1. Living Cities Transit Oriented Development Working Group March 16, 2012 Stephanie Pollack What Do We Mean by Equity? Equitable TOD Research and Metrics

2. Defining and measuring equity and inequity

3. Practitioners and funders need to clarify what we mean when we say... ●Equity ●Transportation (and/or Transit) Equity ●Equitable Transit-Oriented Development Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University

4. A sustainable transportation system ●Allows everyone to have equitable access to a region’s important goods, services and destinations; ●Provides users with real transportation choices that are affordable, safe and convenient; and ●Ensures long-term environmental sustainability, minimizing greenhouse gas emissions and other undesirable environmental impacts Equity Accessibility Affordability Convenience Safety Sustainability

5. A working definition of equity ●Equity refers to an ideal state in which everyone has full and equal access to opportunities and amenities, regardless of their race or ethnicity, gender, age or wealth ●Although a perfectly equitable transportation system cannot be achieved in reality, it still presents an ideal comparison against which to assess the current state of transportation equity

6. Measuring transportation (in)equity ●How can we measure “equity” in commuting patterns? ●Indicator should capture both ●Differences in modes used to commute across different groups ●Spatial distribution of different groups across the region, in relationship to potential employment sites

7. Constructing an “indicator” of transportation (in)equity But does this help people understand the problem of differential commute times?

8. Travel time penalty as a measure of transportation equity Annual Hours of “Excess” Commute Time By way of comparison, Boston commuters experience an average “travel time penalty” of 48 additional hours of delay annually due to traffic congestion (making the region the 10th most congested metro in the US)

9. Defining and measuring “equitable” TOD ●We want to better understand ●Characteristics of TOD that may promote greater inequity ●Characteristics of TOD that may improve regional equity ●We began by looking at transit-rich neighborhoods ●Who lives there? ●What is happening to their housing markets, transportation patterns, etc? Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University

10. Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University The diversity of transit-served metropolitan areas in the U.S.

11. Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University TOD that enhances equity: Serving and growing core ridership ●Focus on core riders, instead of distinguishing between “captive” and “choice” riders ●Core transit riders are disproportionately ●Renters ●People of color ●Low income ●Core transit riders are more likely to ●Live in zero-vehicle households ●Live in transit-rich neighborhoods ●There is a symbiotic relationship between diverse neighborhoods and successful transit ●Transit stations need “ transit-oriented neighbors ” who will regularly use the system

12. Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University TOD that endangers equity: Gentrification and displacement ●Gentrification: a pattern of neighborhood change characterized by increasing property values and incomes ●Displacement: a pattern of neighborhood change in which current residents are involuntarily forced to move out because they cannot afford the gentrified neighborhood

13. Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University Inequitable patterns of neighborhood change ●Patterns of neighborhood change varied across the transit-rich neighborhoods (TRNs) we studied but gentrification occurred in an overwhelming majority of TRNs ●Displacement is not the only inequitable pattern of neighborhood change ●Gentrification consequence #1: Higher housing cost burdens for renters who stayed in the transit- rich neighborhood ●Gentrification consequence #2: A rising number of automobile- owning households less likely to use transit for commuting

14. Framework for equitable TOD

15. A framework for addressing regional equity Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University “Opening up” higher opportunity communities Improving lower opportunity communities (“development without displacement”) Connecting “lower opportunity communities” to opportunity elsewhere in the region through better transportation connections

16. How do equity concerns vary for each piece of this framework? ●TOD in areas of lower opportunity/concentrated poverty ●How can we ensure that TOD respects the vibrancy of existing communities and adds value to what is already in place? ●Can we measure risk factors for gentrification/ displacement and address those in TOD planning? ●TOD in areas of higher opportunity ●How can we maximize benefits to everyone in the region, rather than just those living nearby? ●How can we maximize region-wide access to new amenities and opportunities in such TOD projects? ●Transportation connections ●How can we prioritize transportation investments that create access to opportunity? ●How can we keep transit affordable for all? Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University What other questions should we be asking ourselves?

17. Attributes of equitable TOD The Equity Advisory Committee to the joint Dukakis Center/Center for Transit-Oriented Development Equitable TOD Rating Systems Project will meet next week to consider whether the following set of attributes and objectives provides an appropriate framework for developing a system for rating equitable TOD neighborhoods and projects. What do you think?

18. Data democracy Examples of tools/best practices ●MetroPulse (Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning) ●Housing + Transportation Affordability Index ●TOD Data Base Equity Objective: Data that can help individuals and communities shape equitable development is widely available in user-friendly formats that are free and available to all Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University

19. Inclusive planning Examples of tools/best practices ●BeltLine Community Engagement Framework (Atlanta GA) ●Corridor Development Initiative (Twin Cities MN) ●Longfellow Station Community Benefits Agreement (Minneapolis MN) Equity Objective: Everyone with a stake in a community’s future has the opportunity to participate in planning and the ability to hold government officials and developers accountable for ensuring equitable development Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University

20. Access to affordable homes Examples of tools/best practices ●Inclusionary zoning (eg Carlsbad CA and Bridge Housing’s Poinsettia Station TOD) ●Community land trusts (Sawmill Community Land Trust, Albuquerque NM) ●Incentive programs for housing production (Massachusetts Chapter 40R, San Francisco Housing Incentive Program) Equity Objective: Lower income households have access to homes in neighborhoods that allow them to keep their combined housing and transportation costs affordable Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University

21. Transportation choices Examples of tools/best practices ●Car sharing (SF City Car Share, Hoboken Corner Cars) ●Elimination of parking minimums (Seattle) ●“Unbundling” cost of parking (San Francisco) Equity Objective: Combined housing and transportation costs are reduced, and car ownership is discouraged, for residents of transit-rich neighborhoods Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University

22. Development without displacement Examples of tools/best practices ●Affordable housing set-asides in TIFs (BeltLine Affordable Housing Trust Fund in Atlanta GA) ●Capital grant programs (Metro TOD Program in Portland, MassWorks in MA) ●TOD acquisition funds (Denver, Bay Area) Equity Objective: Investment is provided for infrastructure and/or transit-oriented development without exacerbating inequitable patterns of neighborhood change Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University

23. Economic opportunity Examples of tools/best practices ●Geographically-targeted economic development incentives (Illinois Business Location Efficiency Act) ●Employer “Live Near Your Work” programs (Maryland Smart Keys 4 Employees) ●Community Benefit Agreements Equity Objective: Workers of all incomes and educational levels can find jobs located near public transportation Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy Northeastern University