The
transition to a TOD is a change that many, including me, believe should happen and
will happen for a wide range of environmental and financial reasons. But that belief doesn’t make the transitional
steps any easier.
Today, I’ll
look at the role of surrounding land uses.
In the North Bay, we often think of TOD as primarily new construction
around a transit stop. But in other
parts of the world, large blocks of vacant land don’t exist near transit
stops. Instead, the success of a TOD depends
greatly on the existing pattern of land use.
Atlantic Cities recently reported on a
study by the Center for Transit-Oriented Development on proposed new transit
stops in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The
study ranked each neighborhood on five parameters.
I think the graphical
presentations of the findings are contrived and unhelpful. It is rare that multiple parameters should be
weighted equally. Plus the area of the
pentagon is excessively affected by a single parameter with a low number.
But the five
parameters described, population density, physical form (walkability), car
dependence, presence of amenities, and proximity to employment, are reasonable.
In past
posts, I’ve used the pending Petaluma Station Area Plan as the prism through
which to look at TOD issues. I’ll do so
again today.
To set the
scene for people who may not know Petaluma well, there are four general areas
that adjoin the downtown Petaluma SMART station. Immediately to the southwest are the vacant
parcels on which the TOD would be constructed.
To the southeast,
across D Street, is largely vacant land.
It’s certainly likely that the eventual development of this land will be
shaped by the proximity to the station and the TOD, but that development may
not happen for years, so doesn’t provide any benefits during the key early
years of the TOD.
To the
northeast, across Lakeville Street, are the well-restored Burdell Building and
the East D Street neighborhood. The
neighborhood dates to the first half of the 20th century and is largely
comprised of modest homes on relatively large lots.
To the
northwest, across E. Washington Street and behind some streetfront retail, is a
large area of aging industrial. The streets
are unpaved and the buildings late in their lives, with the owners working to
keep tenants in place until new uses for the area can be economically
justified. The general plan designates
this area for further mixed use, expanding the concept of the Petaluma Station
Area.
Looking at
these areas versus the five parameters of the Center for Transit-Oriented
Development yields these insights:
Population
Density: Until the development of the TOD site, the population density of the
area will be poor. The East D Street
neighborhood is the only source of residents and it’s a relatively non-dense
setting.
Physical
Form: The blocks are bigger than might be preferred for convenient walking. More importantly, Lakeville and E. Washington
Streets are major arterials. They are
legitimately perceived as barriers to safe or comfortable pedestrian
access.
Car
Dependence: In Petaluma, and in most North Bay cities, car dependence remains
high. There are few areas where people
can live convenient car-free lives.
Perhaps the Petaluma Station Area will become one of those areas, but
that won’t happen for many years. Even
the early residents of the TOD will likely do many of their daily chores by
automobile.
Amenities: Not
surprisingly given the low density, there are few amenities in the station
area. There are shopping opportunities
in the River Plaza and along E. Washington Street, but the offerings are
limited and the access difficult except by car.
And there are no schools or cultural opportunities in the area.
Proximity to
Employment: SMART is convinced that jobs are readily accessible at other
stations along the rail line. Which is a
good thing because there are few jobs in the proximity of the downtown Petaluma
station. The largest source of employment
is probably the industrial area on the other side of E. Washington Street. Or perhaps River Plaza. But neither is conveniently accessible to pedestrians
and both offer sufficient parking to make the train an unlikely travel option.
Overall,
except for the vacant parcels on which the conceived TOD would be constructed,
the area around the downtown Petaluma SMART station is spectacularly unsuited
for a TOD. And other North Bay cities would
likely report the same.
This doesn’t
mean that TOD is a bad idea. What it
means is that we’ve constructed a world that has diverged excessively from the
land uses we’ll need in the future. And that
the transitions back will be long and arduous.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
Great article, though since I work at the Petaluma Arts Center, which is right next to where the new station will be, I do disagree with the statement "there are no schools or cultural opportunities in the area" - not only do we have 6 exhibitions/year, we also have classes for kids and adults. I think this does classify as cultural...
ReplyDeleteTaylor, you're correct. In my mental map, I skipped over the Arts Center. Apologies for my omission. I think the cultural opportunities are still deficient, but certainly not completely absent.
DeleteNo apology needed, Dave - we're still getting our name out there. I just like to make sure it gets out there as often as possible! And I definitely agree that there could be more cultural opportunities nearby, and hope that we can be the centerpiece for that.
DeleteHaving recently a BART tour of a selected sampling of five or six current and future TOD sites in the East Bay, I'm eager for a followup to this post that would suggest ways to make TOD workable in the Petaluma station area. The obstacles and limitations are even more daunting to me now that I have been informed by my eye-opening tour, courtesy of the author of this blog!
ReplyDelete