Transit Oriented Development & Social Equity: From Mixed Use to Mixed Framework

Abstract:

This paper aims at evaluating Transit Oriented Development’s performance related to social equity. We are going through the topic starting by the definition of Transit oriented Development, understanding its benefits (economic and environmental), its unintended consequences (related to social equity) and new strategies to avoid the latter ones. Finally we will compare two study cases, one in Rome (Italy) and one in Oakland, CA (USA) in order to figure out whether or not unintended social consequences are likely to be expected. We will adopt an evaluation design scheme, discovering that the best way to guarantee social equity is by using a “mixed framework” approach

• Periodical: Advanced Engineering Forum (Volume 11)
• Pages: 314-322
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AEF.11.314
• Online since: June 2014
• Authors: Francesco Cappellano*, Alfonso Spisto
• Keywords: Affordable Housing, Gentrification, Mixed Framework, Mixed Income, Social Equity, Transit Oriented Development

References

[1] Transit Cooperative Research Program. Transit-Oriented Development and Joint Development in the United States: A Literature Review. Research Results Digest. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, (2002).

DOI: 10.17226/14588

[2] H. Dittmar, G. Ohland, The New Transit Town: Best Practices in Transit – Oriented Development. Island Press (2004).

[3] M. Pacione, Urban Geography: a Global Perspective. London. Routledge. (2009).

[4] P. Calthorpe, The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream. Princeton Architectural Press, New York (1993) pg 43.

[5] T. Still , Transit-Oriented Development: Reshaping America's Metropolitan Landscape. On Common Ground, Winter (2002) pp.44-47.

[6] National Research Council, TCRP Report 102: Transit-Oriented Development in the United States: Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, (2004).

DOI: 10.17226/23360

[7] Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP), An Evaluation of the Relationships Between Transit and Urban Form, Research Results Digest, No. 7, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. (1995).

DOI: 10.17226/24981

[8] A. Tallon, Urban Regeneration in UK. Routledege. (2012).

[9] H. Zeng, One the move: Urban Design for access. The city fix http: /thecityfix. com/blog/on-the-move-urban-design-for-access-heshuang-zeng/, (2014).

[10] R. Cervero , S. Murphy, C. Ferrell, N. Goguts, Y. Tsai, G. B. Arrington, et al. Transit-oriented development in the United States: Experiences, challenges, and prospects (TCRP 102). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board. (2004).

[11] S. Mathur, Innovation in Public Transport Finance: Property Value Capture by 2014, Ashgate. (2014) In press.

[12] K. Bartholomew and R. Ewing, Hedonic Price Effects of Pedestrian- and Transit-Oriented Development. Journal of Planning Literature (2011) 26(1): 18-34.

DOI: 10.1177/0885412210386540

[13] TOD 201, Mixed-Income Housing Near Transit Increasing Affordability With Location Efficiency. Reconnecting America (2009).

[14] S. Pollack, B. Bluestone, C. Billingham, Maintaining Diversity in America's transit-rich neghborhoods: tools for equitable neighborhood change. Dukakis Center publications. (2010).

[15] L. Freeman , Displacement or succession? Residential mobility in gentrifying neighborhoods, Urban Affair Review. (2005).

DOI: 10.1177/1078087404273341

[16] , 17] Kahn, Gentrification Trends in New Transit-Oriented Communities: Evidence from 14 Cities That Expanded and Built Rail Transit Systems. (2007).

DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6229.2007.00186.x

[18] S. Pollack , B. Bluestone, C. Billingham, Maintaining Diversity in America's transit-rich neighborhoods: tools for equitable neighborhood change. Dukakis Center publications. (2010).

[19] K. Wardrip, Public Transit's Impact on Housing Costs: A Review of the Literature. Insight from Housing Policy Research. Center for Housing Policy, (2011).

[20] , 21] Reconnecting America, Mixed Income Housing near Transit, www. reconnectingamerica. org/assets/Uploads/091030ra201mixedhousefinal. pdf (2009).

[22] S. Cameron, Gentrification, housing redifferentiation and urban regeneration: going for growth, in Newcastle upon Tyne. Urban Studies, (2003) 40. 12, 2367–82.

DOI: 10.1080/0042098032000136110

[23] W. J. Wilson, The truly disadvantaged: the inner city, the underclass, and public policy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, (1987).

DOI: 10.1177/088610998800300312

[24] J. Logan, H. Molotch: Urban fortunes: the political economy of place. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA (1987).

[25] H. Lefebvre: The right to the city (1968).

[26] J. Duke: Mixed income housing policy and public housing residents' right to the city,. Critical Social Policy, (2009), 29. 1, p.100–20.

DOI: 10.1177/0261018308098396

[27] C. Bevilacqua, F. Cappellano, L. Zingali: TOD - Transit Oriented Development: a sustainable tool towards smart living, Proceedings of the 7th Conference of International Forum on Urbanism, (2013), pp.275-284.

[28] Reconnecting America: Transit-Oriented for All: The Case for Mixed-Income Transit-Oriented Communities in the Bay Area (2007).

[29] Arnstein, R. Sherry, A Ladder of Citizen Participation, JAIP, Vol. 35, No. 4, July (1969), pp.216-224.

[30] D. Harvey, The right to the city. New Left Review 53, (2008), September/October, p.23–40.