typology case studies - hennepin

APPENDIX B

TYPOLOGY CASE STUDIES

Typology Case Studies B-1APPENDIX BBottineau Transitway Station Area Pre-Planning Study

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 mixed-income 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 CITIESIn 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.

INTRODUCTION

B-2 Typology Case Studies

APPENDIX B Bottineau Transitway Station Area Pre-Planning Study

STATION Origin/ Destination

Scale of TransformationMarket Strength/

TimingDevelopment Opportunity

Scale of Access Investment

Existing Uses Future Uses

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 DestinationPrimarily Industrial/

RecreationMajor Urban Center Long Term Major Opportunity Key Access Routes

Penn OriginPrimarily Residential

(Mostly Single Family)Urban Neighborhood Short-Term Infill Minor

21st Street OriginPrimarily Residential

(Mostly Single Family) + Recreation

Urban Neighborhood Long Term None Minor

West Lake MixMix of Commercial

And ResidentialMajor Urban Center Short-Term Infill Key Access Routes

Beltline MixMix of

Commercial/Industrial And Residential

Urban Center Mid-TermMajor Opportunity/

InfillKey Access Routes

21st Street MixMix of Commercial,

Institutions And Residential

Urban Neighborhood Mid-Term Major Opportunity Key Access Routes

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.


CITY OF DENVER, COLORADODenver 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.

Denver will be updating the TOD Strategic Plan and station typology in 2012-2013 with an emphasis on developing a typology that is focused around a set of implementation activities.

TOD Typology Desired

Land Use MixDesired

Housing TypesCommercial/

Employment TypesProposed

Scale Transit System Function

Downtown

Office, retail, residential, entertainment, and civic uses

Multi-family and loft

Prime office and shopping location

5 stories and above

Intermodal facility/transit hub. Major regional destination with high quality feeder bus/streetcar connections

Major Urban Center

Office, retail, residential, entertainment

Multi-family and townhome

Employment emphasis, with more than 250,000 sf office & 50,000 sf retail

5 stories and above

Sub-Regional destination. Some Park-n-ride. Linked with district circulator transit and express feeder bus.

Urban Center

Office, retail, residential

Multi-family and townhome

Limited office. Less than 25,000 sf office. More than 50,000 sf retail

3 stories and above

Sub-Regional destination. Some Park-n-ride. Linked with district circular transit and express feeder bus.

Urban Neighborhood

Residential, neighborhood retail

Multi-family townhome, small lot single-family

Local-serving retail. No more than 25,000 sf

2-7 stories

Neighborhood walk-up station. Very small Park-n-ride, if any. Local bus connections.

Community Town Center

Office, retail, residential

Multi-family townhome, small lot single-family

Local and com-muter- serving. No more than 25,000 sf

2-7 stories

Capture station for in-bound commuters. Large Park-n-ride with local and express bus connections.

Main StreetResidential, neighborhood retail

Multi-familyMain 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.

Table B.2 - Denver’s TOD Typology identified the key land use characteristics of different types of stations throughout the city.



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


WEST CORRIDOR, DENVER METRO REGIONAlong 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.

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.

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!!

!

!

!

Sta

te H

igh

way

47

0

State Highway 58

I-70

I-70

US Highway 40

US Highway 6

Sta

te H

igh

way

39

1

Sta

te H

igh

way

12

1

I-25

Sta

te H

igh

way

88

Denver County

Jefferson County

OakkOOOOaka

tWestee t WeWWWWWWWWeWeWAurariaAAAuurr riaaraaaar Wea

deral/derr //all/raalFeFeecaturec rrurDeDDeeeDeecatur

ortho tthrto ththWadswWad wWWWWadswwW wWa wWWWW w KnoxKKKKnoxPerryPee ryPerryeridanShehSS eSS erShe dddderrrriddandaaannnee

Lamarmmmmammmam rmGarrisonG risoi nononnr or

Federal CenterFF nedera ed ll nerde Ca ea

Rocks CCRed Rockseed R cRRee c Ce k Cee R

Jefferson Co.efffffffefeffe feffeff rsGovernment CenterCv roovernme tereCG

and 10thd 1Osage aOOOOsaage ae aaan h

[NJanuary 2011

Legend

!

Half-Mile Buffer

County border

State Highways Freeways

Transit Rail Line

Station Station

Transformational

Intensification

Neighborhood Infill

Implementation Types

Source: LEHD 2008,Claritas 2010, CTOD 2010

Figure B.2 - The three different implementation types along the West Corridor were attached to a differ-ent set of implementation activities and next steps.

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.



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.

City Center Suburban Center Transit Town Center

Centers

Regional Center

Key

Iden

tifyi

ng Q

uest

ions

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 developmentchallenges?

Example [2]

[1] Station Area typically refers to half mile radius around station or roughly 500 acres[2] Station Areas are typically a mix of characteristics of several Place Types. These examples are meant to be illustrative of the qualities only.N

otes

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

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.


local-serving and community-serving 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,



local-serving and community-serving 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,


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

STATION AREA PLANNING MANUALPLACE TYPE IDENTIFICATION

T

14

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.


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.) Somerville Equitable TOD Strategy | Equitable TOD Opportunities and Strategies May 2008

29

Map �0: Somerville Equitable Development Opportunity AreasFigure B.3- Somerville’s typology was focused on the different effects transit might have on neighbor-hoods in the city and how affordable housing strategies could prevent displacement.



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.

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 transit-supportive 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.

Central Maryland Transit-Oriented Development Strategy / Executive Summary: Regional Investments for Transit-Centered Communities ES-11

July 2009

There is commonality among the TOD Approaches, but there are also some key differences. Some will be more targeted to investment in new TOD construction, while others will be targeted to investment in preservation and community development outcomes. Some will rate equitable TOD as a top priority and reason for engagement, while others will be able to leverage equitable outcomes from TOD, while accomplishing other priorities.

Using this framework, we can identify an appropriate TOD Approach for existing and planned stations as a starting point for approaching TOD planning in individual locations. These broad approaches need to be implemented through policy and investment tools.

In an era of limited resources, making investment decisions necessitates a comprehensive approach. Given the multiple stakeholders engaged in transit-oriented development, communication and coordination across stakeholders is especially important.

The relative resource intensity and priority in a particular location will vary for each stakeholder engaged in TOD planning and implementation based on the TOD Approach.

NEIGHBORHOOD SCREEN

STABLE COMMUNITY

VULNERABLE COMMUNITY

CHALLENGED COMMUNITY

EMPLOYMENT CENTER

CMS I-70 EAST

EDMONDSON VILLAGE

FELLS POINT

OWINGS MILLS HOPKINS HOSPITAL

WOODBERRY

BAYVIEW CAMPUS

COLDSPRING LANE

ROGERS AVEMARTIN STATE AIRPORT

WHITE MARSH WESTPORT

W BALTIMORE MARC

CHERRY HILL

PENN STATION

ABERDEEN

REISTERSTOWN PLAZA

STATE CENTER

TOWSON

ODENTON

INNER HARBOR EAST

BWI STATION

HUNT VALLEYTOD

OPPO

RTUN

ITY

TYPE

SHORT-TERM DEVELOPMENT

LONG-TERM DEVELOPMENT

EMERGING MARKET

STATICMARKET

DEVELOPMENT FACILITATION

MARKETPRIMING

PROACTIVE EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT

NEIGHBORHOOD REINFORCEMENT

PROACTIVEMIXED-INCOME

MARKETCATALYST

MONITOR & RESPOND

QUALITY-OF-LIFE IMPROVEMENTS

TOD Approach Types with example stations.

Figure B.4- The Baltimore Typology and TOD Strategic Plan evaluated development and demographic characteristics to define future investment priorities.


KEY LESSONS LEARNED FOR BOTTINEAUThese 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.

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.

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.

RESIDENTIAL DENSITY

Brooklyn Park Crystal Robbinsdale Golden Valley Minneapolis (approximate)

Low < 3 du/acre < 5 du/acreSingle Family

detachedSingle 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/acreUp to three stories

of multi-family10-12 du/acre

20 to 50 du/acre

High 9 to 25 du/acre 12+ du/acreMulti-family 4 stories +

Over 12 du/acre 50 + du/acre

Table B.4- Residential Densities along the Bottineau Transitway

typology case studies - hennepin

Documents