By Caleb O. Brown
Contributing Writer (Louisville Eccentric Observer)
Perhaps the most-touted example of rapid transit in the United States is the light rail system in Portland, Ore. What makes Portland worth special study is that it doesn't matter who you ask - detractors and defenders take special care to show what light rail has done for, or to, Portland. And both groups tend to say the credit (or blame) should be directed at attempts in Portland to dovetail land-use planning with light rail development.
Oregon's statewide land-use rules are among the most stringent in the country. David Coyte, a light rail advocate here, argues that land-use regulations in Oregon have facilitated higher density developments and promoted what he calls "transit-oriented development," or mixed commercial-residential developments that are created around transit stops.
Coyte predicts developments built around transit centers here will in turn lead to wider use of transit, and a subsequent reduction in auto dependence, as well as more localized commerce. Barry Barker, executive director of TARC, says about $1.3 billion has been invested in developments along light rail stations in Portland.
But Randal O'Toole, of the Bandon, Ore.-based Thoreau Institute (http://www.ti.org), a public policy think tank specializing in conservation issues, disagrees sharply with the assertion that Portland's mixture of land-use regulations and light rail has been even remotely successful. O'Toole, who has written extensively on the Portland experience with light rail and land-use planning, said that Metro, Portland's metropolitan land-use planning organization, built into its models overall increases in air pollution, although Metro officials don't necessarily like discuss it.
"Currently, about 92 percent of Portland trips are by car and 2.5 percent by transit," said O'Toole. He added that the remainder of the trips in Portland are by foot or bicycle.
"Portland's Metro predicts that, if they can increase population density by 67 percent, build 100 more miles of rail lines, force developers to build transit-oriented developments and pedestrian-friendly design, that these numbers will change to 88 percent by car and five percent by transit. Congestion will also triple, leading to a 10-percent increase in air pollution."
O'Toole said the predictions are not his own, but from the appendices of Metro's own transportation models. "Ironically, a plan to increase air pollution by 10 percent is widely regarded as a model for other cities," said O'Toole.
But Portland is indeed a model for proponents of light rail. Transportation planner Shawn Dikes, who has consulted with TARC on its transportation plans, said he sees the potential for TARC to work with planners to create a transit-friendly land-use plan.
"Portland has kind of been the pioneer of transit-oriented development," said Dikes. "Will we do that to the degree that will make some of our stations in Louisville successful? I think we can, and I think there are some excellent opportunities for TARC to team up with Louisville and Jefferson County. They've just done Cornerstone 2020, which is the region's comprehensive land-use plan. There is a great opportunity to designate the south-central corridor as some sort of rapid transit development district, which would be a gigantic overlay zone, allowing developers at individual station locations to do some innovative things."
However, Dikes said, he sees some things holding TARC back.
"Oregon has statewide planning regulations," he said. "Kentucky does not. Typically, the marketplace drives a lot of the land development activities here. Louisville doesn't strike me as being very proactive in some senses. Only a place like Portland is really that proactive."
TARC's Barker, in an interview last year on WHKW's "Community Roundup" program, said the mixture of land-use planning and transit in Portland, among other cities, has proven transit can attract new development.
The potential exists for the type of developments Barker, Coyte and Dikes would like to see in Louisville, but Portland's experience hasn't proven mass transit alone can attract such development.
"Recently, the city of Portland has had to give developers 10 years of property tax breaks if they will build on the light rail line," said O'Toole. "Other cities in the Portland area are giving direct subsidies to encourage development."
O'Toole called the problem of getting developers to build along rail lines a "chicken and egg" problem. He contends Portland's attempts to spur the developments have failed miserably.
"As it turns out, once built, these developments are not generating much ridership. Eight out of nine people in the apartments built along Portland's light rail drive to work." Further, O'Toole said the proportion of those who live in transit-oriented developments in Portland take transit to work is no greater than anywhere else in the city.
Dikes suggested Louisville can only mimic some of what Portland has done toward mixing land use and transit developments. With no statewide planning regulations, he said, TARC simply cannot exercise much control without chasing development into other counties, he said.
