By Amy Grace Watkins

What is Transit-Oriented Development?

In urban planning, what does TOD stand for? It depends on who you ask! It could be Transit-Oriented Development, Design, or Displacement. In the 1990s, Peter Calthrope popularized the term as Transit-Oriented Development and the planning framework quickly spread across the world. The goal of TOD is to invest in transit centers to increase transit access, reduce the need for cars, and spur economic growth by bringing development to the area.

In Raleigh, the planning team has recently added to the mix of TOD definitions by adding an “E” to make ETOD or Equitable Transit-Oriented Development. Their policies and plans aim to combat the possible gentrification and displacement that has been associated with TOD projects in other cities (Chapple & Loukaitou-Sideris 2022). But based on Raleigh’s Equitable Transit-Oriented Guidebook, I argue that Raleigh has not yet earned the E of ETOD due to their weak policies around affordable housing and unclear public engagement efforts. 

To create TOD that is not just for the wealthy and well-connected, Raleigh put forth a “policy toolkit” in the ETOD Guidebook. The main policy with teeth in this guidebook is zoning for TOD Overlay Districts to build upon current Transit-Overlay Districts. Updated into the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) in October of 2021 by Raleigh’s City Council, TOD Districts are the “core zoning mechanism to achieve goals addressed in this plan” (City of Raleigh 2022). These districts will encourage development by offering bonuses for increased density, mixed-use, and affordable housing. This also means that money will quickly rush into these TOD Overlay Districts to capture these development opportunities. As they are, the policies may not be enough to combat the risk of gentrification and displacement in rapidly developing areas. 

In the book “Transit-Oriented Displacement or Community Dividends?,” planning academics Karen Chapple and Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris (2022) find that there is a strong correlation between gentrification and TODs in the Bay Area. The root cause of gentrification and displacement, however, is notoriously difficult to define because of the many factors involved from individual choice to state-level politics. In short, Chapple and Loukaitou-Sideris find that upscaling and upzoning areas often results in the displacement of vulnerable communities, which can be accelerated by transit system construction (2022, 8). In order to protect vulnerable communities, Chapple and Loukaitou suggest that density bonuses for affordable housing should be required in TODs, and most importantly, vulnerable communities should be consulted through public engagement about the location of TODs (2022, 272). By doing so, the authors believe that done correctly, TODs can be an answer to the increasing housing crisis in California. A crisis that the Triangle region also knows well.  

Raleigh’s ETOD

The good news is that Raleigh’s Equitable Transit-Oriented Development (ETOD) does take density bonuses seriously and aims policies at building more affordable units in the TOD Overlay Districts. Density bonuses encourage developers to include affordable housing by allowing them to build larger buildings. The affordable units, however, have a short lifespan. The plan states, “Within the program, affordability terms would be set at 50% AMI for 30 years based on the City of Raleigh’s desire to provide long-term affordable housing options in the corridors” (City of Raleigh 2020, 89).

In this context, AMI stands for Area Median Income, which describes the midpoint of the income distribution in a given area. In a rapidly growing area like Raleigh, the 30-year time span is far from “long-term affordability” and seems to guarantee unaffordability in 30 years or delayed displacement at best. In order to make these TOD Overlay Districts a success for all residents regardless of income, the ETOD program needs a more robust plan for affordable housing in these areas that guarantees opportunities for low- and middle-income residents for years to come. At a minimum, ETOD should increase the terms to 50 years in order to allow for more housing to be built and for low-income individuals and families to stay in their community.

According to HUD, the typical household stays in assisted housing six years, four years for families with children, and nine years for elderly residents (McClure 2017). This means that Raleigh has the potential to double the amount of low-income residents housed by increasing the term by 20 years. With the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, a federal affordable housing program established under 26 U.S.C. §42, affordable units are required for 30 years at a minimum (2022). In order to show Raleigh’s commitment to sustainable affordability downtown, the policy around TOD Overlay Districts should be updated to go beyond the federal minimum to offer 50 years of affordability.  

Public Engagement Needs

Beyond policies for affordability, the City of Raleigh needs to prioritize extensive and equitable public engagement. The plan cites public engagement as a part of the process but fails to provide numbers or detailed descriptions about the type of engagement events, the number of people engaged, or the demographics of these events around the ETOD program. As Chapple and Loukaitou-Sideris mentioned in their work, this is a very important aspect of equitable transit planning.

The lack of public engagement makes it appear that this plan is following a similar path to the failed light-rail project just a few years before. In fact, the TOD Overlay Districts were originally created for the light rail project (City of Raleigh 2022). One of the main marks against the light-rail project in the Triangle is that it would have served middle- and high-income riders and was more focused on attracting new ridership rather than improving service for current riders. If the City of Raleigh does not prioritize the residents currently living in these areas and using the existing bus system, the TOD Overlay Districts may hurt the very people Raleigh is trying to assist in adding the ‘E’ to TOD. In order to promote equitable public engagement, Raleigh should engage the public in each part of the process from the location of these districts to the design.

In a study on TOD in the Netherlands, Pojani and Stead emphasize the importance of seeing TOD as Transit-Oriented Design, which focuses more on the design around the node or transit center (Pojani & Stead 2015). Allowing the public to participate in the design stage of planning will allow current residents to influence the placemaking of these rapidly growing and changing areas. By engaging current residents and riders in early planning stages and designing charettes further along in the process, the City of Raleigh will better engage the public they hope to help by encouraging equitable development.  

Earning the E in ETOD

Equitable Transit Oriented Development is an exciting opportunity for the City of Raleigh, but it is also important to make sure it is done well. In order to earn the E in ETOD, the City of Raleigh needs to reconsider the parameters of its TOD Overlay Districts to achieve the equitable outcome they desire from the “twist” on Transit-Oriented Development. By offering a 50-year term instead of 30 years for affordable units and engaging the public throughout the transit planning process, the City of Raleigh could better achieve these equitable outcomes. 

Works Cited 

Chapple, K., & Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2019). Transit-oriented displacement or community dividends? : Understanding the effects of smarter growth on communities. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11300.001.0001 

City of Raleigh. (July 2020). “The Equitable Transit-Oriented Development Guidebook.” https://cityofraleigh0drupal.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/drupal-prod/COR22/EDATGuidebook.pdf 

City of Raleigh. (December 2022). “What is a Transit-Overlay District?” https://raleighnc.gov/planning/what-transit-overlay-district 

McClure, K. (2017). Length of stay in assisted housing. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. 

Pojani, D., & Stead, D. (2015). Transit-oriented design in the Netherlands. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 35(2), 131-144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X15573263 

26 U.S. Code § 42. (2022). Low-income housing credit. https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCODE-2021-title26/USCODE-2021-title26-subtitleA-chap1-subchapA-partIV-subpartD-sec42 

About the Author:  Amy Grace is a second-year master’s student in the City and Regional Planning program at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. At UNC-CH, she specializes in transportation and studies how multimodal solutions can transform transportation networks. On the weekend, you will likely find her at her local Home Goods, walking on the Tobacco Trail with her dog, Josie, or trying a new restaurant in the Triangle with her husband, Graham.

Edited by Kimmy Hansen

Featured image courtesy of City of Raleigh, NC