Transportation and Development Policy]] (ITDP), November 2013. * [http://www.frbsf.org/publications/community/investments/1008/index.html Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco ''Community Investments'': Special Issue on TOD] * [http://www.academia.edu/2391463/From_Intentions_to_Consequences_San_Diego_TOD_Design_Guidelines_and_Rio_Vista_West_Project ''From Intentions to Consequences: San Diego TOD Design Guidelines and Rio Vista West Project''] by Aseem Inam ([[American Planning Association]]). * [http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/SHRP2_S2-C16-RR-1.pdf Effect of Smart Growth Policies on Travel Demand], [[Transportation Research Board]], SHRP 2 Report S2-C16-RR-1, 2014. * [http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/666992.pdf Multiple Factors Influence Extent of Transit-Oriented Development], [[Government Accountability Office|U.S. Government Accountability Office]], November 2014. {{Land-use planning|selected=branches}} {{Public transport}} [[Category:Transit-oriented developments| ]] {{DEFAULTSORT:Transit-oriented development}} [[Category:Urban studies and planning]] [[Category:Urban design]] [[Category:Sustainable development]] [[Category:Sustainable transport]] [[Category:Public transport]] [[Category:Housing]]'