Model TOD Zoning Ordinance (PDF, 3.7 MB) - Reconnecting America

Model Transit-Oriented District Overlay Zoning Ordinance ■ June 29, 2001riders who would otherwise opt to drive. K As a result of improved transit service, TODs can beseen as points or zones where commute costs are reduced and, based on this model, land valuesincrease.Yet, little research exists which directly shows disparities in land values between TODs andcomparable developments that are not well-served by transit. A study conducted by John Landis,shows that for every meter that a BART-served Alameda County home was closer to a BARTstation, its 1990 sales price increased by $0.29, all else being equal. Smaller levels of housingvaluecapitalization were also found along light rail systems in San Diego, Sacramento, and SanJose. LRent premiums are one way of gauging land values around TODs. Cervero’s research of theBART system found that, on average, rents for one and two-bedroom units increased 10 to 15%as compared to comparable units (in terms of size, age and amenities that were in the samegeographic submarket but away from BART). Likewise rent premiums in Atlanta’s MARTAbasedTODs and WMATA sites showed “modest” rent premiums over their freeway-basedcounterparts. These premiums were attributed to the fact that rail-served areas were morecompact, more pedestrian-friendly and, yielded more leasable space overall (due to decreasedparking requirements and other factors). Being mixed-use centers more of the leasable space isdedicated to retail uses which typically achieve rents twice as high as office. M Additionally,Orenco Station showed similar results for sales premiums of single-family homes. (See CaseStudy #1 in Chapter III. Case Studies.)As mixed-use centers, TODs themselves can also be expected to generate a certain attraction asemployment centers. Depending on the regional market and the local land use policies, TODs canbe a catalyst for major employment growth around stations. Atlanta’s Bell South Corporationrecently announced plans to move 13,000 of its 88,450 employees from freeway-based outpoststo more centralized “business centers” around MARTA rail stations. BellSouth, like many largecompanies, originally strategized to locate their offices on the suburban fringe in order to takeadvantage of cheaper rents and the ostensible convenience of easy freeway access. Over the lastfew years, the greater cost of increased travel times and stress for commuting have prompted thecompany to consolidate their myriad suburban leases and focus their land-buying power onreducing their employees’ need for an automobile, supporting Transit-Oriented Development.The flagship of BellSouth’s move is the 51-acre Lindbergh Center mixed-use development,KA recent study conducted by the American Public Transit Association shows that for every $10 millioninvested in public transit, over $15 million is saved in transportation costs to both highway and transitusers. These costs include operating costs, fuel costs, and congestion costs. Cambridge Systematics withEconomic Development Research Group, Public Transportation and the Nation’s Economy: A QuantitativeAnalysis of Public Transportation’s Economic Impact (New York: American Public Transit Association,October, 1999).LJohn Landis, Subrajit Guhathakurta, William Huang, and Ming Zhang, “Rail Transit Investments, RealEstate Values, and Land Use Change: A Comparative Analysis of Five California Rail Transit Systems,”Monograph 48 (Berkeley: University of California, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, 1995).As cited in Robert Cervero, “Transit Villages in California: Progress, Prospects, and Policy Reforms,”Working Paper 98-08 (Berkeley: University of California, Institute of Urban and Regional Development,October 1998).MBernick and Cervero 132.Valley Connections ■ Chapter II ■ Page 11