The New Horizontal Frontier of Transit-Oriented Affordable Development

Image Credit: Enterprise Community 

Public transit cheerleaders seem to racking up victories as more cities- even places like Denver, San Diego, and Phoenix where the car is king- implement new or improved public transit systems in the effort to encourage sustainability in our auto-centric culture. Transit projects have been a boon to the redevelopment of once-disconnected urban corridors, with attractive mixed-use centers blending workspaces, high-end commercial activity, and desirable residences cropping up at every turn. But concerns about the lack of low and moderate-income options amidst the surge of redevelopment have directed the conversation toward linking affordable housing and improved transit since the Government Accountability Office released their 2009 report entitled "Affordable Housing in Transit-Oriented Development", which recommended increased collaboration between HUD and the DOT-FTA and more state and local support of transit-centered affordable development. See GAO 09-871. While the report praised California's Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act (encouraging the development of 1,800 affordable units close to transit) and Portland's Transit-Oriented Development Property Tax Abatement (reducing affordable housing developers and property owners' operating costs and supporting construction of hundreds of affordable units on underutilized lots in transit-oriented areas), the GAO identified more local support for affordable housing and even affordable housing requirements as "key practices" by the GAO. See, e.g. Cal. Health & Safety Code §§ 53560 et seq. (2009); Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.600 (2009). The vertical structure of housing and development and transportation agencies at all levels has precluded meaningful cooperation between these sectors and, as former U.S. House Subcommittee Chair on HUD Rep. John Oliver (D-MA) stated, inexplicably viewed "transportation, housing, and energy policy the federal, state, and local levels as separate spheres with little or no coordination for too long."

This lack of coordination has contributed to distressing consequences. According to a report filed by the Southern Environmental Law Center and Housing Virginia, low and moderate-income households in low-density development spend nearly double on transportation costs than their centrally-located counterparts. These residents, who have been priced out of transit-oriented neighborhoods, are isolated from the places in which they work, resulting in expensive and inefficient commutes. Exclusion of affordable housing from transit-oriented development (TOD) often places affordable units in location with little access to employment opportunities  and prevent low and moderate-income residents from seeking employment and deprives centrally-located areas of a full workforce. Affordable TOD advocates have lauded state and local governments' incentives to developers to reserve a certain percentage of affordable units in transit-oriented projects. In addition to the California and Portland laws, the New Jersey Transit Village Initiative has placed housing at the center of a statewide transportation overhaul and regional transit authorities in Atlanta and the Bay Area are working with housing and planning associations to create funds to construct new affordable housing along vital transit lines (MARTA and BART, respectively). State and local coordination mirrors Washington's new rhetoric to enhance horizontal communication between congressional housing and transportation committees, exploration of federal joint development projects, and a recognition that affordable housing and accessible transit are inextricably linked. Does this new horizontal collaboration mean long-term commitment to including affordable housing in TOD? Only time will tell as an increasingly urbanized U.S. reaches the next station.