Housing

Transit-Oriented, But Affordable?

Planning and community development blogs are aglow with talk of transit-oriented development (TOD), which is just that: development clustered around bus and train stations. It’s the favorite buzzword of smart […]

Planning and community development blogs are aglow with talk of transit-oriented development (TOD), which is just that: development clustered around bus and train stations. It’s the favorite buzzword of smart growth advocates looking to curb sprawl, protect open space and provide more affordable housing. The housing piece should be of particular interest to low-income advocates, but it’s controversial. Critics say they’ve seen plenty of cases where TOD caused a rapid increase in housing prices, offsetting whatever residents might save by storing their cars and riding the train.

Cities with an established network of transit lines are in an excellent position to gain revenue and revitalize struggling districts by concentrating new apartment buildings, retail and office space within walking distance of stations. Neighborhoods Now, a CDC network in Philadelphia, is seeking to create a zoning classification specifically for TOD locations. They are teaming with four CDCs to show the benefits of this kind of development.

It wouldn’t be all bad if TODs caused property values to rise, particularly in some of the long-depressed communities in Philadelphia that Neighborhoods Now is looking at. More income diversity in these areas would be a good thing.

Reconnecting America, a TOD think tank, says its studies show more of the people living and working within TOD boundaries are low-income than in surrounding areas. But some of the folks at Heritage Foundation and other conservative writers say TOD, like smart growth and land use planning in general, is exclusionary. Of course, Heritage recently went so far as to blame land use planning for the current subprime mortgage crisis, so maybe we shouldn’t take them too seriously.

Nevertheless, it could be that TOD is attractive to planners because it appeals to many middle and upper-income people who hate traffic and love living in densely populated city neighborhoods. Will it also serve people who are already living in transit-oriented places, or will it slowly drive them out?

This seems like a good issue for CDCs everywhere to pay close attention to, as part of a larger focus on smart growth and sustainability in metropolitan areas.

Related Articles

  • Illustration of a right hand holding a small red two-dimensional house between thumb and index finger. The hand is dark blue and the arm, shown a bit beyond the wrist, is wearing a white shirt and suit jacket. The background of the image is a city skyline, in lighter shades of the same blue, with puffy clouds above.

    Ownership Matters: Institutional Investors and Corporate Ownership

    May 23, 2024

    Who owns our homes is an absolutely essential part of housing policy, and an even greater part of housing politics.

  • A Black woman in blue flowered dress and dusty pink hijab speaks into several microphones. In foreground, blurry, are news cameras. The woman is part of a large group at a rally, carrying signs promoting rent stabilization and saying "Home to Stay MPLS"

    Affordable Housing Sector Split on Rent Control

    May 21, 2024

    In the Twin Cities, where voters have recently supported rent control, most nonprofit housing developers have stayed silent, and some have openly lined up with the developers and landlords who oppose it.

  • Seven people wearing jackets and caps on a city sidewalk holding signs that say "Listen to UREB," "Save Our Homes," "Negotiate with UREB," or "5,000 Against Displacement." One person is speaking into a microphone. At the curb by the speaker is a van with WRLC painted on the side, for Western Reserve Land Conservancy.

    Nonprofit to Close Mobile Home Community to Build a Park

    May 10, 2024

    Ohio’s largest conservation land trust has been accused of purchasing a manufactured housing community with the very intention of closing it, evicting more than 100 households in the process. But proponents of the park’s closure say the land's failing infrastructure—and the benefit the property will bring to an entire city—is what forced the decision.