clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Where Transit-Oriented Development May be Failing

New, 9 comments

The NYC-based Gotham Gazette takes a closer look at a handful of projects in that city, developments trumpeted as transit-orientated development, but which in fact are still "encourag[ing] automobile use by requiring off-street parking." More: "At the same time, the city has missed huge opportunities to cluster new development around transit stations in outer borough neighborhoods like Bay Ridge and Corona, instead reducing development potential to preserve the car-oriented, suburban-like environment." The articles goes on to give more examples are in NYC, but of course, there's a California angle.

"The term "transit oriented development" was introduced by Peter Calthorpe, a California planner and architect, in the late 1980s. Calthorpe defined it as a method to create dense, mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly, socio-economically diverse neighborhoods centered on transit stations...In the past decade, however, Calthorpe's term has increasingly been co-opted by the real estate industry to market any kind of moderately dense, urban infill development. If the concept of transit oriented development is diluted to simply mean density and proximity to transit without discouraging car use -- or encouraging socio-economic diversity -- then we miss Calthorpe's message entirely. And in New York City, where transit is just about everywhere, simply branding development "transit-oriented" can render the term meaningless."
· How 'Transit-Oriented Development' Will Put More New Yorkers in Cars [GG] via Planetizen