Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Typology Guidebook, Center For Transit-Oriented Development, December 2010

Performance-Based
Transit-Oriented Development
Typology Guidebook
!!! !! ! ! !
! !! !
!
! !
!
! !
!
!
!! ! !
!
!
!
!! ! !
! !!
!
!! ! ! !
! Lake County, IL
!
!
! !
!
Lake Michigan
McHenry County
! ! !! !
!
!
!!
!
I-90
! ! ! !
!!
!
!! ! !
! !
! !!
!!
Cook County !
!
!
! Evanston
!! ! !!! ! !
! ! !!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!!!! !
! ! !
!
!
!! ! !!
! ! !
!!! !!! ! ! ! !
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
Kane County
!! ! !
!!
! !!! ! !
!
!!!
!
! ! !
!!
!
! !! ! ! ! !
! ! !
!
!
!
!
! !
! !
! !! ! !!!!!! !!!
!
! ! !
!
! !
!!!!!!!!!
!!!
! ! !!
!!
!!! !
!
! !!!
! !
!
!
!
!
!!
I-355
!!! ! ! ! !!! !!
! !
!
! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!
! !
!!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!!
!
!!
!
!
! ! ! ! !
!! !!!
!! !
!! !!! ! !! !!
!!! !
! !!
!!!
! !! !!!!!!! !!!
!!
! !
!
! !!!
!!
!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!!
!
! !! !
Oak Park
!!! ! ! ! ! !!
!
!!!!
!
!!
!!
!
! !!
!!
!
!
!!! !
! !!!!! !
!!
!!!
!! !
! ! !!! !! !
! !! !
!! !! !
!!
! !!
!!!
!!
I-88
!
!!! ! !!
!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!
! !!!!
!!!
!
!
!
! !!
!
! ! ! !
!!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!
! !!!!!
! !!!
!
!
!! ! !
!
!
!
! !!
! !! !!! !
!! Dupage County ! ! !
!
I-294
!
!
! ! ! !! ! ! !
!!! !
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
! ! !! !
! !
!
!! !!
!
!
!
! !
!
!!
! I-55 ! !
! !
!
!! !! ! !
!
! !!!
!!
! ! !
!! !! !
! ! !
! !! !
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
! !
Kendall County
! ! ! ! !!
!
! !
!
! ! !!
! ! !
! Gary, IN
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
December 2010
The Center for Transit-Oriented Development (CTOD) is the only national nonprofit effort dedicated to providing best practices, research and tools to support
market-based transit-oriented development. CTOD partners with both the public and private market sectors to strategize about ways to encourage the development
of high performing communities around transit stations and to build transit systems that maximize development potential. CTOD works to integrate local and regional
planning, generate new tools for economic development, real estate and investment issues, improve affordability and livability for all members of the community, and
respond to imperatives for climate change and sustainability. The Center for TOD is a partnership of Reconnecting America, the Center for Neighborhood Technology,
and Strategic Economics. For more information go to CTOD’s website at www.ctod.org.
Reconnecting America works to create better communities – places where transportation choices make it easy to get from place to place, where businesses flourish,
and where people from all walks of life can afford to live, work and visit. Reconnecting America not only develops research and advocates for public policy, but we also
build on-the-ground partnerships and convene the players necessary to accelerate decision-making.
The Center for Neighborhood Technology is a creative think-and-do tank that combines rigorous research with effective solutions. CNT works across disciplines
and issues, including transportation and community development, energy, natural resources, and climate change. The goal is urban sustainability – the more effective use
of resources and assets to improve the health of natural systems and the wealth of people.
Strategic Economics is a consulting and research firm specializing in urban and regional economics and planning. The firm helps local governments, community
groups, developers and nonprofit organizations understand the economic and development context in which they operate in order to take strategic steps towards
creating high-quality places for people to live and work.
Authors:
Mason Austin
Dena Belzer
Albert Benedict
Paul Esling
Peter Haas
Gajus Miknaitis
Elizabeth Wampler
Jeff Wood
Linda Young
Sam Zimbabwe
Financial Support for this Guidebook was provided by the Rockefeller Foundation.
Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

December 2010 / Page 2
Executive Summary: Performance Based TOD Guidebook
Development of a As evidenced in the following report, the
compositions of our communities and the quality
To help address this issue, the Center for
Transit-Oriented Development has designed
Performance-Based TOD of transit has a great influence on greenhouse the Performance-Based TOD Typology as a
gas emissions and the ability of cities, regions user-friendly tool that gives interested people
Typology Tool and states to meet climate change goals outlined around the country the ability to evaluate
Transit-Oriented Development is a community in public policy. Yet it has remained a challenge the performance of the transit zones in their
development model that when successfully to better link land use and transportation neighborhoods and towns. The typology creates
implemented can produce significant economic, decisions to meeting climate change policy distinct place types by identifying the number of
environmental and social benefits for people and goals. Mismatched decision-making structures, miles the typical household within each transit
the neighborhoods, cities and regions in which uncertain outcomes, and a lack of a common zone will travel in a year and whether the area is
they live, work and play. These benefits can best framework for measuring performance has often primarily residential, employment, or a balance
be realized through the utilization of analytical been a stumbling block in the attempts to use of the two. Understanding where an individual
tools that can provide all TOD stakeholders with TOD to address climate change and community transit zone sits in this spectrum, or how all of
the ability to make fully informed decisions. development goals simultaneously. the transit zones in a region compare to one
Residential Balanced Employment another can make it easier for stakeholders to
To that end, the practitioners of TOD and the Highest VMT
identify strategies to reduce VMT or to take
decision makers that help make TOD happen, advantage of existing low VMT places.
can benefit from using a performance-based
typology that helps identify the different CTOD affirms that the performance of TOD
Performance
conditions that exist in places, and that should should be measured at the neighborhood scale, or
ultimately determine the form that TOD takes. larger. Therefore, the Performance-Based TOD
Some of the questions a performance-based Typology defines the half-mile radius around
TOD typology might answer include: What each transit station as a unique transit zone.
economic, environmental and social outcomes The characteristics of all households within this
can we expect from investments in transit and Lowest VMT
radius are averaged together, and those averages
TOD? What differentiates transit-oriented are used to define the place types and other
development from transit-adjacent development? 33% 66% characteristics of each transit zone throughout
What standards should be utilized in evaluating Percent of Intensity from Workers this guidebook. This analysis includes the
zoning for TOD or other policy interventions? Place approximately 3,760 existing transit station areas
Performance Based TOD Typology in 39 regions across the country, as reported in
the CTOD’s National TOD Database.

December 2010 / Page i
Key Findings Commute Travel Behavior:
Low VMT place types exhibit more transit
studies were chosen in order to show a variety
of types of transit zones that differ not only in
Overall, most transit stations perform better than ridership and higher rates of walking and biking their place type as defined by the Performance-
or at the national average, outperforming the to work than high VMT transit zones. This Based TOD Typology, but also differ in where
typical non-transit-oriented place on key metrics finding is equally true of commutes by residents they are located in the US, the size of the overall
such as auto ownership, commuting behavior, living in transit zones and commutes by workers region, the size and age of the transit network,
and density/intensity. Within each metric or set who work in transit zones. Transit commute the type of transit in place in the transit zone, and
of metrics there are some interesting variations mode share in the lowest VMT place types is the median income in the transit zone. The case
on this general theme. from 5 to 11 times greater than the national studies include:
average.
Auto Ownership & Transportation Costs: Vermont/Santa Monica Station, Los Angeles CA
Transit zones in low VMT places types tend Employment Proximity: Oak Park, IL
to have low transportation costs and low rates Low VMT transit zones are located much closer West Irving, TX
of automobile ownership. Auto ownership in to employment than high VMT transit zones. A East Liberty Station, Pittsburgh PA
the lowest VMT places average 0.5 cars per typical low VMT place is proximate to ten times Downtown Berkeley, CA
household. more jobs than the highest VMT places. Gresham Transit Center, OR
Essex Street Station, Jersey City NJ
Urban Form: Buckhead Station, Atlanta GA
Low VMT transit zones tend to have more Rockville, MD
intensity (residents + workers) and higher
residential densities than high VMT transit zones. Detailed four-page spreads on each case study are
Residential densities in low VMT transit zones included in the report.
are over 15 times as high compared to high VMT
transit zones. Additionally, transit zones have
smaller block sizes. Low-Moderate VMT, Balanced Use Place
Low-Moderate VMT (9,100 - 11,400 miles per household per year)
Balanced Use Neighborhood (33 - 66% jobs/jobs+residents)
East Liberty
Pittsburgh, PA
Low-Moderate VMT, Balanced Use Place
East Liberty
Pittsburgh, PA
East Liberty
Pittsburgh, PA
East Liberty
Pittsburgh, PA
S t u d i e s
S t u d i e s
S t u d i e s
S t u d i e s
What does it mean to be a low-moderate VMT, balanced use place? How does East Liberty compare to the region? Metric East Liberty Compared to Normative Metric
Who lives and works in East Liberty?
East Liberty is on Pittsburgh’s East Busway. Average VMT per Household* 9,640 miles/year Metric East Liberty Compared to Normative Metric
Residential Balanced Employment
Highest VMT
East Liberty was once a second downtown for
Pittsburgh and attracted high-end shoppers Residential vs Employment Mix 51% workers (49% residents) Total Transit Zone Intensity 14,750 people
until urban renewal efforts cleared much of the Lower Higher
neighborhood for high density public housing. The Total Residents 7,150 residents
busway provides a grade-separated path for several
bus routes that stop at stations along the busway, What factors can lower VMT in Higher Lower Total Workers 7,600 workers
VMT VMT Lower than norm Higher than norm
Lowest VMT
33% 66%
reducing delays due to congestion and providing
a more streamlined transit experience. The East
East Liberty? There are fewer people both living and working in the half mile around the East Liberty station than is
Percent of Intensity from Workers
Liberty station is 5 miles away from downtown Metric East Liberty Compared to Normative Metric typical for transit zones in the low-moderate VMT, balanced use category. However, this transit zone has
Pittsburgh and about a 15 minute trip on the more people than the typical moderate VMT, balanced use category, so it falls between the two on these
Low-moderate VMT, balanced use places have an even mix of workers and residents, and the average Average Block Size 3.2 acres/block metrics. Adding more population (workers or residents) might be one way of lowering VMT in the area.
busway, which improves job access for residents
Case Studies
household drives fewer miles in a year than the typical resident of a transit zone. There is a mix of land
in the transit zone. Residents living in the East Residential Density 15.5 units/acre
uses, including residential, retail, and ofce in these places, at a mix of densities. The normative metrics for
Liberty transit zone are using transit to get to work Median Household Income $27,460 per year
C a s e
each place type are discussed fully in the guidebook; this case study will look at one specic transit zone
C a s e
C a s e
C a s e
too—32 percent use public transportation to get to Employment Proximity* 64,760 jobs nearby
that falls into this category: East Liberty station in Pittsburgh, PA. Average Household Size 1.7 people/household
work compared to 6 percent regionally.
Transit Access Index* 71 transit opportunities Lower than norm Higher than norm
Transit zones in the Pittsburgh region are a mix of Lower than norm Higher than norm Median household income in the East Liberty transit zone is about $10,000 less than the typical low-
What is the East Liberty transit zone like? residential places and balanced use places, with a moderate VMT, balanced use place, and the average household size in the area is also lower than the
few employment-heavy transit zones in downtown This section shows how the East Liberty transit zone performs on some of the key factors that affect
• North of the station, there is a VMT. The transit zone has more than twice as many transit opportunities as the typical low-moderate average. Policies that make changes to these indicators are less likely to have a direct impact on VMT.
Pittsburgh. The transit zones tend to be in the
medium-sized retail center, with moderate to high VMT categories, as the map to VMT, balanced use place, and the average block size is about half as small. However, residential density is
primarily smaller scale retail uses and a little lower around East Liberty station than the typical place, and there are half as many jobs nearby. To
a few big box stores. These kinds of
the left shows. East Liberty is one of the few lower
lower VMT in this transit zone, efforts could be focused on increasing residential density and improving
What are some other low-moderate VMT, balanced use places?
VMT, balanced use transit zones, though two of
uses may be typical for other low- the other stations along the East Busway are slightly employment proximity, discussed more fully in the Guidebook.
T y p e
T y p e
T y p e
T y p e
Station City Transit System Region
moderate VMT, balanced use place. lower VMT and also balanced use places.
• Residential uses around the station are How does East Liberty compare to the norm on other North/Clybourn Chicago Red Line, CTA Chicago, IL
Photo by jmd41280 from Flickr.

Photo by harry_nl from Flickr.
mostly single family homes with 2-3 Residential density is much higher in the East
Burbank Burbank Metrolink Los Angeles, CA
story apartments closer to the station. Liberty transit zone than the region overall, and transportation performance metrics?
There are also a few larger apartment the proportion of renters (to owners) is nearly Pleasant Street Boston Green Line, MBTA Boston, MA
Metric East Liberty Compared to Normative Metric
buildings near major arterials. three times as high in East Liberty as in the region. 7th Ave/ Camelback Phoenix Metro Light Rail Phoenix, AZ
• Several grids come together around Median income for households in East Liberty is Avg Household Transportation Costs* $6,330 per year
signicantly lower than the regional average. U Street Washington, DC Green Line, Metro Washington, DC
the East Liberty station, meaning
Nonauto Commute From Transit Zone 40.1% of residents
This report includes nine case studies of transit

that blocks on average are small, but The table below shows how East Liberty compares St George Staten Island Staten Island Railroad New York Tristate
there are some barriers to walking,
P l a c e
P l a c e
P l a c e
P l a c e
! to the region. Nonauto Commute To Transit Zone 15.9% of workers Coconut Grove Miami Metrorail Miami, FL
including the busway itself, which
16th St Mission San Francisco BART San Francisco Bay, CA
Photo by Liberty is Virtue from Flickr.

runs below grade in this transit zone. Avg Autos per Household 0.79 vehicles
Photo by harry_nl from Flickr.

• There is an older industrial area to Metric East Liberty Region Higher than norm
Johns Hopkins Hospital Baltimore Metro Subway Baltimore
Lower than norm
the southwest of the station, some VMT (miles/year)* 9,640 17,960 Mockingbird Dallas Blue Line, DART Dallas-Fort Worth, TX
of which is being transformed into The East Liberty transit zones performs better than the typical low-moderate VMT, balanced use place on
! Residential Density 15.5 du/ac 3.5 du/ac
upscale shopping and ofce space. the average transportation cost per household (lower in this transit zone than is typical) and the average *VMT and household transportation costs are estimated using the Housing and Transportation Index. The Transit Opportunity Index and Employment
Median Income $27,460 $37,470 Proximity are components of the H + T ® Index.
number of vehicles owned by a household. Residents living in the transit zone use transit, bike, and walk
Percent Renters 75.7% 28.7%
0 0.3 N at the same rate as residents in the typical place, but workers are less likely to use these nonauto modes.
November 2010 / Page 1 Miles [ November 2010 / Page 2 November 2010 / Page 3 November 2010 / Page 4
zones to help illustrate the concepts of the Each case study has four detailed pages
Low VMT transit zones have lower car ownership rates Performance-Based TOD Typology. The case

December 2010 / Page ii
Scenario Studies Atlanta Region
20000 Place Types
This report includes a series of scenario studies, Kennesaw
conducted to understand how additional 18000
increments of growth and development in

existing transit zones would affect overall 16000 Marietta
! !
Dunwoody
Duluth
Sandy Springs
!!
VMT per household

!
performance. Scenarios of 15%, 30%, and Cobb County
!
!
!
!
50% increments of growth in both residential 14000 !
! ! Doraville
households and employment access were Chamblee
!!!
!
12000 Tucker
included, as well as an assessment of an increase

! !
in 2,000 households per station area. 10000

! !
Scottdale
!
! !!! !!
! Decatur
! !!
!
! !
! !!
! ! ! !
!
!
!! !!
!
!
Key lessons from the scenarios include:

!
! !!
8000 ! ! ! !! !
! !
! ! !
DeKalb County
Douglas County !
Downtown Atlanta
! !
1. Encouraging new development in transit 0 20 40

Use Mix
60 80 100
! !
zones, independent of the place type, can help Fulton County

! !
Adding Jobs and Housing Increases Performance !

reduce regional VMT, especially in regions where
! Atlanta
! ! International
Airport
the average household VMT is higher than the Legend
average household VMT for even high VMT Policy Implications Transportation
! Station Residential
C yt Place
Clayton Co
County
u
unty
Types
Balanced Employment
places. State Highways
Freeways
Highest VMT
Henry County
Co
Creating a robust Performance-Based TOD Red Line
Blue Line
High VMT
Moderate VMT
2. High VMT transit zones (residential, balanced Typology has implications for policy at all levels Gold Line
Green Line
Low VMT
Lowest VMT
and employment) can see significant reductions in including local zoning codes, regional incentive City of Atlanta 0 2 4 6
Miles
[
N
average household VMT from relatively moderate programs, State housing allocations, and Federal
County Line Sources: CTOD TOD Database, Census 2000
amounts of new development. funding decisions, and many more in between. Atlanta’s Place Types
While this effort has been primarily focused on
3. Prioritizing low VMT transit zones for new developing a useful tool that can be used by many
development can produce the largest reductions TOD stakeholders, this report includes a series
in total regional VMT. of potential policy implications and outcomes
that can be the basis for future applications of the
typology.

December 2010 / Page iii
Table of Contents
I. Introduction 4 VII. Detailed Case Studies 38
Why Create a Transit-Oriented Development Typology 4 Vermont/ Santa Monica, Los Angeles Region 39
Why Use Performance Measures in a TOD Typology 4 Oak Park Station, Chicago Region 43
Why VMT as the Performance Measure 4 West Irving Station, Dallas Region 47
A User Friendly Tool 6 East Liberty, Pittsburgh Region 51
Bringing the Actors Together 7 Downtown Berkeley, San Francisco Bay Area 55
Audience/Users 8 Gresham Transit Center, Portland Region 59
Essex Street, New Jersey, New York Tri-State Region 63
II. TOD Typology Methodology 9 Buckhead, Atlanta Region 69
Defining Place Types 9 Rockville Station, Washington, DC Region 73
Estimating Average VMT 9
Creating Performance-Based TOD Place Types 10 VIII. Appendix 77
Comparing Place Types within a Region 12 Normative Metrics Sources and Descriptions 77
How are VMT and Annual Transportation Costs Calculated 78
III. Normative Metrics 14 Self-Assessment Tool 79
What Are the Normative Metrics? 14 Normative Metric Graphics 80
Key Findings from Normative Metrics 17 Regional Place Type Maps 82
Other Uses for Normative Metrics 19
IV. Case Studies 20

Criteria for Choices 20
Using Case Studies 20
Build Your Own 25
V. Changing Transit Zone Performance 27

Development Scenarios 27
Example: Adding 2000 Households in St. Louis 32
Changing Employment Access 33
Lessons Learned from Scenario Planning 34
VI. Possible Policy Implications and Uses 35

Place Type Typology 35
Normative Metrics and Case Studies 35
Scenario Planning 36

I. Introduction
Why Create a Transit- depending on what outcomes the typology is
meant to accomplish, and not every station
measures in a typology means that users can
identify “higher-performing” place types as
Oriented Development area in one place type will be exactly the same. aspirational places, making goal-setting a more
Typologies are useful tools because they increase straightforward process. Using place types also
Typology? understanding of characteristics that contribute helps stakeholders compare one transit zone to
Transit-oriented development (TOD) is an to place, establish measurable performance another and understand the characteristics that
approach to community development that benchmarks, and provide a framework to set make them different.
leverages the unique opportunities provided goals for better performance.
by access to high-quality public transportation. TOD in particular can benefit from using a
TOD contributes to creating healthy, walkable The widely varying characteristics that help define performance-based typology to define and
communities that provide residents with housing places require different strategies and approaches differentiate different types of TOD. Some
and transportation choices, which support an to be employed to foster the growth of vibrant of the questions a performance-based TOD
affordable lifestyle. At the neighborhood scale, transit-oriented neighborhoods that enhance typology might answer include: What outcomes
TOD is typically defined as compact community existing assets and conditions and serve people can we expect from investments in transit and
development within easy walking or biking of all incomes. These differences can often be TOD? What differentiates transit-oriented
distance of a transit station. highlighted through the use of a typology tool development from transit-adjacent development?
that identifies key themes and strategic decisions What standards should be utilized in evaluating
There is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to TOD. that apply across a range of places when zoning for TOD or other policy interventions?
Over the last five years the Center for Transit- implementing TOD.
Oriented Development (CTOD) has developed
Why VMT as the
and applied many TOD Station Area Typologies,
in different regions, such as Denver, Portland,
Why Use Performance- Performance Measure?
Chicago, and Baltimore, to help plan for station Based Measures in a TOD Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) works well as
area revitalization and development.
Typology? a performance measure for a TOD typology
because places with lower VMT tend to be places
A TOD typology is a way to group together Performance measures use data on existing where more people walk, bike and take transit,
different transit zones that have a common set conditions to compare station areas to one of the goals of TOD. VMT accounts for not
of characteristics. A typology has several place aspirational outcomes. Performance measures only the number of trips households take but
types, and all of the station areas within one can be studied over time, gauging whether station also the distance traveled on each trip, both of
place type have some elements in common. The areas are moving towards aspirational conditions which affect greenhouse gas emissions. The total
characteristics that define a typology can differ or away from them. Using performance

number of trips in a transit zone or region is not increased transit ridership, etc.) might also have concerned with sustainability at the state,
necessarily correlated with VMT—a household served as a performance-based measure, VMT regional, municipal, and neighborhood level.
that takes only a few very long trips a day may correlates strongly with those metrics and using it
have higher annual VMT than a household taking as the performance-based measure accomplishes The pursuit of sustainability includes a wide
many very short trips. other purposes. range of policy goals that address environmental,
equity, and economic conditions. The
At the core of transit-oriented development VMT also serves as a good performance measure transportation sector is frequently seen as a place
is the idea that people with a wide range of for TOD because of the growing interest in ripe for helping regions meet their sustainability
incomes can live and work in places with more sustainable communities, neighborhoods that goals because of its relationship to global
transportation options, giving them the choice have more housing and transportation choices, warming, pollution, employment access, and
to take care of some of their daily trips by are closer to jobs, shops or schools, are more household costs. To address global warming
using transit, walking and biking, rather than energy independent and help protect clean air and pollution especially, policy makers use a
driving. Most transit supportive places also and water. While there is a growing understanding three-pronged approach, with the first two
tend to be compact neighborhoods of varying and appreciation for TOD in America, urban, prongs focusing on improving fuel efficiency
densities. Density is the key variable that allows suburban and rural policy makers are increasingly and vehicle efficiency to address transportation’s
communities in rural, suburban and urban role in increased emissions and travel. The third
environments to support a mix of uses and Figure 1: Performance-Based Typology prong, the built environment, has been linked by
activities including work places, child care, stores, Residential Balanced Employment numerous studies to vehicle miles traveled and
restaurants, and different housing types. Highest VMT greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs).123
Because these neighborhoods are both small In this Guidebook, VMT serves as an estimate
enough to be walkable and have many uses and of the number of miles driven by a household
Performance
activities, it is easy for residents and workers in one year. TOD is at the nexus of the land use
to walk or bike to take care of some of their
1 Cambridge Systematics. Moving Cooler: Transportation
daily needs. Thus, people are able to reduce Strategies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 2009 <http://
the amount of money spent on travel, their www.movingcooler.info/home>
household VMT, and perhaps the number of 2 CTOD. Transit Oriented Development and the Potential for
VMT Related GHG Emissions Reduction. 2010 <http://www.
cars they own – creating positive benefits for Lowest VMT
reconnectingamerica.org/public/stories/1530>
households and for greenhouse gas reduction 33% 66%
3 United States Department of Transportation. Transportation’s
goals. While other characteristics (reduced Role in Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 2010 <http://
Percent of Intensity from Workers
ntl.bts.gov/lib/32000/32700/32779/DOT_Climate_Change_
household expenditures on housing and transit, Place Report_-_April_2010_-_Volume_1_and_2.pdf>

changes and increased transportation options people to understand. Because stakeholders often creates distinct place types by identifying the
that can reduce carbon production, improve air have more pressing needs, climate change goals number of miles the typical household within
quality, and reduce the burdens on households are often left behind when addressing short-term each transit zone will travel in a year and whether
related to the cost of automobile ownership challenges such as economic or equity goals — the area is primarily residential, employment, or
and operation. Average household VMT is an even though these are not mutually exclusive a balance between the two. Understanding where
important driver of all of these outcomes, and options. Moreover, since transportation relates to an individual transit zone sits in this spectrum, or
is thus an important variable in assessing the other strategies, making the connection to VMT how all of the transit zones in a region compare
sustainability of a place. can have a tremendous impact. Using VMT as a to one another can make it easier for stakeholders
performance-based measure for TOD can help to identify strategies to reduce VMT or to take
Using VMT as a performance measure for TOD engage a broader set of people in identifying advantage of existing low VMT places.
also helps simplify and focus the discussion solutions that may reduce VMT.
around how to reduce VMT. Many policy makers The Normative Metrics in Section 3 expand
and stakeholders want to reduce VMT in their CTOD’s previous TOD typologies sorted upon the typology’s existing conditions
communities, but there is little consensus on station areas with similar critical characteristics analysis by looking at several categories of
the best way to achieve this goal. Nor is there to provide a framework for how to organize place characteristics, including urban form,
agreement on what amount of VMT reduction is planning strategies, preservation approaches transportation, and household characteristics.
achievable or what strategies should be employed and community development goals. The
to meet these goals in different places. The Performance-Based TOD Typology builds upon
inputs that can affect VMT, especially land use this work by developing Normative Metrics
Figure 2: Normative Metrics Example
and transportation policies, tend to happen at from nationally comparable data on a number 30,000
different scales. Bringing VMT to the local level of different factors across regions and provides
25,000
helps tie regional VMT reduction strategies to baseline guidance for long-term strategies
local TOD improvements. that address the goals of reducing VMT and 20,000
High
transportation-based greenhouse gas emissions. High - Moderate
VMT 15,000
Currently many of the attempts to reduce VMT Moderate
or address climate change use language that is

A User Friendly Tool 10,000 Low - Moderate
often hard to understand. It is difficult to create Low
rallying cries such as “returning to 350 parts per The Performance-Based TOD Typology is a user 5,000
million” or “a 30% reduction in emissions,” but friendly tool that gives communities around the 0
building 1,000 more housing units or providing country the ability to evaluate the performance 0 33% 66%
Employment Percentage of Total Intensity

more transit service are much easier for most of their transit zones (see Figure 2). The typology Workers/ (Workers+Residents)

Figure 3: Self-Assessment Template The Case Studies in Section 4 provide examples use and transportation policy making generally
of transit zones in different place types and show happens at more local levels. Combining regional
Self-Assessment Tool how they compare to the Normative Metrics goals of VMT reduction with locally created land
and where they can improve. Stakeholders, from use polices has been a major challenge in the past.
Metric [Insert Transit Zone here.] Compared to Normative Metric
elected officials to local advocates, can use these This tool helps bring together those geographies
S t u d i e s
Average VMT per Household*
Residential vs Employment Mix

up-to-date, quantitative measures on population, by using simple, specific, and tangible numbers to
Lower Higher
travel behavior, and urban form to communicate measure transit zone performance while creating
What factors can lower VMT in Higher Lower
[insert transit zone here]? VMT VMT clearly and with hard facts. a communication device for speaking about
This Guidebook also shows how users can these complex issues in local public forums with
Average Block Size
Residential Density
perform self-assessments on the transit zones in a range of actors. This tool also helps identify
Employment Proximity* their communities. These self-assessments build how small changes in individual transit zones can
C a s e
Transit Access Index*

Lower Higher the groundwork on which to enact specific policy, result in significant benefits regionally.
How does [insert transit zone here] compare to the norm on
other transportation performance metrics? programmatic, and fiscal interventions in order to
improve specific outcomes like reduced VMT. The tools in this Guidebook can be used to
Avg Household Transportation Costs*
Nonauto Commute From Transit Zone

augment policy decision-making on many
T y p e
important issues, including transportation

Bringing Together the
Nonauto Commute To Transit Zone
Avg Autos per Household

Lower Higher planning, economic and community
Who lives and works in [insert transit zone here]?
Metric
Total Transit zone Population

[Insert Transit Zone here.] Compared to Normative Metric
Actors development, and urban design. For example,
economic development strategies can fold in
P l a c e
Total Residents Stakeholders often have different views on sustainability objectives, showing that the benefits
Total Workers
Median Household Income $23,500 per year

how to decrease reliance on autos, create more of connecting jobs to transit can not only reduce
Average Household Size 1.75 people/household
Lower Higher
walkable communities, or advance climate change, congestion but also greenhouse gases.
November 2010 / Page 1
transit and TOD goals, making policy decisions
With the Normative Metrics, users can compare a sometimes daunting task. By creating a starting Affordable housing advocates can come
the metrics from each station to others within point for discussion, the Performance-Based together with regional planners to understand
their place type. Transit zones that have lower TOD Typology can bring together a wide array that the benefits of locating more housing
transportation costs, higher transit ridership, and of actors working at the full range of geographic and employment near transit goes beyond
smaller block sizes than the norm for their place scales to improve regional and local sustainability. convenience but will provide lower costs for
type will set different goals than places that do families and fewer cars on crowded freeways.
not perform as well as other stations areas in the VMT and greenhouse gas reduction is usually Bike and pedestrian planners and public
same place type. analyzed at the city or regional scale, while land health workers may use the tool as evidence

that walkable blocks and compact growth are • At the regional level, regional agencies,
important elements to improving sustainability. including Metropolitan Planning
Organizations (MPOs), transit agencies, and
other stakeholders can use this tool to guide
Audience/Users corridor planning and regional investments in
The Performance-Based TOD Typology will be housing and transportation; and
of use to policy makers, planners, employers, and • At the local and neighborhood level, cities,
residents who have interest in matters related community-based organizations and other
to transit ridership, climate change, economic stakeholders can use this tool to inform local
development, affordable housing, urban design, planning decisions from long range plans to
or any one of the countless other issues linked to affordable housing location.
transportation, employment, and place.
Whether working locally, regionally, or at another

geographic scale, the Guidebook will provide
critical and easy to understand information to
help guide action aimed at creating high-quality
TOD and reducing VMT in communities around
the country.
While this tool could be useful in guiding future

planning decisions by a variety of stakeholders,
there are three specific groups at different levels
of government that could most readily use it to
affect decision-making:
• At the federal and state level, agencies can use

the tool to inform funding and investment
policies and in regional planning and
decision-making;

II. TOD Typology Methodology
Defining Place Types the average annual VMT per household as the
primary performance measure of transit zones.
transit commuters, and non-transit
commuters),
The performance of TOD should be measured • household density (both residential and
at the neighborhood scale, or larger. Therefore, By defining each transit zone by the average gross),
the Performance-Based TOD Typology defines VMT per household, the typology ties the place • block size,
the half-mile radius around each transit station types to a measurable outcome that results from
as a unique transit zone. The characteristics of locational attributes, such as walkability and • transit access,
all households within this radius are averaged residential density. • and job access.
together, and those averages are used to define The end result is a measure of household VMT.
the place types and other characteristics of
each transit zone throughout this Guidebook. Estimating Average VMT To define different TOD place types, the model
This analysis includes the approximately 3,760 The Center for Neighborhood Technology estimates the average VMT per household using
existing transit station areas in 39 regions across developed a model of household travel behavior the underlying household and local environment
the country, as reported in the CTOD’s National as a part of its Housing and Transportation data from the CTOD database. In order to
TOD Database.4 (H+T®) Affordability Index.5 The model fully understand the influence of neighborhood
is based on a multidimensional regression characteristics on VMT, household size, income,
There are many benefits associated with TOD, analysis, in which a formula describes the and commuters per household were fixed to
including reduced household expenditures on relationship between three dependent variables represent the typical regional household of the
housing and transit, increased transit ridership (auto ownership, auto use, and transit use) and metropolitan area of each given transit zone.
and reduced vehicle miles traveled. While any of nine main independent household and local
these could have been adopted as performance environment variables. Neighborhood level Fixed-guideway6 transit stations in the US
measures, these outcomes tend to be highly (Census block group) data were utilized as the operate in a wide variety of locations, and the
correlated with each other. For example, independent, or predictor variables, includes: average VMT within these transit zones varies
households that own fewer cars tend to have accordingly, ranging from 5,200 miles driven per
• household income (both average and
lower household VMT and lower household year up to 31,400 miles. To define different VMT
median),
transportation costs. However, because it is types, CTOD divided the transit zones into five
useful to have one overall measure of how much • household size,
groups, as shown in Table 1.
people are driving, rather than several related • commuters per household,
and overlapping values, CTOD chose to use • journey to work time (for all commuters,
6 Fixed-guideway transit includes underground subway and
4 The National TOD Database is available at 5 The H+T® Affordability Index is available at elevated heavy rail, light rail, commuter rail, and bus rapid transit
http://toddata.cnt.org/ http://htaindex.cnt.org/ that incorporates dedicated right-of-ways.

Table 1. VMT Types Predominantly residential places require different releases the 2010 data, these numbers (and the
Household VMT Type VMT Range approaches to planning and investment than other metrics used in the Guidebook) will be
employment-dominated places. Places with updated.
1 – Low < 9,100
a mix of uses also have their own planning
2 – Low-Moderate 9,100 to 11,600 opportunities. CTOD defines “use mix” as the percentage of
3 – Moderate 11,600 to 14,300 workers in a station area, relative to the overall
4 – High-Moderate 14,300 to 17,200 Detailed land use data for all of the transit count of residents and workers (workers/
5 - High > 17,200 zones is not available, but counts of residents (workers + residents)). Station areas are then
and workers in the area can be used as proxies divided into three types according to this use
Estimating Use Mix for the mix of residences and employment. For
counts of residents, the Performance-Based
mix measure, as shown in Table 2. This is a
simplified measure in the absence of detailed land
While VMT measures how each transit zone TOD Typology uses 2000 Census data, and for use data—but nonetheless conveys the general
performs relative to others in terms of household counts of workers, it uses employee counts from characteristics of the station area.
travel behavior, it gives little sense of what the 2000 Census Transportation and Planning
that area looks like “on the ground.” Land use Package (CTTP). When the Census Bureau
mix, or the balance between residential and Creating Performance-
Figure 4: Performance-Based Place Types
non-residential uses is a critical determinant
of the qualities and characteristics of a place.
Based TOD Place Types
Performance-Based TOD Place Types utilize
Highest VMT
two factors: (1) performance—as defined by
Table 2. Use Mix Types household VMT and (2) place—as defined by
Percentage of use mix. The typology includes 15 station area
workers relative place types that are defined by the combination
Performance
Use Mix Type

to workers and of the three types of use mix with the five VMT
residents types. Figure 4 shows a graphic representation of
1 primarily these place types, with the “highest performing”
33.3% or less
residential place types near the bottom with the lowest
VMT.
2 balanced 33.3% to 66.7% Lowest VMT
3 primarily 33% 66% Each place type may include a wide range of
66.7% or more transit zones, from more suburban commuter
employment Percent of Intensity from Workers
Place

Figure 5: All Stations Sorted into Performance-Based TOD Typology stations to major downtown transit hubs. Figure
5 shows a graph of all of the existing transit
Residential Balanced Employment zones, with VMT along the vertical axis and use
30,000 mix along the horizontal. This graph shows that
transit zones exist along a continuous spectrum,
though the typology divides that spectrum into
25,000 distinct parts.
There are several benefits to organizing transit

20,000 zones in this way. Though each transit zone is
High a unique place, there are similarities between
the transit zones in each place type. These
High - Moderate similarities allow policy makers and stakeholders
VMT 15,000
to create common sets of strategies to improve
Moderate performance. Using place types also helps
Low - Moderate
stakeholders compare one transit zone to another
10,000
and understand the different characteristics that
Low make one transit zone a lower VMT type than
another.
5,000
0
0 33% 66%

Workers/ (Workers+Residents)

Figure 6. Chicago Region Place Types
! !!!!
Comparing Place Types
!
Greater Chicago !
Region
! !
!
! !
Downtown Chicago
within a Region
! !
!
! ! !
!
!
Lake
!
!
! !! Place Types
!
!
!
Shore
!
!
!
! Once each transit zone has an assigned place
!!!
!
! ! ! !
Drive
! I-94 ! ! !
!
! !
!! !
!
! !! type, it can be compared to the other transit

! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
! ! !
zones along a corridor, within a neighborhood,

! !
! !
!
! !
!
!! !! ! ! !
or in a region. Figure 6 shows the place types
!!!
!
!!
!!! ! !
!!!
! ! ! !
!
! !
! ! !
!! ! !
! ! ! Lake County, IL
! ! ! Lake Michigan ! ! !
!
!! !
!
!
!
!
!! ! ! !!!!
! ! !!! for all of the existing transit zones in the
McHenry County
!!
! ! !
! ! ! ! !!!
!
!!
! !! !
!!!
! ! ! !!
! ! ! !! !
!
! ! ! !
! !!
! ! !
Chicago region. Putting transit zones into their
! !
!!
!
!
!! !! !
I-90 ! !
! ! ! !
!
!! Cook County !
!
!
!!! ! regional contexts makes it easier to identify

! !! !!
! Evanston !
!! ! !!! ! !
! !!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!! !!! !!! !
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
! high performing TOD in the region. Regional
!
! ! !!
!!!!! !
! ! !
!
! !
! !
!!
!
! ! ! !
! !
context (employment access, the transit network,
!
! !
!!! !!! ! !! ! ! !
!
!
!
!
!!
!! !
! ! historical land use and development patterns)

Kane County ! ! !
! !
!
!!
! !
!
! !
!! !! ! !
!!!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
! !
! !! ! ! ! !
!
!
!
! !!!!!! !!
!
!
!
!
! !!
!
! !
!!!!!!!!!!!!
! ! !!
!!
!! !
!!
!!
!!!
!
!
!
!
! is a major contributing factor to the average
!
!!
I-355
! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! !!!
!!
!!
!! !
!
!!
!!
!
! Legend ! ! ! ! !
!!! ! ! ! !! !!
!!! !!!
household VMT in a transit zone. Understanding
!!!
!
!
!! !
!
!
! !!! ! !! !
!!! !! ! !!
!! !!!!!!! !!!
!!
! !
! !
! ! !
!!
!!
!!
! ! !
!
!!
!
!!!!
!!
! !!! ! ! ! ! !!
!!!!!
!!
!!!
!
!
!! !
!
!!
Oak Park !!! !
! !!!!
!! ! ! !!
!!!
Place Types
how this context affects transit zone performance
!
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!!!!!!
I-88
!!
!!!
!!
! ! !! !!! ! ! !
!!
! !!
!! !!!! !!! ! !!
!
!!
! !!
can help inform decisions about transit and TOD.
!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! High VMT
! !!
!
!!
!
!!
! ! !
!
!
! !
!
!!
! !!!!!
!
! !! !!!!
!!!
! !
!
Dupage County !
! !!!
! !
! !!
! !
High-moderate VMT
This approach elucidates the similarities and
!
I-294
!!
!!!
! ! ! !
!
! !! !
! !!
!! !
! !
! Moderate VMT
differences among transit and land use patterns
!
!
! !
!
! ! !! ! Low-moderate VMT
!
!
! !
!
!
! ! !!
!
!!
! I-55
! ! !
! !
! !!!!
!!
!
!
across regions as well.
! Low VMT
!!
! ! !
! !
!
! !
! !! !
!
! ! ! ! ! !County Line !
!
!
!
!
!
! !
! !
!
! !
Kendall County
! !! ! !! !
! !
!
Sources: CTOD TOD Database, Census 2000 In Chicago, the lowest VMT stations are in the
! ! !!
Transportation ! ! !
! Gary, IN
! ! Station
! !
!
0 4 8 12 region’s core, with low VMT-employment places
! ! !
Mile s
State Highways !
! Freeways ! !
!
within the central business district (CBD) and low
N
! !
VMT-residential transit zones surrounding the
! Will County
Elevated/Subway
Commuter Rail ! I-57
Lake County, IN
[ CBD. These transit zones are more likely to have
the elements that support more walking, biking,
and transit use. Along suburban commuter rail
corridors, the transit zones are more often higher
VMT places with both primarily residential and

Figure 7. Bay Area Region Place Types Figure 8. Bay Area Place Types Figure 9. Chicago Region Place Types
San Francisco Bay Area !
! !
! !
Residential Balanced Employment Residential Balanced Employment
Place Types ! !
Concord 30,000
! !
Richmond
25,000 25,000
!!
!
!
!
!
!
! ! !
!
! Walnut Creek
!
20,000 20,000
!
Berkeley
!!!
!
! Contra Costa County
! !
High High
!! !
!
I-
68
!
!
High - Moderate High - Moderate
0
!
San Francisco
I-80
! VMT 15,000 VMT 15,000
!
!
!!
!
!!
! !!!!
!!!!!!!
!!
! ! !
!
Downtown Oakland Moderate Moderate
!
!!
!
! !
!!
! !!
!!
!!! ! !!
! !!
!! !
!!
!!! !
Low - Moderate
! !
!!!
! Low - Moderate
!
!
!
! !
! 10,000
!!! !! ! 10,000
!
!
!
!
!! ! !
!
!
!!! !! !
! !
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!!!! !
!!
!! !!!!
Low
! !
!! ! !
!
!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!
! ! !! !!! !
!! Low
! ! !
!! ! !
! ! !
!
!!
!!
! !
!
!
! !
! ! !
!
!
!! !!!!!!!!!!!
!! ! !
! !
!!!!!! !!
! !
! !
! !
! !!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!!
!! !
! !!!!! !! !
! !
!! 5,000
!! !! 5,000
!
!!
!
! !
! !!!
!
!
!!!! ! ! !
! !
!!!! ! I-580
!!
! !
! !
!
! ! ! !
!
! ! !
!
!! ! San Francisco Bay
!
! Hayward
!
0 0
0 33% 66% 1 0 33% 66% 1
!! !
! !

! Employment Percentage of Total Intensity
!
!
Workers/ (Workers+Residents) Workers/ (Workers+Residents)
!! !
! Hig
hw
ay
92
!
!
H
!!
I-
!
ig
28
hw
balanced use mixes. Households living along

!
transit zones tend to be higher VMT places, with

0
ay
!!
!
10
!
!
1
!
!
Alameda County
!
!
these suburban corridors may take transit to many more employment-based transit zones.
!
!!
4
8
ay
!
w
h
ig
work, but they drive more miles than the average

H
Freemont
! !
!
!! residents who live closer to the CBD. Figures 8 and 9 above show how transit zones in
!
!!
!!
!!!
! ! !!!!
!! !
!!!!
!! !! !
! !!
!
!! Palo Alto !
!
!
! !
!
!!!
!!
! !!!
!!!!!
! !! !
!!!!!
!
! !
!! !
!
the Chicago and Bay Area regions are distributed

!!!! !!
! !
!
!
!! !
! ! !! !
!!!!!!
!! ! !
!
!!
!
! ! !! ! !
!! ! !
! !
!
!
!
! ! !!!
!!! ! !
! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !
!
!
! ! !
!
! ! !!
! ! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Chicago represents a prevailing pattern seen in

!!
among the fifteen place types. Comparing these

! !
!
!
!! !
! !!
!! ! !
!
! !! ! ! !
!!!!
!
!
!! !
!! !!
!!!!
! ! !
!!!
!
! !
!
! ! San Jose
!!
!
!!
!!! ! ! !
!
!
!
!
!!!! !!!!! !! !!!
!
! ! ! !
! !
!! ! !
! !
!
!
!
!!
! ! !
! !
! ! both large and small regions, and regions with

!
!
distributions, you can see that Chicago has a

! ! ! !
!!
! !
!
!!!!
!
!!
!!
!
!! !
! !
!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
! ! !
! !
!
!!!!! ! ! ! !!!
!
! ! !
!!
! !
!
!! !
! ! !!!!!
!
!
! !!!
!
!
!
! !!! !! !
!! !
!
! !
!
!
!
! a variety of economic characteristics. Figure 7

!
!!
! !
!! ! larger concentration of transit zones in the lower

! !!!! ! !
! !
! !
!
!
!! !!
! !!
! !
!
!
!
!! !!
!
!
!!! !
!
!
!
!
!
!!!! !! !!
!
! !
! ! !!
! Santa Clara County ! !
of the San Francisco Bay Area highlights some

! !
! VMT residential place types. San Francisco has

!
!
!
Legend ! !
! !! !
San Mateo County !
!
!
!
!
!
! !
of these similarities: lower VMT, employment more balanced and employment transit zones,
!
Place Type
County Line
Residential Balanced Employment Transportation
transit zones near downtowns, and higher VMT

High VMT ! Station
High-moderate VMT
State Highways
Freeways
SF MUNI
Sources: CTOD TOD Database, Census 2000
0 7 14
and the overall distribution of transit zones ends
residential and balanced transit zones farther
Moderate VMT
to be in the moderate VMT categories. In both

Caltrain M ile s
BART
Low-moderate VMT VTA Light Rail N
[
ACE
Low VMT Amtrak
out from the center. The Bay Area represents regions, there are only a few transit zones in the
a multi-nucleated region, with major centers in high VMT categories. This is partly indicative of
San Francisco, San Jose and Oakland. Of these higher residential densities found in urban areas
centers, San Francisco has some of the lowest as well as established transit systems.
VMT transit zones. Outside of San Francisco,

III. Normative Metrics
What Are the Normative Table 3: Normative Metrics Figure 10: Normative Metric Relationships
National
Metrics?
Metric 30,000
Average
Performance (VMT) and place (use mix) are Total Intensity (residents + 25,000
N.A.
combined to create place types that help organize workers) 20,000
transit zones. However, each place type also has Residents N.A. High
High - Moderate
additional characteristics (or metrics) that can be Workers N.A. VMT 15,000
Moderate
used to evaluate performance. For the purpose Workers/Residents N.A. 10,000 Low - Moderate
of this Guidebook a Normative Metric is defined Households N.A.

Low
as a measure that allows for the comparison of 5,000
Household Size 2.59

similar transit zones within each place type. These
metrics are normative, in the sense that they Gross Density (units/acre) N.A. 0
0 33% 66%
represent the average value, of the universe of Residential Density (units/acre) N.A. Employment Percentage of Total Intensity
Workers/ (Workers+Residents)
values, within each place type. They can be used Average Block Size (acres) N.A.
to compare any given transit zone to the average Monthly T Cost N.A.
or norm of the universe of similar transit zones. Yearly T Cost N.A.
Average Median Income (1999) $40,696
The Normative Metrics in this Guidebook can be
Travel Time to Work (minutes) 24.3 Residential Balanced Employment
used as performance measures. Paired with the 30,000
Performance-Based TOD Typology, they gauge Employment Gravity (jobs

N.A.
the performance of transit zones. The data for nearby) 25,000
each station area comes from a variety of sources Transit Access Index N.A. 20,000
High
and are compiled from CTOD’s National TOD Autos/Household 1.9 High - Moderate
VMT 15,000
database. Table 3 shows the different metrics Home Journey to Work Transit 5.7% Moderate
analyzed and the national average for each metric Home Journey to Work Walk/ 10,000 Low - Moderate
(if applicable.) 8.2% Low

Bike/Transit 5,000
Workplace Journey to Work

Comparing the national average of these metrics 5.7%
Transit 0
to the Normative Metric for each place type can 0 33% 66%
Workplace Journey to Work Employment Percentage of Total Intensity

show if transit zones of different place types 8.2% Workers/ (Workers+Residents)
Walk/Bike/Transit

Table 4. Normative Metrics
Residential Places Balanced Places Employment Places
Place Types Low-Mod High-Mod Low-Mod High-Mod Low-Mod High-Mod
Low VMT Mod VMT High VMT Low VMT Mod VMT High VMT Low VMT Mod VMT High VMT
VMT VMT VMT VMT VMT VMT
Total Intensity
54,216 24,718 12,580 7,708 3,429 64,155 21,763 11,600 6,867 3,242 109,306 34,914 13,009 5,969 2,325
(residents + workers)
Residents 44,293 20,106 10,229 6,292 2,716 29,875 10,732 5,884 3,695 1,764 12,581 5,103 2,065 1,154 321
Workers 9,923 4,612 2,351 1,416 713 34,280 11,031 5,716 3,172 1,478 96,725 29,811 10,944 4,815 2,004
Workers/Residents 18.3% 19.5% 19.6% 20.3% 19.6% 51.6% 49.7% 48.2% 46.0% 46.2% 86.5% 83.9% 84.2% 83.0% 87.1%
Households 16,214 7,684 3,906 2,253 974 15,466 4,646 2,429 1,467 670 6,828 2,524 861 467 120
Household Size 2.71 2.61 2.62 2.71 2.68 1.95 2.21 2.41 2.43 2.60 1.58 1.67 2.22 2.28 2.64
Gross Density
50.0 21.6 10.3 5.7 2.2 48.7 16.4 7.6 4.0 1.9 28.5 10.3 4.6 2.2 0.9
(units/acre)
Residential Density
53.2 23.6 12.1 6.7 3.4 55.6 20.9 10.5 5.8 3.5 51.4 20.6 10.8 6.0 2.9
(units/acre)
Block Size (acres) 4.2 4.1 5.7 7.7 18.8 3.7 5.8 8.5 9.9 23.7 3.7 6.4 14.2 69.9 86.7
Monthly T Cost $422 $563 $688 $781 $906 $394 $597 $721 $794 $900 $463 $613 $713 $793 $920
Yearly T Cost $5,064 $6,756 $8,256 $9,372 $10,872 $4,728 $7,164 $8,652 $9,528 $10,800 $5,556 $7,356 $8,556 $9,516 $11,040
Average Median
$31,713 $35,643 $41,344 $53,492 $62,06t9 $43,997 $37,364 $43,395 $51,138 $65,544 $41,875 $34,183 $43,935 $40,985 $57,562
Income (1999)
Travel Time to Work
35.6 31.4 27.4 25.5 24.7 23.5 22.1 21.4 21.6 22.9 18.0 17.1 18.7 19.0 21.5
(minutes)
Employment
233,890 127,448 65,640 42,260 20,788 451,725 152,310 73,393 41,335 27,131 396,277 159,118 99,648 58,747 32,167
Proximity
Transit Access Index 31 19 13 10 3 56 28 11 9 4 85 45 19 10 4
Autos/Household 0.45 0.82 1.18 1.47 1.71 0.52 0.87 1.22 1.41 1.68 0.48 0.74 1.11 1.18 1.61
Home Journey to
58% 39% 23% 15% 8% 43% 25% 14% 10% 8% 25% 16% 13% 9% 5%
Work Transit
Home Journey to
Work Walk/Bike/ 68% 47% 27% 18% 10% 64% 40% 23% 15% 11% 58% 37% 24% 18% 9%
Transit
Workplace Journey
33% 20% 11% 7% 2% 38% 17% 8% 5% 3% 38% 16% 9% 5% 3%
to Work Transit
Workplace Journey
to Work Walk/Bike/ 47% 30% 18% 12% 6% 48% 23% 12% 8% 5% 43% 19% 11% 7% 5%
Transit

are performing better or worse than the national
average. (The national average is the average of Focus on Employment Proximity
all people or households in the US, not just those
Employment proximity, or employment gravity, measures the access that residents within a transit
living in transit zones.)
zone have to jobs across the region by using a gravity based model.7
Table 4 on page 15 shows the Normative Metrics
Previous research by CNT and CTOD has found that households that are near many jobs, or have
for each place type in the typology. These
higher employment proximity, have lower VMT than those with lower access to employment.8
metrics are meant to give an overall sense of the
There are at least two factors
characteristics of each place type. The metrics
were calculated by averaging all of the transit
that may reduce the need for Figure 11. Employment Gravity in the Twin Cities
driving in the presence of greater
zones within each place type. For example, the Twin Cities Region
employment: 1) Because there Employment Gravity
normative intensity for a low VMT, residential 55K Jobs+

are a more jobs near the transit 40-55K Jobs
transit zone is derived by averaging all of the 25-40K Jobs
zone, residents are more likely 10-25K Jobs
transit zones in that place type, and computes < 10,000 Jobs [
N
to have shorter commutes than

to 54,215 persons (workers and residents.) The
people who live in places with
TOD Database provides these metrics for every
low employment access. 2) Places
operational transit zone in the US.
with high employment access
may also have many local services
In Figure 10, each point in the graphic at the top
and shopping opportunities that
is a transit zone in the TOD database. The boxes
residents can access without driving
in the graphic to the bottom show figuratively
long distances. The map shows
how the Normative Metrics represent the average
employment gravity in the Twin
of all the stations within one place type. (A more
Cities, with the areas in red with
detailed explanation of how CTOD calculated
the highest employment gravity, or
each metric is in the appendix.)
proximity.
Overall, the Normative Metrics of lower VMT 7 The total employment access is defined as the sum of all of the jobs in a region, weighted by the inverse square of their
distance from a given station area. For example, a block group with 100 jobs that is 2 miles from a station area would contribute
places show higher performing TOD than higher 100/22 = 100/4 = 25 jobs to the employment access for that station area, whereas a block group with 100 jobs that is 10 miles
VMT places (higher transit ridership, lower auto away would only contribute 100/102 = 100/100 = 1 job.
ownership, etc.) A discussion of key findings 8 Center for Transit Oriented Development and Center for Neighborhood Technology. “Transit Oriented Development and the
Potential for VMT-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction,” March 2010.
from the Normative Metrics follows.

Key Findings from influence local land use policies, such as parking
requirements for new development, providing
Figure 13 shows that the average household living
in a low VMT transit zone spends half as much
Normative Metrics a rationale for allowing lower parking ratios in on transportation costs than households living
Overall, most transit stations perform better lower VMT places. Higher VMT transit zones in high VMT places ($4,000-5,000 compared to
than or at the national average, outperforming that want to improve their performance on this $10,000-11,000). Transportation costs quantify
the typical non-transit-oriented place. Within metric might consider what elements would make the yearly expenditures the average household
each metrics or set of metrics there are some it easier for households to get rid of one or more will make on auto ownership (car payments,
interesting variations on this general theme. cars, including grocery stores within walking maintenance, etc.), auto use (gas purchases),
distance of households or sidewalks and other and transit use. The average household in the
Auto Ownership & Transportation Costs pedestrian amenities. US spends about 19 percent of their income
Transit zones in low VMT places types tend on transportation costs, and 47 percent of
to have low transportation costs and low rates Figure 12 shows how the Performance-Based their income on the costs of housing and
of automobile ownership. This finding could TOD Place Types differ on vehicle ownership.
The difference between the highest and lowest
Figure 12: Normative Metrics for VMT places is significant, but scaling down from Figure 13: Normative Metrics for
Household Automobile Ownership
one level to another happens incrementally. This Transportation Costs
graphic also shows that auto ownership does not Residential Balanced Employment
vary significantly with changes in use mix, though
it does with VMT. Highest VMT
$10,872 $10,800 $11,040
While the Normative Metrics compare the
$9,372 $9,528 $9,516
performance of transit zones around the country
to one another, it is also important to consider
how these areas are performing when compared $8,256 $8,652 $8,556
to the national average. On this particular metric,
the national average for vehicle ownership $6,756 $7,164 $7,356
(1.9 cars per household) is slightly higher than
the average for the highest VMT place type. Lowest VMT
$5,064 $4,728 $5,556
However, households in low VMT transit zones
own one fourth as many cars on average. Household Annual
Transportation Costs
(For Residents)

transportation combined.9 More and more, policy Figure 14: Normative Metrics for Non- transit even less than the national average. This
makers and stakeholders are looking at both Auto Journey to Work finding suggests that concentrating employment
housing and transportation costs as a measure of in low VMT transit zones will have a strong
the neighborhood affordability. positive impact on transit use in general.
Because of the potential savings on Urban Form

transportation costs that are available in low Low VMT transit zones tend to have more
VMT place types, these transit zones are intensity (residents + workers) and higher
important places to ensure that a range of residential densities than high VMT transit zones.
housing options exist to serve residents with a Residential densities in low VMT transit zones
wide range of incomes. are over 15 times as high compared to high VMT
transit zones (shown in Figure 15.) Blocks in low
Commute Travel Behavior VMT transit zones average between 3.7 acres (for
Low VMT place types exhibit more transit employment and balanced use places) and 4.2
ridership and higher rates of walking and biking acres (for residential places). In high VMT places,
to work than high VMT transit zones. This the range is between 18.8 acres (for residential
finding is equally true of commutes by residents places) and 86.7 acres (for employment places).
living in transit zones and commutes by workers
who work in transit zones. employment place types, independent of VMT. This finding suggests that low VMT transit
However, these differences are less pronounced zones are also characterized by urban form that
Figure 14 shows that 58 percent of commuters when comparing the percent of people who is generally more pedestrian-friendly than high
in low VMT, residential places use transit to use transit, walk, and bike to work. Residents VMT transit zones. Block sizes and pedestrian
get to work, more than 10 times the national of transit zones that have a lot of employment connectivity are difficult to change, a challenge
average. However, transit ridership rates in high activity may find it easier to walk or bike to jobs for high VMT transit zones that want to
VMT transit zones are much lower (closer to within the transit zone. transition into lower VMT places.
the national average.) In general, workers living
in more residential transit zones use transit to The Normative Metrics also underscore a similar However, there are examples of places where
commute more than residents in balanced or pattern for people who work in transit zones. In older, suburban-style malls or manufacturing
low VMT transit zones, workers take transit at 8 districts have recreated grid street networks
9 Center for Transit-Oriented Development and CNT. “The times the rate as the national average. In contrast, to support more walking. In Oak Park, a
Affordability Index: A New Tool for Measuring the True workers traveling to high VMT transit zones take pedestrian mall was reintroduced to the street
Affordability of a Housing Choice,” January 2006.

Figure 15: Normative Metrics for Other Uses for Normative funds could be targeted to areas that plan for
more changes. Additionally, with an existing
Residential Density
Metrics baseline for each station area, it is possible to
track progress over time, making adjustments to
The case studies show how the Normative
funding easier and giving each jurisdiction a fair
Metrics can also be used to analyze the
playing field no matter what type of place they
performance of a particular transit zone. The
are.
Normative Metrics offer individual transit zones
a starting point to analyze how they compare
The Normative Metrics may also be useful in
to stations that are similar to them in terms of
scenario planning at the regional scale, discussed
VMT and use mix. The individual transit zone
more in Section IV below. Residential density,
may differ considerably from a normative metric
employment proximity, transit access, and block
for its place type. Places in transition may use the
size are all important inputs to the average
Normative Metrics to see where they might end
VMT in a transit zone. Some metrics may be
up on the spectrum.
more important than others for a particular
transit zone, and the potential for a transit
Policy makers and stakeholders that want to
zone to change some of those metrics will
outline strategies to improve the performance of
network and loaded with pedestrian amenities. differ depending on the specific place. A full
their station area can use the Normative Metrics
It provided some parking for local businesses complement of illustrations of the metrics can be
to set quantitative goals. To lower VMT, they may
and opened up traffic flow to reduce congestion. found in the Appendix.
look to the Normative Metrics to see what the
In Gresham, OR, the city reintroduced the grid norm for that place type is in terms of vehicle
when redeveloping a large tract of land into a ownership, transit use, density and more to
commercial center. Research has shown that determine the types of changes to be made.
urban form characteristics known as “the four
Ds” (density, design, distance, destinations) are Many policy changes will happen locally, but
critical for lowering overall VMT. While this federal and state actors could also use the
study has focused on household VMT data as Normative Metrics to set up funding mechanisms
a performance standard, future research should and initiatives that will help local jurisdictions
look to investigate the 4D research with this achieve their goals. Allocations of federal
performance-based approach. grants for affordable housing or redevelopment

IV. Case Studies
The case studies take a look at nine different where the basic demographic conditions used also demonstrate how to perform an existing
transit zones within the Performance-Based to categorize and measure performance already conditions analysis for any transit zone in the
TOD Typology: Vermont/Santa Monica, CA; reflected the existence of transit. US using the National TOD Database and the
Oak Park, IL; West Irving, TX; East Liberty, H+T® Affordability Index.10
PA; Downtown Berkeley, CA; Gresham Transit This report includes case studies for nine of
Center, OR; Essex Street, NJ; Buckhead, GA; the fifteen total place types. To show a diverse
Part 1: Place Type Overview
and Rockville, MD. They serve as examples range of place types, the case study stations were
This section discusses what it means to be in a
of the nine different place types and act as a chosen to ensure that at least one low or low-
particular place type, and pulls some examples
template for stakeholders to created their own moderate, one moderate, and one high or high-
from the case study to show what housing looks
existing conditions analysis. This section gives moderate place type in each use mix category was
like in terms of density, whether there are small
an overview of the purpose and how to use the represented. Figure 16 shows which place types
blocks on a grid or sprawling suburban cul-de-
case studies. The full four-page case studies are in are presented by the case studies, with dashed
sacs, and what kinds of retail or employment uses
Section VII of this Guidebook.. lines separating the low and low-moderate and
are in the area.
high and high-moderate place types.
Criteria for Choices 10 The Database is available online at http://toddata.cnt.org/

and the H+T® Affordability Index is available at http://htaindex.
The case studies were chosen in order to show Using Case Studies cnt.org/
a variety of types of transit zones that differ There are four parts to the case studies: Figure 16: Case Studies
not only in their place type as defined by the • Part 1: Place Type Overview
Performance-Based TOD Typology, but also Highest VMT
Gresham Transit
• Part 2: Regional Context Center
differ in where they are located in the US, the
• Part 3: Comparing to Normative Metrics
size of the overall region, the size and age of the
• Part 4: Other Examples Across the Country West Irving Rockville
transit network, the type of transit in place in the
transit zone, and the median income in the transit Downtown
Oak Park Buckhead
zone. Table 5 shows how the case studies are The case studies perform several functions. Berkeley
distributed. They show an example of a typical station and

Vermont/Santa
transit zone within each major place type and Monica
East Liberty
Each of the stations chosen was on a transit line discuss how that station performs compared to
that began operating before the 2000 Census. the Normative Metrics for that place type. They Lowest VMT
Essex Street
While all places have experienced some change 33% 66%
since 2000, this report focuses on transit zones Percent of Intensity from Workers

Table 5. VMT Place Type Case Studies
Place Type Size of Transit Geographic
Station Name Transit Region Rail Type Median Income
VMT Use Mix Network Region
Low-moderate VMT Residential Vermont / Santa Monica Los Angeles Heavy Rail Low Large West
Moderate VMT Residential Oak Park Chicago Heavy Rail High Expansive Midwest
High-moderate VMT Residential West Irving Dallas Commuter Rail Moderate Medium South
Low-moderate VMT Balanced Use East Liberty Pittsburgh Bus Rapid Transit Low Medium East
Moderate VMt Balanced Use Downtown Berkeley San Francisco Heavy Rail Low Expansive West
High VMT Balanced Use Gresham Transit Center Portland Light Rail Moderate Large West
Low VMT Employment Essex, NJ New York Tristate Light Rail High Expansive East
Moderate VMT Employment Buckhead Atlanta Heavy Rail High Medium South
High-moderate VMT Employment Rockville Washington, DC Heavy Rail Moderate Large East
grid; there are few intersections, and there residential area, bordered by older retail
For example, the moderate VMT, employment are no direct paths from residential areas to corridors. Many central urban stations in
use transit zone (Buckhead in Atlanta, GA) has the transit station or mall, making walking older cities with extensive transit networks
the following characteristics: from the residential area to the mall extremely have many stations in this place type.
challenging. • In the Vermont/Santa Monica transit zone,
• Tall office buildings surround the Buckhead residential density is about 19 units per acre,
station, which is located along a major arterial Some of these may also be characteristics of which takes the form of moderately dense
(Highway 400). This kind of land use may be other moderate VMT, employment use places, 3-4 story apartment buildings.
typical of other employment place types. but are not necessarily true for all transit zones in • Streets around the Vermont/Santa Monica
• Buckhead is also close to a large shopping this place type. This description is meant to give station are in a well-connected grid, though
mall, and has many other auto-oriented retail the unfamiliar user a sense for what a moderate there are a few large blocks directly around
centers in the area. As a moderate VMT VMT, employment use place might be like. the station.
place, people will drive to many of these • Both Vermont Ave. and Santa Monica Blvd.
destinations. In contrast, the low-moderate VMT, residential are retail corridors, but instead of walkable,
• There is a small residential area within the use case study (Vermont/Santa Monica in Los small scale retail, most of the stores are auto-
transit zone, where residential density is very Angeles, CA) has the following characteristics: oriented, and there are a few larger big box
low, only 3.4 households per acre. shops near the station itself.
• The streets are curvilinear without a clear • Vermont/Santa Monica is primarily a

From this simple description, these two places Figure 17. Dallas-Fort Worth vs Pittsburgh, PA
have some obvious differences: Pittsburgh, PA
Dallas-Fort Worth
• Residential density is much higher in the low- Place Types
Colin
Place Types
moderate VMT, residential use place Wise Denton
• The street patterns are very different: !

!
!
I-27
I- !
35
! !! !
9
! !
E
!
!
! ! !
curvilinear in the moderate VMT,

Denton !
!
! !
!!! !
!!
City of Pittsburgh
!
!
!!
Hig !
!!! !
! hw ! !
!
ay ! !
employment use place and gridded in the

30
!
! I-376
! !
! !! ! !!!!
!
35 ! !
!!
!
! I-6
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!!!
!!
!
!
!
low-moderate VMT residential place. !

!! !!
!
! !! ! !
! ! !!
! !
! !
!
!
! !
!
!! !!
! !
!!
!
! !
! !
!
! !
• Both places have some retail uses. Buckhead’s I-820 !

!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!! ! ! !
!! !
!
!!
!
!
is mostly in the mall and surrounding areas, ! ! !! !!!

! !
! !
!
!
! !!
!
! ! !
!
! !
! !
!
!
! !
!
!
! ! !
! !!!! !! !
!
!!
!
!!!!
!
!! !
while Vermont / Santa Monica’s retail is I-30 !

79
! ! !!
! !
!
!
!
I-
!! !
!
! ! !
! Allegheny
!!!!
! !
!
!! !
! !
!
!
!
Kaufman
along commercial corridors.
!
!
! !
!
City of Dallas
!
!
! Westmoreland
!
!
City of Fort Worth
!
!
!
! !
I-20 !
! !
!
Washington
!
!
!
!
!
!
Part 2: Regional Context

Legend
Place Types
! !
County Line
I-4
This section compares the case study transit zone
Residential Balanced Employment City Limits Legend
Tarrant N Place Types
5
Sources:
High VMT County Line
High-moderate VMT
Transportation TOD Database
Census 2000 [ Residential Balanced Employment City Limits
! Station
to the region. Knowing how far away the station

High VMT
0 3 6 Transportation
Moderate VMT State Highways Miles High-moderate VMT Sources: TOD Database, Census 2000.
!
I-3
Station
Freeways Moderate VMT
Johnson Low-moderate VMT Highways 0 1 2 3 miles
5W
is from major employment centers in the region
Freeways
Light Rail Low-moderate VMT
Low VMT N
Ellis Light Rail
Commuter Rail Low VMT
Busways [
helps broaden the understanding of employment

Worth, TX and Pittsburgh, PA. There are some • Dallas has far more employment-centric and
proximity and access (discussed in the Normative
similarities between these two regions: balanced stations than residential ones. Most
Metrics section above.) Comparing one particular
• Transit zones in the downtown areas in of Pittsburgh’s transit zones are primarily
station and transit zone to others in the same
both regions tend to be in the low VMT, residential places.
region can be helpful for local and regional actors
employment use place type. • Pittsburgh connects to several low VMT
as well—regional conditions play an important
• The majority of transit zones are moderate residential and balanced use places outside
role in determining how transit zones perform
VMT or higher. of the CBD. Dallas has almost no low VMT
on the metrics discussed in the Guidebook, and
• Transit zones are more likely to be higher transit zones outside of its CBD.
understanding how a station fits into the region
VMT the farther away they are from the • Pittsburgh’s transit system is a mix of pre and
is important to identifying policies to help lower
central city. post WWII lines, while Dallas-Fort Worth’s
VMT in transit zones.
was all built after 1996.
However, these two regions also differ in fairly
The maps in Figure 17 show the place types
significant ways: Regions with different transit systems will also
of transit zones in two regions: Dallas-Forth

Figure 18. Transit Zones in the Bay Area than Dallas’s new light rail, but younger than the region on the performance metrics discussed
San Francisco Bay Area !
! !
! !
other extensive systems like Chicago and New in the Section II) can help to define station area
Place Types ! !
Concord
York City. While the region has many stations in planning priorities and goals. Below are two
! !
many different kinds of places, the map shows examples of regional analysis in the case studies.
Richmond
!!
!
! that even within the City of San Francisco,

!
!
!
! ! ! !
!
Walnut Creek
!
Berkeley
!
transit zones have a range of VMT and use mix Downtown Berkeley
!!!
!
!
! Contra Costa County
!
!! !
!
types. Similar to Dallas and Pittsburgh, stations Located in the East Bay of the San Francisco
I-
68
!
!
0
! !
outside of city centers in the Bay Area tend to be Bay Area, downtown Berkeley is on the Bay
I-80
!
San Francisco
!
!
!!
!!
!! ! !!
!!!!!!!
!!
! ! !
!
Downtown Oakland
!
!!
!!!!
!
! !!
!
!!
!
!!! ! !!
!
!
!! !
!
!!! !
higher VMT places, but these include both more Area Rapid Transit (BART) heavy rail system.
!!!
! !
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!!! !! !
!!
!
!!
!
! !
!!
!! ! ! !! !
!
!!
! ! !!
!! !
!!!! !
!
!! !!!! !
! !
!!!
!!! !
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
! !
!!
! ! !
!! ! !
! !
residential places in the East Bay and balanced Downtown Berkeley is one of the more urban
!
!
!!
!!
! !
!
!
! !! !
! !
! !
! !
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!! !
!
!!!!!! !!
! !
! !
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!! !
!
!
! !
!!
!! !
! !! !!!!! !! !
!! !! !
!!
!! !
! !!!
!
! !
!!!! ! ! !
! use places along the Caltrain line along the stations in the BART network, with a mix of
! !
!!!! ! I-580
!!
! !
! !
!
!
!
!
!
! ! !
!
!
! ! San Francisco Bay
!
! Hayward
!
Peninsula. office buildings, moderate to higher density
!! !
! !
residential, and a plethora of restaurants, bars,

!
!
!
!! !
!
Hig
hw
ay
92
!
!
Regional planners trying to reduce VMT, increase and shops. This station is also in close proximity
H
!!
I-
!
ig
28
hw
!
0
ay
!!
!
transit ridership, and offer more walkable to the University of California at Berkeley
10
!
!
1
!
!
Alameda County
!
!
!
!! mixed use neighborhoods can benefit from campus, a major employer and activity generator.
4
8
ay
!
w
h
ig
!
H
Freemont
! !
!
understanding the overall picture of how transit

!!
!
!
!!!
!! !
!!! zones are performing compared to the national Downtown Berkeley is well-connected to regional
! !!!!
!! !
!
!
!! !! !
! !!
!
!! Palo Alto !
!
!!!
!!!!
!
! ! ! !! !
!!
! !
!!!
! !
!!!!!
! !
!
!! !
!!!! !!
! !
!
!!
! !!! ! !! !
!!!!!!
!! !
!
!
!! !
! ! !! ! !
!! ! !
! !
!
Normative Metrics laid out in this Guidebook. job centers. The transit zone is within a 20
!
!
!!!
!
!
! !
!
!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !
! ! !! !! !
! ! !!
!
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
! !!
! ! !
! !
! !!
!! ! !
!
! ! ! !! !! ! ! !
!
!!!!
! !
!!
!
!!!
! ! !
!!!
! Looking at the regional picture can help identify minute transit ride to downtown San Francisco
!
!
! ! San Jose
!! !! !
!!
! !
!! !
! !
!!!! !!!!! !! !!! !
!
! !
!
! ! !
! !! ! !
!
!
! !
!
!!!
! ! !
!!!
!
! !
! ! !
!
! !
! ! !
! !
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
! !
! ! ! !
!! ! !
places that are already high performers within the and a 10 minute ride to downtown Oakland. The
!!!!!!!!!!!! !
! ! !!
!!!!! ! ! ! !!!
!
!
! !
! !
!!
!
!! !
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!!
!! !!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
! !!!!!
!
! !
!! !! !! !!
!
!
!!
! ! !
!
region and help guide policy decisions to support transit zone itself is also an important job center
!
!
! !
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!! !! !!
! !
! !
! ! !
! !
!
!! Santa Clara County
!
! !
!
!
!! similar “high-performing” places in other parts for the region, with nearly 18,000 workers in the
!
Legend
! !! !
! San Mateo County !
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
Place Type
County Line

High VMT
Transportation
! Station
of the region. These places may be models for half mile around the station alone. Downtown
State Highways
High-moderate VMT
Moderate VMT
Freeways
SF MUNI
Caltrain
Sources: CTOD TOD Database, Census 2000
0 7 14
M ile s
other transit zones in the region. Berkeley has the highest percentage of workers
BART
Low-moderate VMT
Low VMT
VTA Light Rail
ACE
Amtrak
[
N
who commute by walking, nearly 14%, in part
At the station area scale, understanding due to the many housing opportunities in
have a different pattern of place types. The map how a particular transit zone relates to the proximity to these jobs. Increasing employment
in Figure 18 shows the San Francisco Bay Area. region (through its proximity to employment, proximity may be the best way to reduce
its connections to the broader transit and household VMT in this transit zone.
The Bay Area has an extensive system, older transportation network, and how it compares to

The Bay Area has a diverse mix of transit zones, Line located in the southern half of Oak Park. and the area includes a diverse range of income
and Downtown Berkeley falls in the middle in The Metra Line continues west from Oak Park groups. While housing in the Chicago region is
terms of VMT. Many stations in the city of and together with PACE bus service provides predominantly owner-occupied, Oak Park has an
San Francisco fall into the low-moderate and a limited number of connections to several even mix of renters and owners.
low VMT types, while the Peninsula and the suburban employment centers such as Oak
South Bay (where San Jose and Silicon Valley are Brook and Wheaton. Oak Park has also worked Part 3: Comparing to Normative Metrics
located) have more transit zones in the higher to improve the mobility options within the city; This part of the case study compares the metrics
VMT places. Oak Park boasts a rickshaw taxi service, two car for each case study station to the Normative
sharing program, and a bicycle and electric car Metrics for that place type. There are three
Oak Park rental service. sections within this part of the case studies.
The Oak Park transit zone is located in the
Village of Oak Park, on the western border of Oak Park is fairly dense (15.2 households/acre), One section focuses specifically on the metrics
the City of Chicago. The station is the second compared to the Chicago region (4.8 households/ that directly impact the VMT model used in
to last on the CTA’s Green Line, an elevated acre) and to the average residential density of this Guidebook: block size, residential density,
heavy rail line whose stations are close together, other transit zones in the region (8.5 households/ employment proximity, and transit options.
about a half-mile apart. A commuter rail station acre.) Median household income is slightly Though there are other inputs to the model,
(run by Metra) is about a half-mile from the Oak higher in Oak Park than the region ($51,680) these four are pieces of the built environment
Park station and has a direct connection to the
Green Line’s terminal station, Harlem and Lake. Figure 19. Part 3 of Case Studies
The corridor around the Green Line is primarily What factors can lower VMT in Higher Lower
mixed-use, with retail and office uses mixed with VMT VMT
apartment and condo buildings. A single-family East Liberty?
residential neighborhood extends beyond the Metric East Liberty Compared to Normative Metric
mixed-use zone. Oak Park is well-known for
its many Frank Lloyd Wright homes, but the Average Block Size 3.2 acres/block
neighborhood has a diverse mix of housing.
Residential Density 15.5 units/acre
Oak Park has many transit connections to
Employment Proximity* 64,760 jobs nearby
downtown Chicago, the major employment hub
in the region, including the Green Line, Metra’s Transit Access Index* 71 transit opportunities
Union Pacific West Line, and the CTA Blue Lower than norm Higher than norm

and transportation alternatives that planners and place type. Readers who are unfamiliar with Figure 20. Template Place Type
decision makers can impact. the case study region or station may recognize
Figure 19 shows how the metrics for an another station on the list, making it easier to Self-Assessment Tool
individual station are compared to the Normative contextualize the different place types. Metric [Insert Transit Zone here.] Compared to Normative Metric
S t u d i e s
Metrics. This section shows how the East Liberty Average VMT per Household*
Residential vs Employment Mix
transit zone performs on some of the key

Lower Higher
factors that affect VMT. The transit zone has Build Your Own What factors can lower VMT in
[insert transit zone here]?
Metric [Insert Transit Zone here.]
Higher
VMT
Lower
VMT
Compared to Normative Metric
Average Block Size
more than twice as many transit opportunities Figure 20 is a template that stakeholders Residential Density
Employment Proximity*
as the typical low-moderate VMT, balanced use interested in lowering VMT in their station area
C a s e
Transit Access Index*
Lower Higher
How does [insert transit zone here] compare to the norm on

place, and the average block size is about half can use. The template shows all of Part 3 from other transportation performance metrics?
as small. However, residential density is a little the case studies, the section that analyzes how Avg Household Transportation Costs*
Nonauto Commute From Transit Zone
lower in East Liberty station than the typical
T y p e
the individual station compares to the Normative Nonauto Commute To Transit Zone
Avg Autos per Household
place, and there are half as many jobs nearby. To Metrics for that place type. Who lives and works in [insert transit zone here]?
Lower Higher
lower VMT in this transit zone, efforts could be

Total Transit zone Population
P l a c e
focused on increasing residential density and
Total Residents
Stakeholders interested in how their station area Total Workers
improving employment proximity.

Median Household Income $23,500 per year
is performing compared to the average station Average Household Size 1.75 people/household
Lower Higher
area in the same place type can fill out the November 2010 / Page 1
The second section in Part 3 includes other form in the Appendix. Using this template can
transportation performance metrics to also help stakeholders identify where there are To fill out the template, stakeholders should use
broaden the overall picture of car ownership, opportunities to lower VMT. The next section the TOD Database (http://toddata.cnt.org/),
transportation costs, and travel patterns within of the Guidebook discusses scenario planning, which provides data for over 4,000 existing and
the transit zone; the third section is an assessment and shows that stations in the highest VMT types potential transit zones in the US. VMT is given
of the total residential and worker population and have some of the greatest opportunity to lower in the H+T® Affordability Index, also available
of other factors like household size and median VMT by making fairly incremental changes. online (http://htaindex.cnt.org/.) The Normative
income that can help form a picture of what a Increasing residential density and improving Metrics for each place type are given in this
transit zone is like, but that may not be relevant employment proximity can create the most Guidebook. Stakeholders should first identify
to lowering VMT. opportunity for lowering VMT in a transit zone. their station’s place type and then compare each
Identifying how a particular transit zone already metric in their station to the Normative Metrics
Part 4: Other Examples Across the Country performs on these indicators will improve the for that place type.
The last section shows ten examples of other overall understanding of what strategies can be
stations around the country that are the same implemented.

V. Changing Transit Zone Performance
The typology uses existing conditions to group CO2 emissions in the transit zone and the region, to the model that CNT developed to predict
together similar transit zones from all parts of even if the place type does not change. household travel behavior, they can be used to
the country. It is primarily oriented around the show how changes might affect transit zone
average household VMT in transit zones and Key questions for users are 1) what needs to VMT.
can be used as a tool to determine how to lower change to lower VMT, and 2) how much change
the average VMT in an individual transit zone, is needed to significantly lower VMT. Previous
effectively moving the transit zone from one work by CNT and CTOD has shown that Development Scenarios
place type to another. residential household density and employment New development can change both employment
access are strong drivers behind the travel access and residential density. Regions plan for
Table 6 provides context for evaluating behavior of households.11 a finite number of new residents and jobs, and
household VMT reductions, showing the ranges
of VMT in each category. Reducing average VMT While these scenarios show broad pictures of Figure 21: Scenario A - Increased
in a transit zone by approximately 2,500 would the VMT reductions possible with increases
enable a transit zone to change its place type. in housing and employment, planning for
Employment Access & Households by
However, even reductions of less than 2,500 can such increases in the real world should ensure 15 Percent
have a meaningful impact and reduce VMT and that increasing housing means increasing the ●
diversity of housing types affordable to a range

●
30000 ●
Table 6. VMT Category Widths

●
● ●
of household incomes. Likewise, employment

●
●
●
●
VMT
●
growth should be aimed at a wide range of

●
VMT Range Width

●
● ●
●
●
Category
●
25000
●
●
●
●
job opportunities, with varying skills and

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
salaries. Increasing employment access means

●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Low < 9,100

●
●
● ●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
● ●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
strengthening existing job centers, not creating

● ●
● ●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
20000
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
●
●
● ● ●
● ●
● ●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
● ●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
new ones or adding employment to every

●
● ●
Low- 9,100-
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
VMT
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
● ●
● ●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
● ● ● ●
●
●
2,500
● ●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
● ● ● ●
● ●
● ●
●
● ● ●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
● ●
●
● ●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
●
● ●
●
● ●
● ●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
● ● ●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
● ● ●
●
● ●
transit zone. New transit investments should

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
● ● ●
Moderate 11,600
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
●
● ● ●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
●
● ●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
● ●
● ● ●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
● ●
● ●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
● ● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ● ● ●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Typology Guidebook, Center For Transit-Oriented Development, December 2010

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Typology Guidebook, Center For Transit-Oriented Development, December 2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Performance-Based

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

Photo by jmd41280 from Flickr.

This report includes nine case studies of transit

Photo by Liberty is Virtue from Flickr.

Photo by harry_nl from Flickr.

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

conducted to understand how additional 18000

increments of growth and development in

VMT per household

performance. Scenarios of 15%, 30%, and Cobb County

50% increments of growth in both residential 14000 !

households and employment access were Chamblee

included, as well as an assessment of an increase

in 2,000 households per station area. 10000

Key lessons from the scenarios include:

1. Encouraging new development in transit 0 20 40

zones, independent of the place type, can help Fulton County

Adding Jobs and Housing Increases Performance !

the average household VMT is higher than the Legend

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

IV. Case Studies 20

V. Changing Transit Zone Performance 27

VI. Possible Policy Implications and Uses 35

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

or address climate change use language that is

often hard to understand. It is difficult to create Low

Employment Percentage of Total Intensity

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

Average VMT per Household*

Residential vs Employment Mix

Transit Access Index*

Nonauto Commute From Transit Zone

important issues, including transportation

Avg Autos per Household

Total Transit zone Population

Median Household Income $23,500 per year

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

Whether working locally, regionally, or at another

While this tool could be useful in guiding future

• At the federal and state level, agencies can use

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

Use Mix Type

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

There are several benefits to organizing transit

Employment Percentage of Total Intensity

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

! !! type, it can be compared to the other transit

zones along a corridor, within a neighborhood,

!!! ! regional contexts makes it easier to identify

! ! historical land use and development patterns)

Performance-Based Transit-Oriented Development Typology Guidebook

Employment Percentage of Total Intensity

balanced use mixes. Households living along

transit zones tend to be higher VMT places, with

work, but they drive more miles than the average

the Chicago and Bay Area regions are distributed

Chicago represents a prevailing pattern seen in