TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IN PHILADELPHIA:Using a proven strategy to create more vibrant, livable neighborhoods.

A report outlining

opportunities to create

more TOD in Philadelphia

and its role in supporting

a stronger city economy.

Report researched and written by Econsult Corporation for NeighborhoodsNow

F u n d e d i n p a r t b y C i t i b a n k , S u r d n a F o u n d a t i o n a n d T h e P r u d e n t i a l F o u n d a t i o n .

October 2007

Executive Summary

About NeighborhoodsNowNeighborhoodsNow, a Philadelphia-based nonprofit contributes to the economic vitality of thecity and region by collaborating with public and private organizations to strengthen low- andmoderate-income communities. We are a catalyst using public policy work, direct revitalizationprograms and strategic partnerships to re-energize and rebuild neighborhoods. Our HealthyNeighborhoods Initiative focuses on stabilizing ‘middle-market’ neighborhoods throughimprovements in physical appearance, resident engagement and market health. Our transit-oriented development work seeks to capitalize on existing transit assets by attracting new realestate investments that benefit current and future neighborhood residents. NeighborhoodsNow isgoverned by a board of directors with expertise in economic development, neighborhoodrevitalization and policy development.

About Econsult CorporationEconsult Corporation (www.econsult.com) was founded in Philadelphia in 1979 for the purpose ofproviding high quality economic research and statistical & econometric analysis in support oflitigation. Today Econsult’s practice has expanded beyond litigation to include economicconsulting services to assist business and public policy decision-makers. Econsult's academicallydistinguished consultants and affiliates combine quantitative expertise and experience withcustomized approaches designed to meet client's needs.

About the AuthorsRichard P. Voith, Ph.D., Principal Author. Dick Voith is Senior Vice President and Principal ofEconsult Corporation. He is an economist whose contributions to transportation and urbaneconomics span both the academic and popular press. In particular, Dr. Voith is a well knownexpert in transportation and real estate economics, including the impacts of transportation andother policies on the real estate market and development patterns. Dr. Voith was recentlyappointed by PA Governor Rendell to the newly created Transportation Funding and ReformCommission charged with recommending appropriate levels of funding for transit systems, roadsand bridges throughout the Commonwealth. Dr. Voith was also a leader in the GreaterPhiladelphia Transportation Initiative, the region’s first independent organization dedicated totransportation policy analysis and research in Greater Philadelphia. Prior to joining Econsult, Dr.Voith held the position of Economic Advisor at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia wherehis responsibilities included analysis of Philadelphia’s regional economy.

Dr. Voith served on the Board of Directors of the Southeastern Pennsylvania TransportationAuthority (1992-2000) as one of two representatives for the City of Philadelphia. He is currentlyon the editorial board of Real Estate Economics and an associate member of the Urban LandInstitute.

Lee Huang, M.G.A. Lee Huang is a Director of Econsult Corporation. With an undergraduatedegree from the Wharton School and a master’s degree from the Fels School of Government ofthe University of Pennsylvania, Lee provides an excellent perspective for public, private, and non-profit clients. As an employee of The Enterprise Center in Philadelphia for ten years, Lee also hasextensive experience in day to day management as well as strategic decision making. Lee is a keymember of the Econsult consulting team, and has been responsible for leading projects examiningcommercial corridors, state and city tax incentive zones, and transportation planning, as well asproviding financial and economic impact analysis for a wide range of clients.

Acknowledgements

e are extremely grateful to Lee Huangand Richard Voith of Econsult

Corporation for producing a very thoughtfuland timely report, and for engaging in aniterative process and graciously allowingmany people to provide comments andparticipate in the review process. We alsothank the following, who not onlygenerously provided their time and expertiseto the review process, but have also madevaluable contributions to the development ofNeighborhoodNow’s approach andphilosophy.

Richard Bickel, Delaware Valley Regional Planning CommissionKaren Black, May 8 ConsultingKaryn Conway, Ogontz Avenue Revitalization CorporationOmowale Crenshaw, Enterprise Heights Real Estate Development Company

Anne Fadullon, Dale CorporationDavid Fogel, SEPTA

Andrew Frishkoff, City of PhiladelphiaEva Gladstein, City of PhiladelphiaRose Gray, Asociación Puertorriqueños en MarchaDonald Haskin, CitibankFarah Jimenez, Mt. Airy USA

Melissa Long, Long AssociatesKarin Morris, Delaware Valley Regional Planning CommissionJeremey Newberg, Capital AccessRichard Redding, Philadelphia City Planning CommissionJason Salus, Mt. Airy USAPatrick Starr, Pennsylvania Environmental CouncilSam Zimmerman-Bergman, Reconnecting America

Diane Strauss, Strauss and AssociatesMichelle Webb, Philadelphia City Planning

CommissionV. Lamar Wilson, Wilson Associates

NeighborhoodsNowBoard of Directors

Thomas L. Webster, Chair, The Gabriel Institute

Larry Segal, Vice Chair, Impact Pennsylvania Strategies, LLCRobert Penn Biron, Secretary, City ofPhiladelphia, Law Department

Jim Ferris, Treasurer, NeighborWorks Capital CorporationKimberly Allen, Wachovia Regional Foundation

John Claypool AIA, AICP, American Institute of Architects Philadelphia

David Fair, United Way of SoutheasternPennsylvaniaAmy B. Lempert, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

Belinda Mayo, Office of Housing and Community DevelopmentRobert Rosenthal, TRF Development Partners

Gene S. Schneyer, Esq., Resources for Human DevelopmentSamuel Sherman, Jr. New Urban Ventures

NeighborhoodsNow StaffBeverly Coleman, Executive DirectorDiane-Louise Wormley, Deputy DirectorJacina Adolphus, Program AssistantAriel Ben-Amos, Graduate Intern

Graphics and EditorialMargaret Hughes BerkeySage Communications PartnersCover Design - SK DesignworksPhotos - Raymond Holman, Jr., HeatherNewcomb

The opinions expressed in this report are those of theauthors and do not necessarily express the views ofthe funders.

W

Foreword

n behalf of Econsult Corporation, I want to thank NeighborhoodsNow for giving us theopportunity to produce this report: “Transit-Oriented Development: Using a Proven

Strategy to Create More Vibrant, Livable Neighborhoods.” Whether in my capacity as aconsultant, or working on the Governor’s Transportation Funding and Reform Commission or inmy former role as Vice Chair of the Board of Directors of SEPTA, I have always believed thatPhiladelphia needs to make the most of its outstanding transit infrastructure. In many ways,transit is fundamental to the city’s urban character, which is the city’s greatest financial strengthand its most distinctive characteristic. Transit-oriented development can be a powerfully effectiveway to capitalize on Philadelphia’s assets and to do it in a way that has the most impact onneighborhoods.

Transit-oriented development was an integral component of Philadelphia’s development in thepast, and deserves to be an integral approach to our development in the future. The notion oforienting residential, retail, and recreational activities to make the most of transit access is as oldas some of Philadelphia’s oldest neighborhoods. Sadly, citywide disinvestment during the secondhalf of the 20th century, combined with funding crises at SEPTA, have resulted in little if anydevelopment near Philadelphia’s transit hubs.

However, the pieces are in place to stimulate new and exciting development aroundPhiladelphia’s transit stops in ways that make the most of the city’s urban assets and its incredibleneighborhoods. The transit infrastructure is still there, of course, and despite past funding woes,SEPTA has continued to make large investments to maintain it. Just as importantly, the fundingpicture for public transportation has improved considerably as a result of this year’s budgetnegotiations.

Philadelphia is in the midst of an extended upward trend in residential and commercialdevelopment, both in Center City as well as the neighborhoods. Existing and new residents areembracing Philadelphia’s urban renewal as a positive thing, buoyed by amenities like newlyrenovated parks, improved public schools and vibrant cultural options. Finally, important work isbeing done at the state level, to provide incentives and targeted funds to facilitate the connectionbetween transit and development.

In short, we are at a crossroads. Can we make the most of transit infrastructure, and the access tojobs, shopping, and recreation that it provides? Can we push to orient new development totransit in such a way that good urban design and safe passageways result? Do we have thecollective will to do this all for the benefit of Philadelphia’s neighborhoods and of the city as awhole?

We need to be able to answer yes to these questions. Our report concludes with action items, andit is my sincere hope that all of us will take action to make more transit-oriented developmenthappen in Philadelphia.

- Dick VoithEconsult Corporation

O

Executive Summary

i

Executive Summary

Making the Case forTransit-OrientedDevelopment inPhiladelphia

ransit-oriented development (TOD)may seem like a new-fangled notion,

and in fact has particularly gainedmomentum and cachet in the past decade;but it is in fact a strategy as old as some ofPhiladelphia’s oldest neighborhoods. Then,as now, neighborhoods became more vibrantand livable to the extent that newdevelopment could be oriented to transitaccess and to the value of the mobility itafforded. Conversely, neighborhoods havesuffered in vibrancy and livability whenreinvestment has been hindered or whenthere has been little or no coordination withtransportation infrastructure.

So it is appropriate that transit-orienteddevelopment is a major focus ofNeighborhoodsNow. It is also anappropriate moment for the release of thispublication, “Transit-Oriented Development inPhiladelphia: Using a Proven Strategy to CreateMore Vibrant, Livable Neighborhoods.”Philadelphia has enjoyed a resurgence in

development activity in the past decade; andin parallel, the City and other key

stakeholders are bringing to the foreimportant discussions on related topics suchas transportation funding, city planning, andneighborhood development. The time is rightto return to a concept authentic to urbanPhiladelphia and to its most storiedneighborhoods, that of transit-orienteddevelopment.

TOD refers to a mixed-use development inclose proximity to a public transit station,which provides a community with a varietyof transportation options, multiple uses in acompact setting, and pedestrian-friendlydesign. If done well, TOD can confer a varietyof benefits to residents and to a region:

• A sense of place • Economicdevelopment

• Economic equity • Environmentalstewardship

• Greater mobility • Healthier citizens

• Increased transitridership

• Public costsavings

• Public/privatepartnerships

• Public safety

• Quality of life • Reducedcongestion

This list of potential benefits is of greatrelevance to neighborhoods. Neigh-borhoods all across Philadelphia, after all,seek to be aesthetically pleasing andauthentically designed; they want robustcommercial growth but also multiple pricepoints for housing; and they desire most ofall an enhanced economic and social qualityof life. TODs, at their best, can confer thesesorts of positives to neighborhoods in which theyare located:

T

Germantown neighborhood of Philadelphia

ii

• Affordability. Higher densities can enablea mixing of house price levels. Also andimportantly, proximity to transit stopscan lead to a reduction intransportation costs for workingfamilies, by reducing or eveneliminating the need for a car andrelated expenses. Thus, connecting withTOD can produce a twofold effect oncost of living for working families.

• Access. For the segment of the localpopulation that does not wish to orcannot afford to own a car, being nearpublic transit greatly increases the poolof potential jobs that can be pursuedand obtained, as well as the universe ofretail outlets that can be reached andutilized. To the extent that TODbrings retail and other employment toneighborhoods, these also representadditional shopping options and jobopportunities.

• Aesthetics. TOD can bring good urbandesign to previously disinvestedcommunities. Its value for pedestrian-friendliness can also bring the necessarylighting and access to make saferpreviously avoided intersections.

These potential benefits represent the upsidefor neighborhoods of having TOD. Thedownside for neighborhoods of not havingTOD, of course, is that disinvestmentimposes higher costs on families, stiflesaccess to employment and retail centers, andcreates physical eyesores in once-prominentlocations.

Infrastructurally, TOD requires extensive railtransit service and a dense central core, twoconditions that regions around the nationare spending billions of dollars to create orrecreate. Meanwhile, Philadelphia has bothattributes in abundance. However, goodTOD in Philadelphia’s neighborhoods hasproven elusive. In fact, where developmenthas occurred near transit stops, it has nottapped into the benefits of transit-oriented

development and can generally be bestdescribed as merely transit-adjacentdevelopment. Even worse, there are asignificant number of promising sites inwhich no meaningful development hasoccurred at all.

The hindrances to TOD in Philadelphiaappear to be more systemic:

• The hollowing out of urbanPhiladelphia diminished the value of accessto destinations served by transit.From a development perspective, thevalue of transit access has beenfurther lessened by cheap auto travel,

regional decentralization, reducedservice levels, and uncertaintyresulting from the absence ofdedicated funding.

• No development, let alone thatoriented to transit, will take place ifthere is no profit to be made indeveloping. In fact, the City

Fruitvale Transit Village. Located in Oakland, CA, this257,000 square foot transit village was built on former BARTparking lots and provides 47 units of mixed-income housing,114,000 square feet of community services (clinic, library,senior center), 40,000 square feet of retail shops andrestaurants and a 150-car parking garage. The project’sprimary goals include reducing poverty, encouragingpublic/private investment, improving public safety, providinghigh quality housing and increasing transit ridership. FruitvaleTransit Village is considered one of the most successfulinner-city TODs in the country. Citigroup invested $27 millionin construction and permanent financing for this $100 million,mixed-use development.

Executive Summary

iii

experienced a significant 50-yearpattern of population and employment lossafter World War II.

• Although Philadelphia does not lackfor viable TOD sites, its antiquatedzoning code does not go far enough toencourage TOD.

These barriers, however discouraging, alsorepresent opportunities to act now to stemthe existence of transit-adjacent develop-ment and transit-anemic development andto stimulate the movement towards transit-oriented development. In many ways, thetime is right for transit-oriented development inPhiladelphia:

• There is a distinct increase in thequality and quantity of conversationsat the highest levels over theimportant subject of dedicated funding forpublic transportation, coupled with therecent multiyear funding commitmentby the Commonwealth ofPennsylvania for SEPTA.

• The City is no longer bleedingresidents and jobs, and in fact, thanksin part to a citywide ten-year taxabatement on new construction andsignificant renovation, there has beena notable increase in residential andcommercial development.

• There has been much discussionrecently over the updating andreforming of the City’s zoning code, andmany groups are particularly urgingthe City Planning Commission tospearhead a more aggressive andcoordinated agenda to zone keytransit-proximate sites to encourageTOD.

Transit Service and Its Impact onDevelopment

As much as public transit in Philadelphia isdisdained in the media and on the street, it isunmistakably a core asset for the City. Itcould become a key advantage in anincreasingly competitive regional, national,and global economy. The continuingsuburbanization of jobs, houses, and retailonly underscores this reality: Philadelphia’sedge lies in its urbanness. From this perspective,the City’s vast transit infrastructure is anasset around which to build, literally, ratherthan a liability to starve or avoid.

Many of Philadelphia’s neighborhoods grewup around transit and railroad lines. In fact,much of the real estate development in thefirst half of the 20th century was undertakenjointly with transit development. Before thepredominance of the car, private incentiveswere well aligned for TOD; with the adventof the car, that link has been broken.Highways are developed and financedindependently of residential and commercialdevelopment, and as there is no single entitythat has the incentive or authority toundertake TOD, there is no easy coordinationbetween land use, transportation planning, andprivate development. Further, as the region hasdecentralized, more and more areas are notaccessible except by car.

In evaluating sites for TOD, one mustconsider the value of the site’s nearby transportation

West Philadelphia neighborhood

iv

services. The extent to which transit offersreal value to residents and businesses in aTOD will determine the profitability andtherefore the viability of its realization.After all, developers engage in a TOD whenthey can expect a sufficient return for theirefforts. Developer’s profits, in turn, dependon the extent to which households and firmsare willing to locate in the TOD.

The price that the site commands, then, willincrease if the transit service is perceived ashaving long-term value, value that peopleand businesses are willing to pay for to be inclose proximity, and value that isdetermined in part by the followingconsiderations:

• The long-term certainty of the service. Theprospect of insufficient funds hasfrequently resulted in SEPTAproposing to cut or end services and/orraise fares. The significant uncertaintyregarding the frequency, cost, and veryexistence of SEPTA services is a majorimpediment to successful TOD.Conversely, positive developments,such as the State’s recent multi-yearcommitment of funding to SEPTA, arepositively accounted for in the decisionsof people and organizations thatdepend on transit.

• The number and desirability of destinations.An important aspect of the valuederived from proximity to a rail stationis the access afforded by that station.For example, of the considerableevidence demonstrating that people arewilling to pay more to live near transitstops, it has been proven that much ofthe value conferred is as a result ofaccess to employment centers. Access toemployment centers is of huge consequence toneighborhoods, particularly low- tomoderate-income ones. To the extentthat car ownership percentages are low,access for such neighborhoods toemployment centers via public transit isthe difference between a relatively small

universe of job opportunities and amuch larger, more promising universe.

• The frequency of service and integration withother services. High frequency routes,wide spans of hours of operation, andservice integration, all increase thecomfort level riders have about thetransit system and thus the valuedevelopers can derive from locatingnew uses in close proximity to itsstations.

• The importance of service amenities. Ridingtransit can be made to be a moreenjoyable means of traveling, sinceriders do not get stuck in traffic, theycan concentrate on their work or on agood book, and do not have to worry

about the cost or hassle of parking oncethey have arrived at their destination.The stations themselves could besources of value enhancement, to theextent that they adhere to the TODprinciple of being aesthetically pleasing,friendly to pedestrian access, andauthentic to their particular place.Well-lit and well-greened transitstations could reduce crime, noise, andpollution, three important potentialfactors that otherwise could confernegative value on transit-proximatesites.

• How automobile access integrates with TOD.Successful TODs are able to balancethe need for cars with the need for

SEPTA’s Market East Regional Rail Station

Executive Summary

v

density, and are designed in such a wayto extract the value of good automobileaccess without that accessibilityrendering the transit service lessvaluable. At the very least, parkingstructures could be designed to enhancethe pedestrian experience, by includingretail or other visually appealing uses atthe street level.

Barriers to Transit-OrientedDevelopment in Philadelphia

Construction costs in Philadelphia aresignificantly higher than those in thesurrounding suburbs, making it expensive tosupply Philadelphia with TOD.Furthermore, decentralization of residential,employment, and retail centers has resultedin a significant loss of population, jobs, andshopping activity in Philadelphia.

The fact that the impacts of this decline inpopulation and jobs were not felt equallyacross the city is even worse for the existenceof TOD in Philadelphia. Typically, theoldest, most obsolete development isabandoned first. In Philadelphia’s case, thismeant that the oldest communities thatdeveloped along the major transit lines werethe most adversely affected. Thus, instead ofTOD-friendly sites attracting more development, theyexperienced more disinvestment.

Structural Hurdles• Site assembly with multiple small and/or

odd-sized lots

• Demolition and environmental clean-upcosts

• Union costs – rates and work rule changesrequired

Governmental Hurdles• Time consuming and uncertain zoning

permitting and entitled processes

• Regulatory requirements with excessivecosts

• Lack of government promotion of TOD

• Outdated and excessively restricted zoning

• SEPTA’s regulatory and monetaryconstraints in advocating for TOD

• Need for public subsidy

Therefore, all things being equal, developerswill tend to gravitate towards developing inthe suburbs rather than in the city. TheCity could change that equation and makedevelopment in the city more desirable in terms ofamenities, and/or by lowering the cost todevelop in the city.

Thus, for example, the continuation of theten-year property tax abatement is vital tocontinuing to make developmenteconomically feasible in the city. Othercitywide policy decisions, such as reducingthe wage tax and Business Privilege tax,improve the viability of TOD by makingaccess to Center City and its retail andemployment locations all the more valuable.

Finally, the City could work with SEPTA toshore up its uncertain funding base. Thereis very little contribution to transit services atthe local level, and this translates into a lackof focus on transit at the local level and a lack ofcoordination between SEPTA and the City aroundtransit and development. This lack ofcollaborative mindset has resulted in majorinvestments in transit infrastructure, such asthe rebuilding of the elevated portion of theMarket Frankford Line (MFL) in WestPhiladelphia, with virtually no considerationof TOD surrounding its station areas.

TOD, with its focus on transit access, goodurban design, and multiple housing pricepoints, could be an effective mechanism bywhich previously disinvested locations, suchas those around MFL stations in WestPhiladelphia and Broad Street Line (BSL)stations in North Philadelphia and SouthPhiladelphia, could be rejuvenated in waysthat are aesthetically pleasing and thatproduce lively, mixed-income settings.Other opportunities exist in communities

vi

served by the Regional Rail and bus transitservice. Thus, such an uncoordinated effortas what has taken place with thereconstruction of the elevated portion of theMFL in West Philadelphia represents a hugeloss in opportunity to consider approachesthat foster healthy and vibrantneighborhoods and that encouragedevelopment that fully capitalizes on thetransit resource that the MFL represents tothe City.

Solutions That Encourage MoreTransit-Oriented Development

There are three key steps that the City ofPhiladelphia and SEPTA must take to maketransit-oriented development (TOD) areality:

Creation of transit-oriented zoning overlays forneighborhood TODs and regional TODs. In orderto encourage and facilitate TOD, the Citycould create zoning overlays appropriate forneighborhoods near transit stations.

• For station areas in Philadelphia thatare appropriate for residentialneighborhood TODs, the zoning rulescould include parking maximums,higher residential density allowances,facilities for pedestrian access,neighborhood-oriented mixed-usedevelopment and transit inter-connections. Such mechanisms could

help ensure that development activityresults in affordable housing, safepassageways, good urban design, andother positive outcomes forneighborhoods.

• Zoning overlays could also be used tostimulate regional TODs, where existingtransit services make the station areaaccessible to a wide area of the regionby transit. These overlays can attemptto spur development by increasingallowed densities. The developmentscan be multimodal in nature, providinggood auto access as well as transitaccess. Zoning overlays could ensure,however, that parking does notinterfere or detract from transit access.

Transit Revitalization Investment Districts(TRIDs). The Transit RevitalizationInvestment District Act was enacted in 2004by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania toenable local governments and transitauthorities to create TRIDs. TRIDs enablemunicipal governments and transitauthorities to more closely coordinatetransportation infrastructure, land use, andprivate development. Both the City andSEPTA have much to gain from theaggressive pursuit of TRID as a means tocreating more TOD:

• The enabling mechanism of valuecapture, whether through tax incrementfinancing or other avenues, means thatTOD-related development andamenities could be funded with nonegative impact on the City budget, butrather by taking a portion of futureproperty tax increases that willmaterialize around the site as a result ofthe new enhancements. A typical valuecapture at a neighborhood level might,for example, generate anywhere fromtwo to four million dollars upfront,which could be used for infrastructureimprovements and paid off over timewith the incremental increase inproperty tax revenues that result from

TOD opportunity at Broad and Spring Garden Streets

Executive Summary

vii

higher property values in and aroundthe TOD.

• As for SEPTA, it has already beendiscussed that TOD could equate toincreased ridership; TRIDs are an effectiveway for SEPTA to work with the Citytowards that end.

Developing a priority list of TOD sites. Inaddition to an overall, citywide TODstrategy, the City could develop a prioritylist of TOD sites, and mobilize funding,leadership, and administrative efforts

towards developing such sites, in order toachieve early success and build momentumfor even more aggressive and comprehensiveaction. Specifically, all possible sites couldbe identified and then classified by demandand by use. Perhaps early successes willprovide lessons for stakeholders to warm tothe potential of TOD to rejuvenate otherlocations around the city. Notinsignificantly, TOD is somewhat fuzzy tograsp on paper but distinctly clear to allwhen built out, so quick wins are not onlyuseful for building momentum but also forcreating images around which more andmore supporters could rally. In parallel,City funds could be identified and allocatedtowards this effort, which would furtherstimulate additional private sector attentionand investment.

• In the long-term, all MFL and BSL stopscould be considered for TOD; after all, thesevery areas were once major residentialand retail centers, during the first halfof the 20th century, when such usestruly were transit-oriented. Such anorientation to transit use has a deeplineage in Philadelphia, and is a majorreason for the remarkable socio-economic diversity of its neighbor-hoods. It is inspiring to think that sitesthat once thrived because high densityand transit access were consideredassets, and then deteriorated becausethose same characteristics were deemedliabilities, could now be evaluated anewas promising places for development.

• The need for early successes fromwhich to build leads us to suggest that afew attractive sites should be targetedfor immediate action. We agree withNeighborhoodsNow’s focus on the 46th

and Market and the Temple University sites,as they represent highly attractive,high-density locations primed for earlyTOD success. Importantly, both sitesrepresent opportunities to organizeexisting positive momentum aroundprivate development towards ends thatensure a healthy evolution to mixed-use, mixed-income communities thatare transit-oriented and aestheticallypleasing.

• Other locations, particularly the WayneJunction station, the North Philadelphiastation, and the Broad and Girard stationexhibit characteristics conducive toTOD, as do other subway, bus, and railstops.

Recommendations forStakeholders

Transit-oriented development (TOD) is, likeall real estate development, a collaborativeexercise. Thus, it is important that allstakeholders work collectively to pursue both

Temple University SEPTA Station

viii

individual TOD sites as well as an overallenvironment that is more conducive toTOD. Several nonprofits including thePennsylvania Environmental Council, theEconomy League of Greater Philadelphia,and PennTrans are contributing to elevatingthe significance of public transportation.The following stakeholders are critical toensuring successful TOD:

• The City of Philadelphia. The City shouldpursue an aggressive implementation ofTRIDs and of TOD zoning overlays, aswell as of value capture mechanisms togenerate funds to support reinvestment,and affordable housing initiatives thatinduce a greater mixing of house pricelevels. City funds could be identifiedand allocated, further stimulatingadditional private sector attention andinvestment. Accompanied by reduceddevelopment costs (via the continuedproperty tax abatement on newdevelopment) and reduced administrativecosts (via unified TOD checklists andinter-agency orientations), thesemeasures help create an environmentfriendly to development and especially toTOD.

• The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. TheTRID Act is a great start and theCommonwealth resources it commitscould be appropriately expended; theCommonwealth could also work withthe City to identify dedicated fundingsources for transit, thus reducinguncertainties around service levels, aswell as additional public subsidies insupport of TOD. The Commonwealth’srecent commitment to funding SEPTAis also a huge step towards fullycapturing the value of transit proximity,and thus represents positive momentumupon which to build.

• SEPTA. The TRID Act providesSEPTA with greater flexibility toconsider collaborations with the City, aswell as operational objectives that moreclosely coordinate land use and development

opportunity with transportation infrastructure;SEPTA could also build TOD plans intoall major infrastructure investments.

• Developers. If the public sector isstepping forward with incentives toencourage TOD, private and non-profit developers need to step forwardwith proposals that deliver the intendedresults: mixed-income, pedestrian-friendly,and aesthetically pleasing developments.

• Institutional Anchors. Institutional anchorsincluding universities and hospitalscould enter into dialogues with the Cityand SEPTA, such that issues ofmobility, parking and pedestrianfriendliness are incorporated into theirdevelopment plans.

• Neighborhood Groups. Neighborhoodgroups could take advantage of theirstrong community voice and demandnot no TOD or any TOD, but TODthat helps lead to more vibrant, livableneighborhoods; they could also sellresidents and policymakers alike on themerits of TOD by championing small-scaleexamples of successful TODs that havebeen brought into existence by theefforts of local CDCs.

• Delaware Valley Regional PlanningCommission (DVRPC). The big-pictureperspective of metropolitan planningorganizations (MPOs) comes in handyas TOD initiatives intersect withregional issues of land use, trans-portation policy, and environmentalstewardship. Accordingly, DVRPCcould advocate for more dedicated andsecure sources of funding for SEPTA,and could continue to make TOD apriority in is funding allocation process,thus using its influence in setting landuse to encourage private developmentthat is oriented to transit and thatadheres to TOD principles.

1211 Chestnut Street, Suite 310

Philadelphia, PA 19107

215.564.9470

www.neighborhoodsnowphila.org

NeighborhoodsNow contributes to the vitality of Philadelphia and the region by collaborating with

public and private organizations and securing resources to create programs and influence policies that

strengthen neighborhoods where people live and work.

NeighborhoodsNow is supported by generous contributions from

Capmark

Citibank

Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh

Mellon Financial

Pennsylvania Department of Community and

Economic Development

Philadelphia Office of Housing and

Community Development

PNC Bank

Sovereign Bank

Surdna Foundation

TD Banknorth

The Pew Charitable Trusts

The Prudential Foundation

United Way of Southeastern Pennsylvania

Wachovia Foundation

William Penn Foundation

3600 Market StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19104215.382.1894www.econsult.com

EconsultCorpor ation