If You Build Rail Transit in Suburbs, Will Development Come?

Abstract

Problem, research strategy, and findings: There is little consensus about the effects of rail transit on residential development, especially in suburbs, despite high expectations. I revisit this issue by examining a “best case”: I test the impacts of rail transit on housing development around suburban rail stations in Portland (OR), a region with multiple supportive transit-oriented development policies. I conducted longitudinal analyses of housing development in quarter-mile catchment areas around 57 suburban rail transit stations in suburban Portland from 2004 to 2014, a longer time period than many previous studies, evaluating factors that helped station areas attract residential development. Housing developments, most multifamily, grew much faster in the quarter-mile catchment areas around suburban stations put into service in or before 2004 than the regional average. Areas around stations opened after 2004 have few residential developments. More residential development is associated with higher system ridership, more vacant land zoned for residential and mixed-use purposes, greater shares of nonresidential land, and higher shares of the White population. Faster density increases were associated with more vacant land zoned for high-density and mixed-use purposes.

Takeaway for practice: Rail systems may need to be in operation longer to affect land use than the study periods in some previous research. Rail transit can guide suburban residential development in neighborhoods with enough vacant land, some nonresidential destinations, and appropriate zoning. Multiple supportive public policies and incentives appear to have a major impact, but may not be effective alone unless these preconditions are met.

Keywords:

• transit-oriented development
• rail transit
• housing development
• suburban Portland

Acknowledgments

I thank the three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments, which helped me to improve the manuscript. I would like to thank James Strathman for his valuable comments on an early version of this article. I would also like to thank Stuart McFeeters for copyediting the manuscript.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed on the publisher's website.

Notes

1. I thank the anonymous reviewer for pointing this out.

2. I use 15% as a cutoff value because the regional increase of residential density is about 15% in the study period.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Hongwei Dong

Hongwei Dong ([email protected]) is an assistant professor in the Department of Geography and City and Regional Planning at California State University, Fresno.