1. Does TOD Need retail? Retail employment near light rail stations MATTHEW M. MILLER DOCTORAL STUDENT, DEPARTMENT OF CITY & METROPOLITAN PLANNING RESEARCH ANALYST, METROPOLITAN RESEARCH CENTER UNIVERSITY OF UTAH MILLERMM@ARCH.UTAH.EDU

2. TOD Transit Oriented Develop- ment (Photo source: http://extrahelpinc.com/2012/02/day-of-a-downtown-dweller-by-dana-kay-goddard/) 2

8. Sample (Opened post 2000) 8

11. http://resources.esri.com/help/9.3/arcgisengine/java/gp_toolref/geoprocessing/GPKAC_points_select_by_location2.gif

12. What my variables were 12 Variable Type & ScaleVariable OutcomeChange in Retail employment Predictor PrimaryOperating years of Transit Geographic Metro Region; CBSA Census Region Census Division Census State Station Level Controls Retail employment, 2002 Non-Retail employment, 2002 Income indicator, proportion middle, 2002 Age indicator, proportion middle, 2002 Change in non-retail employment, '02-'13 Variable Type & ScaleVariable Predictor Metropolitan Scale Controls Income Indicator, proportion middle, 2002 Age Indicator, proportion middle, 2002 Change in Income indicator Change in Age indicator Retail employment, 2002 Non-Retail employment, 2002 Change in retail employment, '02-'13 Change in non-retail employment, '02-'13 Confounders Presence of a major mall Mall renovated recently Presence of a major airport Presence of major college/university Presence of a major hospital

13. Results 13 .. Signif. codes 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1 Residual standard error 493.6 on 183 degrees of freedom Multiple R-squared 0.4738 Adjusted R-squared0.4508 F-statistic 20.6 on 8 and 183 DF P-value < 2.2e-16

14. Results 14 .. Signif. codes 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1 Residual standard error 493.6 on 183 degrees of freedom Multiple R-squared 0.4738 Adjusted R-squared0.4508 F-statistic 20.6 on 8 and 183 DF P-value < 2.2e-16

15. Results 15 .. Signif. codes 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1 Residual standard error 493.6 on 183 degrees of freedom Multiple R-squared 0.4738 Adjusted R-squared0.4508 F-statistic 20.6 on 8 and 183 DF P-value < 2.2e-16

16. Results 16 .. Signif. codes 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1 Residual standard error 493.6 on 183 degrees of freedom Multiple R-squared 0.4738 Adjusted R-squared0.4508 F-statistic 20.6 on 8 and 183 DF P-value < 2.2e-16

17. Implications  Zoning for retail near transit stations is a silly idea;  In most places, it results in the best land (nearest the station) being used for low intensity uses.  Retail works when it’s large retail; transit makes it more accessible.  Like adding an additional highway; larger market area. 17

18. Speculations  Retail is pedestrian oriented, never transit oriented.  Transit allows spatial disaggregation; why recreate a monocentric ‘new town’ rather than a ‘Transit Oriented Corridor’ (Cervero 2003), with uses aggregated at stations.  Adding a transit station to ‘redevelop’ an area results in the replacement of marginal retail by new, denser residential.  Methodologically:  HLM  Spatial Regression  Time Series (ARIMAX) 18

19. Thank you! Contact Information: Matthew M. Miller PhD Student, Department of City and Metropolitan Planning Research Analyst, Metropolitan Research Center College of Architecture + Planning University of Utah millermm@arch.utah.edu Many thanks are due to Dr. Joanna Ganning 19

20. Apportioning 20  Census Blocks  2000  * Area_Clipped/Area_Origi nal