Transit agencies are quick to claim that new rail transit lines generate all sorts of new developments, particularly so-called transit-oriented developments, meaning high-density, mixed-use housing. But an objective study of Minneapolis’ Hiawatha light-rail line from economists Sarah West and Needham Hurst found that “neither construction nor operation of the line appears to affect land use change relative to the time before construction.”
Unfortunately, the paper itself is behind a paywall, but it is summarized in this article from the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. An earlier version of the study is also available.
Hurst’s and West’s findings are obliquely affirmed by a recent article in the Journal of the American Planning Association that finds that people living in transit-oriented developments may drive a little less than other people, but it’s not because of the presence of rail transit. Instead, “Housing type and tenure, local and subregional density, bus service, and particularly off- and on-street parking availability, play a much more important role.” Another way of putting it is that people who choose to live in places with limited parking probably didn’t want to drive much anyway.
In general though, the major order viagra australia benefits lie in helping people with pancreatic deficiency. How to overcome these aging effects? Shilajit ES capsule has excellent anti oxidant properties to ensure improved blood flow to all of your body organs. canada cialis from This is often a very heritageihc.com cheap cialis costly procedure, and there are associated risks involved. Older males usually suffer from low semen load viagra 20mg india and low sperm motility.
John Charles of the Cascade Policy Institute has argued for well over a decade that transit-oriented development was a myth, which is a kind way of saying it is a fraud. Not only is it stimulated more by subsidies than by rail transit, he argues, it doesn’t change residents’ behavior much if at all. Charles is joined in this by Sam Staley looking at Austin and David Hartgen looking at Charlotte. To the extent that anything is built along rail transit lines, it is often subsidized, tends to be slow to fill up, and merely displaces development that would have taken place anyway, though possibly in some other part of the city at a lower density.
In other news from the Twin Cities, construction of the region’s second light-rail line is having a significant impact on business–all of it negative. Apparently, construction harmed the businesses of a hairdresser, a thrift store, and a medical hiring company, and they successfully sued the rail contractor, Walsh Construction. But Walsh has been slow to pay damages. Of course, the planners who envision yuppified TODs along the light-rail line probably didn’t want those businesses to survive anyway.
The “study” you cite from the APA Journal is totally contradicted by that recent USC study that directly measured what people did “before” and “after” the LA Expo Line opened. I for one take studies that directly measure what people do over tortured data anytime, and measure people’s actions objectively such as the use of GPS and similar methods, as the LA study did.
There’s another UofM study from awhile back that had similar findings. It looked at housing prices, not land use.
The only TOD’s that work: Retirement homes. Not because of transit, high density, bike lanes, bioswales, or limited parking, but because 80% of the residents have some kind of chronic disease that caused their license to be revoked.
The mess of cars found surrounding a retirement home TOD belong to employees of the facility and family members.
What a terrible infringement of Marty’s freedom! If only we had built an elevated highway instead . . .
I wonder why Randal conflates this corridor to every city but the authors don’t. And I wonder why Randal didn’t mention that the authors suspect that the Great Recession had something to do with it because
I wonder why Randal didn’t mention that. I wonder…I wonnnnnnnnnnnnderrrrrrrrrrr…
DS
Dan, ridership on the line fell last year. The city + Metro Transit have wanted to put transit on that corridor for generations ( yes, plural ). Yet they’ve done little to prepare or shape things for it’s arrival.
It should be no wonder that land use has gone on unchanged. It wasn’t a location that lent itself to much change. It’s primary selling point was cheap right of way due to MN 55 & access to MSP.
One side of the line has a busy freeway with – other than the Sabo bridge – at grade pedestrian crossing of a very busy highway coupled with an industrial area. The other side of it was full of SFHs. The couple small brownfields that were open before the line was built were filled with single family homes after construction began.
Anyone want to build housing near the stations to take advantage of higher prices at this point needs to buy out single family homes & get city approval to tear them down and replace it with something more dense. Building BRT, LRT, Monorail, streetcars or whatever isn’t going to change the messy, expensive process of redevelopment. And with a city whose council will spend 5-7 minutes discussing what _SIDING_ and how many windows a property will have, you know it doesn’t take much neighborhood opposition to get ugly and expensive fast.
An interesting note on the Hiawatha LRT, the current mess that Metro Transit has on the proposed Southwest LRT is due to the Hiawatha LRT and it’s corresponding MN 55 rebuild project. To save money on the project & to get the bonus of getting freight off the greenway in MPLS ( ex-Milwaukee Road, btw ) they got the Twin Cities & Western RR to agree to sell the line to them and change their freight routing.
The current routing was supposed to be temporary. Of course, with nothing pressing the issue they never found a permanent solution. They saved money on Hiawatha and MN 55 by not having to bridge the freight lines in exchange for what we have today, a mexican stand-off.