Turner_MastersProjects_LowRes

Metropolitan Saint Louis and Urban Sprawl:

The Case for Transit OrientedDevelopment at the Local Level

Erik C. TurnerUniversity of Illinois at ChicagoMasters of Urban Planning & PolicyMay 2015

Flag of the City of St. Louis, known as the Three Rivers Flag, the blue bands represent the junction of the Mississippi, Missouri, and Illinois Rivers

Abstract

NAME: Erik Charles Turner

PROJECT TITLE: Metropolitan Saint Louis and Urban Sprawl: The Case for Transit Oriented Development at the Local Level

FACULTY ADVISOR: Curtis R. Winkle

SPECIALIZATION: Spatial Planning & Design

Like many regions across the United States, Metro Saint Louis suffers the effects of uncontrolled urban sprawl. This project looks at how the region could potentially better leverage its existing light rail system as a catalyst for countering its sprawl by implementing transit oriented development (TOD) in its existing station areas. By using a case study station, Richmond Heights-Galleria, in the near western suburbs, this project examines the role local municipalities can play in achieving regional sprawl prevention by exploring options and processes for TOD at a local level.

Cover Image: Satellite view of Metro Saint Louis Courtesy: www.ordtolax.wordpress.com Retrieved: 4/7/2015

Metropolitan Saint Louis & Urban Sprawl

Table of Contents:

A Region at a Crossroads• Introduction.....................................................1

The Problem of Urban Sprawl• What is Sprawl?...............................................3• Location Efficiency..........................................4

Controlling Urban Sprawl • What is Growth Control?.................................5• What is TOD?..................................................7• Benefits of TOD...............................................7• TOD & Place Making.......................................8• TOD Design Principles....................................8• Barriers to Effective TOD..............................11

Transportation & Metropolitan Saint Louis• Overview........................................................13• Metrolink.......................................................13• Design Characteristics..................................13• Potential Expansions.....................................15

Metropolitan Saint Louis & Urban Sprawl

Richmond Heights-Galleria Station• Location & Overview......................................17• Station Facilities...........................................20• Design Concerns............................................21

A Plan for Richmond Heights-Galleria Station• Why TOD for Richmond Heights?................23• Potential Station Improvements...................23• Potential District Improvements..................25• Possible Futures for Richmond Heights........28

Conclusion..........................................................29

Appendix• Sources..........................................................31

1 Metropolitan Saint Louis & Urban Sprawl

A Region at a Crossroads

Introduction

Metropolitan Saint Louis is a slow growth region, yet it is expanding ever outward as if it were a rapidly booming city in the Sunbelt South. Despite minimal population growth since the 1950s, the region is one of the most sprawled in the nation relative to its total population. As a result of its continued outward growth there have come substantial ramifications, including but not limited to, unneeded habitat/ farmland destruction, disinvestment in older areas, ethnic/ racial and socioeconomic segregation, spatial mismatch between centers of employment and residence, and increased pollution. In short, as the region continues to dilute across the landscape it has become harder to establish and maintain adequate urban spaces; places which play host to resources and connections which residents need. Considering current conditions in Saint Louis, it is important to better leverage the existing light rail network as a locus for residential and commercial development through the implementation of anti-sprawl measures like growth control and transit oriented development (TOD). As the region moves forward, it simply must work to control its sprawl, but to do so the current pattern of peripheral development must end. However, in a highly fragmented region that lacks a strong central voice, stopping sprawl will be difficult for Metropolitan Saint Louis.

Given the practical difficulties involved with the region’s inability to enact comprehensive anti-sprawl policies, the most realistic hope for slowing sprawl in Metro Saint Louis is for the region’s many municipalities to develop and carry out anti-sprawl policies within their own borders. This is not to say that the Saint Louis area should give up the idea of collective regional action, it is simply a realization that until such time as an agreement can be reached at the regional level, localities must be the ones to push for and enact progressive sprawl prevention methods.

Unfortunately, regional political fragmentation mostly precludes the use of comprehensive growth control policies like Urban Growth Boundaries, which leaves TOD as the most viable sprawl curbing option for Metropolitan Saint Louis. TOD fosters denser transit focused development, and as such helps concentrate some growth, but it is not the only answer. Therefore, while the region should actively build TOD now, in the long run it must utilize other sprawl control measures in addition to TOD.

Nevertheless, opportunities for TOD are tremendous across the Metro Saint Louis suburbs, and even within the City itself. By investigating how TOD could feasibly be implemented at the Richmond Heights-Galleria Metro station in the near west suburbs, this project will show that small municipalities can make an impact in the battle to control sprawl. As this project will demonstrate, municipalities across Metro Saint Louis could carry out this process for the betterment of themselves and the region as a whole. In effect, the aim of this project is to lay the ground work for further TOD development and feasibility studies across the Metro Saint Louis region.

Figure 1: At right. A nighttime view of Metro Saint Louis’ sprawl.Courtesy: NASA Earth Observatory

A Region at a Crossroads

Metropolitan Saint Louis & Urban Sprawl 2

Figure 2: Above. I-64 in Richmond Heights, MOCourtesy: www.fredweberinc.com, Retrieved: 4/5/2015


The Problem of Urban Sprawl

Sprawl is a direct threat to many of the nation’s urban areas. As such, this section will define the concept of sprawl and give one measure, Location Efficiency, which can be used to better understand the problems it creates. What is Sprawl?

After 1990, more than 75% of Americans lived within urbanized areas. While the majority of the population lives in these places, it is important to clarify that more than 52% of Americans actually live in the suburbs and not within traditional central cities.1 Though the suburbs existed prior to the post war development boom with which they are so commonly associated, their share of the total population was once well below that of today. However, now after decades of immense suburban growth, the nation’s urbanized areas are increasingly threatened by these same sprawling landscapes to which they have given birth.

The term Urban Sprawl is a highly contentious and sometimes hard to define concept. Generally though, it refers to uncontrolled outward growth at the edges of cities, marked by the consistent development of former farmland and natural areas. Suburban developments are often defined by low density, Euclidean zoning schemes, single-family homes on large lots, miles long commercial corridors, insufficient pedestrian infrastructure, and a lack of easily identifiable community centers.

Disparate environments such as these are routinely characterized by an extreme level of auto-dependence which forces residents to make surplus car based trips to do such simple things as crossing the street to visit the next store or office.

Though many prefer a life in the suburbs, these places do come with a multitude of serious concerns many of which stem from the auto-reliance that is their defining quality:

• Destruction of farmland and natural habitat• Higher energy, water, and chemical products usage• Increased pollution of air and water resources• Inefficient single use zoning which forces a dispersion of uses• Diminished pedestrian infrastructure • Mandatory parking requirements which lead to large surface parking lots• Increased ethnic and socioeconomic segregation• Spatial mismatch between jobs and places of residence, and• Higher likelihood of obesity and other health problems caused by decreased physical activity

Like many regions, Metro Saint Louis suffers from these issues due to its now decades long suburban expansion. Across the past few decades, development has been largely at the region’s fringe.

Consequently, the core areas have seen marked decline and increasing racial and socioeconomic segregation. In light of these problems, it is evident that the sprawling form of the typical suburb is simply not working; they have ceased to score well across measures of social and environmental sustainability.

Figure 3: Above. Urban Sprawl in Wentzville, MOCourtesy: Google Earth, Retrieved: 4/5/2015

Saint Louis Regional Population Shift Between the Years 2000-2010

The Problem of Urban Sprawl


Location Efficiency

The overwhelming reliance on the automobile for most if not all trips means that suburban areas suffer from depressed “Location Efficiency,” a measure which looks at the savings in time and money that come from the effective placement of goods and services in relation to spatial accessibility.2

For TODs to be location efficient they must have these three qualities:

• Density to ensure adequate pedestrian presence and ridership,

• Transit accessibility, meaning that stations are centrally located and easily reached from multiple points, and

• Pedestrian friendliness provided through a well-connected system of pathways that connect the development internally and externally with the surrounding neighborhood.3 Location efficient places do more than save resident’s time and money, they encourage lower resource consumption and decreased pollution; they are by nature counter to sprawl. The Saint Louis area largely lacks adequate urban spaces as a result of its sprawl, which underscores the need for greater regional location efficiency.

Figure 4: This image depicts block level population change across Metro Saint Louis between the years 2000 and 2010, with gains in blue and losses in red. As shown, the steepest gains, in dark blue, were seen at the region’s edges, especially in St. Charles County, while the region’s core generally experienced losses evidenced by the widespread presence of red. In an auto-dependent region like Saint Louis, new transportation projects such as the upgrading of I-64 and the extension of MO-364 into St. Charles County have helped spur sprawl by opening large sections of peripheral land to direct highway access.Courtesy: Stephen Von Worley & www.datapointed.net, Retrieved: 4/5/2015


Controlling Urban Sprawl

Because sprawl must be controlled, this section offers and explains two valuable anti-sprawl methods, growth control policy and Transit Oriented Development.

What is Growth Control?

One method that could be used to control our nation’s metropolitan spread, is growth control. Commonly referred to as the “Green Belt” concept; growth control involves imposing actions like permitting controls to slow and or redirect metropolitan growth. Pioneered in the mid twentieth century in the United Kingdom to combat London’s unprecedented outward growth, this methodology is common in many nations, but is still considered a relatively new concept in the United States.4 First proposed in 1935 by London County Planners, what has come to be known as the Metropolitan Green Belt was formally adopted under the auspices of the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947, and after decades of land acquisition and the subsequent placing of covenant restrictions, thirteen percent of England’s land area is now formally protected from development by a series of fourteen greenbelts which gird the nation’s largest cities. Examples beyond London include Birmingham, Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds, and Newcastle.5

In the United States, Oregon is well known for its enactment of Senate Bill 100 in 1973, which placed land use planning in the realm of state control.6 The bill compels all localities to, “design, phase, and locate transportation

facilities… in such a manner as to encourage growth in urbanized areas while discouraging growth in rural areas.” Within this system, Portland is the embodiment of a city that uses regional level controls to prevent the spread of development beyond the boundary, (though it has been relaxed numerous times since its creation). Metro, the regional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for Portland has been successful in developing a multimodal transit system (light rail, streetcar, and bus) around which it is constructing transit oriented developments with the aim of reducing auto usage while fostering dense walkable neighborhoods. Using the boundary, Portland has been able to redirect growth inward and toward areas that were in the 1960s beginning to see neglect and abandonment such as the Pearl District, the South Waterfront, and the old East Side Warehouse area.

Despite growth control’s merits, it is politically infeasible in many parts of the United States including Metro Saint Louis. The region’s hyper fragmented nature; spanning two states and more than six core counties, renders the requisite political consensus nearly impossible. Since this valuable tool is effectively off limits in Saint Louis, it only stresses the importance of utilizing alternative anti-sprawl methods like TOD.

Figure 5: Above. In this image, England’s urban areas, orange, are girded by the nation’s greenbelt areas, green.Courtesy: www.cobhamgreenbelt.org.uk,

Figure 6: Next PageThis map from Metro Portland’s 2040 Growth Concept Plan, displays the region’s urban growth boundary in addition to transportation systems, and priority development areas (PDAs). Without land use controls like PDAs, boundaries will not be effective. These areas are places generally with access to transit in which a region has identified a need for higher density growth. Therefore they are a valuable method for concentrating growth which is needed to curb sprawl even within a boundary.Courtesy: www.oregonmetro.gov



Wash.Ore.

SE Stark St

Portland GatewayHillsboro

Gresham

Beaverton

WashingtonSquare

Clackamas

OregonCity

St.Johns

Bethany

Orenco

Troutdale

Hollywood

CedarMillForest

GroveSunset

Rockwood

Aloha

RaleighHills

HillsdaleLents

PleasantValley

WestPortland

MilwaukieMurrayScholls

LakeOswegoLake

GroveDamascusKing

City

Tualatin

Gladstone

Wilsonville

TigardHappyValley

Tanasbourne/AmberGlenCornelius Fairview

WoodVillage

Sherwood

Vancouver

Orchards

MillPlain

Camas

Washougal

SalmonCreek

BattleGround

SW

Hal

lBlv

d

N E SandyBlvd

SW Elligsen Rd

N E Killingswo rth St

NE Weidler St

NW

185t

h Av

e

N Lom bard St

NE

82nd

Ave

N E M arine D r

NE

122n

d Av

e

SWT

erwilliger B

lvd

NW Lovejoy St

SE Powell Blvd

SE Stark St

N W Cornell Rd

SE Foster Rd

N M arine D r

SW Nyberg St

SW W ilso nville Rd

ND

enve

rA

ve

E Burnside St

N Portl

and Rd

SE Division St

SE Sun n ysid e Rd

NC

o lum bia Blvd

SWSt

affo

rdR

d

S W BarnesRd

SEM

cLough linBlvd

W Burnsid e St

SW Canyo n Rd

Front St

SW Farm in g to n R d

SW Farm ing ton Rd

N WM arine D r

SE8

2nd

Ave

SE Taco m a St

NW 6th Ave

S

Sprin g water

Rd

S Spring

water

Rd

19th Ave

Pio neer Blvd

NE Arndt Rd

SW Clay St

NE

242n

d D

r

SW Tu alatin Sh erwood Rd

Kruse W ay

Qui

nce

St

S Beavercreek

Rd

SEO

rient

D r

7th St

Suns

et D

r

E Po well Blvd

Boones F erry

Rd

SW D urhamRd

E Burnside St

SE Oak St

N 1s

t Ave

SE 1 st Ave

Country Club Rd

N W A m ber w o odD r

SEFo

sterR

d

SWS

p ringH

illR d

G ales Creek Rd

SBa

r low

RdS

Bar

low

Rd

SW 18

5th

Ave

S M cL o ughlinBlvd

N A dair St

SWSc

h olls

Fer r

yRd

N WYeo n Ave

SE H

ogan

Rd

SE 2

42nd

Ave

Willamette Fa llsDr

SW BaldPeak Rd

S Union Mills Rd

N E C o rnell Rd

SE Bluff Rd

SW Dixon

M i ll Rd

S R edlan d Rd

SC

lack

amas River D r

NW

Gales

Creek

Rd

SWM

acAdam

Ave

Willam ette D

r

NW

Gle

nco

eR

d

SE G

rand

Ave

SWBarb

ur Blvd

B St

S M

ain

St

SWR

ivers ide

Dr

SE 1

22nd

Ave

SW M

urra

y Bl

vd

N Holly St

N M

olal

la A

ve

E St

SE K

ane

DrSE

182

nd A

ve

Molalla Ave

S H enrici Rd

SE

River

Rd

Sprin

gH

ill Rd

SW 2

57th

Ave

Blu

f fR

d

Fren

chPr

airie

Rd

SWR

iver

Rd

SW U nger Rd

N EA irport W ay

Aurora

Banks

BarlowCanby

Carlton

DaytonDonald

Estacada

Gaston

Hubbard

Lafayette

McMinnville

Molalla

Newberg

NorthPlains

Sandy

St. Paul

Woodburn

Yamhill

Dundee

West Linn

Willamette

2040 Growth Concept MapSeptember 2014

0 2 4miles

The Metro 2040 Growth Concept defines theform of regional growth and development forthe Portland metropolitan region. The GrowthConcept was adopted in December 1995through the Region 2040 planning and publicinvolvement process. This concept is intendedto provide long-term growth management ofthe region.

The map highlights elements of parallelplanning efforts including: the 2035 RegionalTransportation Plan that outlines investments inmultiple modes of transportation, and acommitment to local policies and investmentsthat will help the region better accommodategrowth within its centers, corridors andemployment areas.

Sandy R.

Columbia River

Willamette R.

Tualatin R.

HaggLake

SturgeonLake

VancouverLake

Clackamas R.

The information on this map was derived from digital databases on Metro's GIS. Care was taken in the creation of this map. Metro cannot accept anyresponsibility for errors, omissions, or positional accuracy. There are no warranties, expressed or implied, including the warranty of merchantability orfitness for a particular purpose, accompanying this product. However, notification of any errors are appreciated.

Willamette R.

Making a great place

Employment land

Parks and natural areas

Neighborhood

Urban growth boundaries

Rural reserve

Urban reserve

Neighboring cities

Intercity rail terminal

Airports

Existing high capacity transit

Planned high capacity transit

Proposed high capacity transit tier 1

County boundaries

Mainline freight

High speed railFor more information on these initiatives, visithttp://www.oregonmetro.gov/2040

Main streets

Corridors

Central city

Regional center

Town center

Station communities

Was

hing

ton

Co.

Mul

tnom

ah C

o.

Columbia Co.

Multnomah Co.Clar k Co. Skamania Co.

Multnomah Co.Clackamas Co.

Clackamas Co.Marion Co.

Washington Co.

Cla

ckam

as C

o.

Yam

hill

Co.

Washington Co.Yamhill Co.



While growth control policy and growth boundaries are useful in peripheral areas, they are not good solutions in already built up areas. Because these places often need infill development, TOD is the best option for an existing places.

What is TOD?

Transit Oriented Development (TOD), is a development methodology that strives to create an environment within ¼ to ½ a mile from a transit stop in which there is a diversity of uses, residences, commercial offerings, cultural amenities, and potentially even industrial space, all within a dense walkable, and ideally multimodal environment. Though the express purpose of TOD is to increase transit ridership, it is also about creating diverse resilient places that can benefit all ages and socioeconomic groups.7

Transportation systems are significant investments, so it is in a municipality’s best long term interest to foster dense mixed use development around its transit stations. Despite this, it is common that transit agencies do not actively push development around stations due to a lack of available land, money, political will, or legal capability. For example, legacy systems like the CTA in Chicago were built mostly within public rights of way and therefore lack sufficient land reserves near to stations which when combined with prohibitive land acquisition costs, in effect hinders progressive agency action.

Nevertheless, TOD must be a transit agency’s priority because it fosters dense station area environments which in turn maximizes a transit agency’s return on investment. Furthermore, because TOD leads to increased densities and a diverse mix of amenities/ services, there is a tendency for reduced auto trip generation in place of higher transit usage. The inherent return on investment for a well-designed TOD proves that this development strategy is in the end more sustainable and equitable than traditional green field development.

Benefits of TOD

Beyond ridership and place making, TOD is a powerful way to invest in the health and future of the places where we live, work, and play. Examples of the numerous benefits associated with TOD include,

• Sustainable and efficient use of land, and resources• Conservation of open space• Decreased energy consumption• Reductions in air pollution• Enhanced walkability• Increases in property and rent values• Higher sales and property tax revenues to municipalities• Mixed income housing opportunities, and• Healthier resident lifestyles due to increased pedestrian activity.8

In short, TOD developments are high in “Location Efficiency,” due to their condensed and mixed use format which reduces the number and length of trips that residents and visitors alike would need to make to reach such things are work, shopping, and recreational offerings. These developments are designed to provide for most if not all the needs of the average person within a short walking distance.

Figure 7: Above. This image shows a hypothetical TOD. Notice the mix of uses, higher density residential, and transit station access.Courtesy: wwww.tceq.texas.gov, Retrieved: 4/5/2015



TOD & Placemaking

As previously stated, TOD strives to increase or maintain transit ridership, but in many ways TOD is about placemaking. To create quality urban spaces, communities must consider how to make interactive, attractive, and lively locations around transit stops. That being said, as the Project for Public Spaces has stated, “…placemaking is not just the act of building or fixing up a space; it is a process that fosters the creation of vital public destinations – the kind of places where people feel a strong stake in their communities and commitment to making things better. Placemaking capitalizes on a local community's assets, inspiration and potential, creating good public spaces that promote people's health, happiness, and economic well-being.”9 TOD should be conceived with a holistic vision that attempts to meet all aspects of a resident’s needs.

A well conceived TOD should be designed such that a person could feasibly accomplish ten different things while in a given place.10 By fostering a variety of activities, TOD designers can better support the basic principles of TOD by giving many people multiple reasons to interact with a unique well designed space.

TOD Design Principles

TOD is heavily dependent on good design, which means, a well-conceived TOD should strive to address four basic design considerations:

• Active, Walkable Streets• Building Density and Intensity• Transit Integration• Zoning Standards

Active, Walkable Streets

A healthy and vibrant pedestrian presence is a hallmark of a truly successful place. Places like Barcelona’s Ramblas, Paris’ Champs Elysees, and Venice’s St. Mark’s Square exist due to a combination of factors which intricately merge to reinforce walking and socializing. Pedestrian friendly environments are hard to design because they are the much sought after outcomes of the convergence of many factors, primarily land use, sidewalks, building placement and orientation, entry points, window coverage, block sizes, parking allotment and placing, and street design. Despite the challenge of properly intertwining these factors, it is essential they align to ensure the success of a TOD.11

Pedestrians respond to good urban design, and catering to their needs encourages walking. Use of smaller block sizes, ideally between 200-600 feet in length, narrow slower trafficked streets with features like buffered sidewalks, and plentiful trees increases the pedestrian friendly perception of neighborhoods. The use of small

Figure 8: Above. Delmar Blvd in University City, MO is not a traditional TOD, but it still displays many qualities of TOD, like mixed uses, walkable streets, access to transit , and diverse cultural offerings.Courtesy: www.nextstl.com, Retrieved: 4/5/2015

Figure 9: Above. The Lofts of Washington University is a new mixed use residential development on Delmar Blvd. It houses more than 400 students and over 20,000 feet of commercial space including a grocery store. Mixed use developments like this are a benefit to Delmar because they support the local desire to create a 24/7 full service downtown for University City, MO.Courtesy: St. Louis Business Journal, Retrieved: 4/5/2015



block size in effect reinforces walking by providing a porous neighborhood fabric. Further details like plentiful street oriented retail and wide transparent windows, street furniture, and human scaled building entrances provide yet more bolstering effects to pedestrian activity.12

Parking is a Challenge

Attention should be paid to parking facilities within TOD. At no point should parking provisions and or placement subordinate pedestrian activity or its necessary infrastructure. If at all possible, parking requirements should be forgiven or at least relaxed to reduce the number of required spaces. If parking cannot be excluded, then consideration for behind building, underground, or interior parking should be explored.13 Good parking integration is being able to strike a balance between sustainability and practicality. While TODs encourage reduced auto usage, these developments will be initially sited within a broader auto-centric context. Therefore, in the short term, many residents and visitors may choose to drive until pedestrian friendly developments become more present within the surrounding built landscape.

Building Density and Intensity

In light of the differences in density and urban form across many transit systems, there is no absolute density standard for TOD. Though density and the variety/ concentration of uses around a station should be high enough to support transit service, there is simply no way to define a specific universal figure for the number of residential units that should be built around a hypothetical station. However, for all TODs, densities need to meet or exceed those found elsewhere in the subject community.14 In developing TOD, communities should focus on establishing minimum allowable densities for station areas. By denoting a minimum instead of a maximum, this ensures that enough units are built to maintain a high enough resident population to sustain transit. For example, San Jose, CA mandates that urban locations have a density of forty-five units per acre, while suburban locations must have twenty-five units per acre.15

Even if higher building density is achieved, there must be an accompanying intensity of uses. Preferably buildings will be mixed use with retail, offices, and residential above. Green space should be incorporated within developments. Preferably there should be a mandatory minimum for open space that is based on the density of the surrounding population.

Transit Integration

Despite transit being the core reason for TOD, how stations integrate with surrounding developments is often overlooked. Developments cannot just be adjacent to a transit stop, they need to fully integrate the station as a fundamental part of the location’s built fabric. Stations should ideally have multiple entrance and exit points that lead to different parts of the development and surrounding area. Thought should be given to paths of flow; how will pedestrians, buses, cars, and even trains, move through the development? When riders exit or enter the station, they should get a clear sense of where they are going, via signage and other types of way finding. As pedestrians and bus riders move through the TOD district, they should have easy connections to all areas. In sum, the development must be designed to seamlessly integrate within itself and the surrounding area.16

Zoning Standards As previously stated, the success of a TOD development is largely dependent on high quality design, however without adequate zoning TOD is not possible. In most municipalities, current right of way zoning standards simply do not allow the types of density or mix of uses that are the hallmarks of TOD. This is especially true in suburban towns whose zoning schemes traditionally favor single use zoning which is complicated by high parking mandatesmandates, and a preference for single family detached housing. Given this reality, new forms of zoning should be created to allow for and bolster TOD development.Figure 10: At left. A parking garage entrance at The

Boulevard Development in Richmond Heights, MO



Research/Office

Office

Mixed Use/ Hotel

Residential

Parking

Retail

Proposed Land Use Plan: CORTEX Life Sciences District, Saint Louis, MO

Figure 12: This map shows a proposed land use concept for the CORTEX District in Saint Louis, MO. This burgeoning science and technology focused district will be anchored by a new Metrolink station (center image), and will benefit from its proximity to major employment and cultural centers like Barnes-Jewish Hospital/ Washington University Medical Center, the Central West End, and direct access to Downtown Saint Louis. While this TOD is structured to be mostly a research/ light industrial center, the provision of residential units at its northern edge will work to better connect the new station and its district to the more established residential areas north of Forest Park Parkway, which runs across the top portion of the map.Courtesy: www.nextstl.com, Retrieved: 4/5/2015

Site Plan of Denver Union Station

Figure 11: Above. Denver’s T-MU-30 District was applied to the Union Station redevelopment process shown here. As part of the station’s reconstruction, a multimodal hub was developed including an underground bus concourse which allowed the construction of homes, offices, and stores at surface level.Courtesy: www.dot.gov, Retrieved: 4/6/2015

An example of the recent changes in zoning to support transit can be seen in Denver, CO which developed its transit friendly T-MU-30 district. This zoning classification is designated for transit oriented development projects within the city.17 This district which overall aims to encourage pedestrian oriented development, must be located no more than 1,500 feet from the center line of the tracks, is deliberately designed to be extremely flexible with what densities and uses it will allow.18



Barriers to Effective TOD

Despite the inherent values of TOD, there are many barriers to its more widespread adop-tion. Existing transportation funding methods place an emphasis on automobile infrastructure which often leaves little in way of transit appro-priations. In places like Saint Louis, road expan-sion is seen as providing an economic benefit, while transit operations are considered a poor use of resources. Though both systems are subsidized by Federal, State, and Local governments, high-way subsidies are relatively hidden while transit funding is routinely seen as deficit spending. In places like Missouri, which contributes virtually no funding to public transportation, localities are left to finance transit at a local or regional level, in addition to seeking increasingly scarce federal dollars.

After funding, the next barrier is the in-creasingly outdated nature of local zoning codes. As many codes were written to deliberately ex-clude a mix of uses, TOD is functionally impos-sible in many communities. Consequently, com-munities must refashion their zoning codes to allow for higher residential density and a mix of uses. Fortunately, compared to funding reform, this step is relatively simple due to its local nature.

Paired with zoning changes should be a mandatory reduction in the required number of parking spaces. Current parking standards force the production of surplus spaces and often dis-courage dense development. Cities should look to relax and if possible do away with mandatory

minimum parking space requirements. TOD is known to encourage lower auto usage and height-ened pedestrian activity which could offset the demand for parking, therefore increasing the effi-ciency of a development.

Figure 14: Right. Zoning is usually an impediment to TOD because many towns do not allow more than single family zoning. The City of Ladue, MO a suburb of Saint Louis is shown in this image. Ladue is one of the wealthiest suburbs in the Saint Louis area, and as such has zoned most of its land as single-family residential which entirely precludes construction of a genuine TOD districtCourtesy: City of Ladue, MoRetrieved: 4/6/2015

Figure 13: Above. Traditional transportation funding schemes prioritize road construction frequently at the direct detriment of public transportation. The completion of the Page Extension through St. Charles Co. diverted millions of dollars that could have been used to extend the Metrolink Red Line across the Missouri River and into St. Charles County, thus providing relief to traffic which was cited as necessitating the need for an extended Page Avenue.



Courtesy: City of Ladue, MORetrieved: 4/6/2015

Zoning often Precludes Density, Let Alone TOD


Transportation & Metropolitan Saint Louis

By its name, TOD is predicated on the existence of transit. Therefore, this section briefly lays out the present state of public transportation in Metro Saint Louis.

Overview

Prior to its abandonment in the mid 1960s, Metro Saint Louis was served by a sprawling streetcar system and an accompanying series of commuter railway lines. After the dismantling of these systems, the region has been largely dependent on buses for its public transport options. However, since the reintroduction of trains in the 1990s, the region has been slowly moving toward the creation of a new multimodal system that may one day feature not just light rail and buses, but bike-share, streetcars, and bus rapid transit.

Metrolink

The current light rail network consists of two lines, Red and Blue, that via two branches, connect Scott Air Force Base in Illinois with Lambert Airport and the near southwest suburbs in Missouri. Starting in 1990, construction of the initial line was completed in 1993 when the system opened for operation. Connecting North Hanley Station to East St. Louis with fourteen miles and sixteen stations, the initial line proved a success which led to several extensions first to Lambert Airport in North St. Louis County, then to Scott Air Force Base in St. Clair County, IL. A later extension in 2006, the Cross County Connection (current Blue line Shrewsbury Branch) linked the main line to Clayton (the second regional downtown) and the near southwest suburbs.19

Presently, the light rail system and Metro’s bus operations enjoy steadily growing ridership; fifty million riders per year as of 2014.20 Overall, light rail has been a positive development for Saint Louis. Since its implementation, there has been over two billion in investment along the system.21 Realizing the importance that transit plays in the regional economy, Metro Saint Louis is now developing its long range transit plan, Moving Transit Forward, which includes options for potential system expansions such as the North South Metro line that could connect North County with South County via downtown.22

Design Characteristics

Operating entirely within its own right of way, the Metrolink system mostly runs at grade, with some aerial and below grade portions. To save money, Metro’s lines recycle stretches of former railway including a tunnel beneath downtown.23 While this measure reduced construction costs, it has disadvantaged the system. The existing lines largely pass through industrial lands far removed from residential or commercial areas which isolates many stations from their potential users. Furthermore, because many stations are not located in walkable areas it is an even greater disincentive to transit usage. These stations are thus inefficiently located and several of them suffer from low ridership as compared to the better connected stations, such as the Central West End Station. While not sited immediately within a residential area, this station is on the grounds of the Barnes-Jewish Hospital/ Washington University Medical Center, which is a major regional employer. Additionally, there is a multi-bay bus depot on site, and neighboring Euclid Avenue is home to many extremely popular restaurants and stores. This station leverages its connections to create a critical mass for transit usage and pedestrian activity that makes this portion of the city one of the most-lively and desirable. Even so, the system as a whole suffers lower ridership than could be possible due to its relative isolation from users.

Figure 15: A Metrolink LRT vehicle shown leaving Union Station on its way east to its terminus in IllinoisCourtesy: Matthew Black & Wikipedia, Retrieved: 4/5/2015



Figure 16: The current Metrolink SystemCourtesy: www.metrostlouis.org, Retrieved: 4/5/2015



Former Saint Louis Streetcar System in 1942

Figure 19: At left. Like many cities, Saint Louis once had an extensive streetcar system. Though no longer in existence, many sections of the core city are left with a built legacy which directly supports mixed use and walkability because they were built during the system’s time of operation. In effect, Saint Louis City is already built as a TOD though it presently lacks transit access in most areas.

Opportunities for TOD in Regional Transportation Expansion

Current mode share in Saint Louis overwhelmingly favors the automobile over public transportation, however recent developments in local and regional transportation planning have signaled that in the future more Saint Louisans may be taking transit. With the completion of Moving Transit Forward, the region’s comprehensive long term transportation plan, in addition to several proposed light rail extensions, bus rapid transit (BRT) lines, and the possibility for two new systems, bike share and streetcar, it appears that Metro Saint Louis is starting the process of rebuilding its multi-modal transport system. As such, the importance of TOD is only heightened. As these systems are built or extended, opportunities for TOD should be fully sought out. Should these proposals be successfully combined with TOD, the region would be taking a tremendous step toward ending its sprawl.

Figures 16, 17, & 18: At far right. These images show several potential transit expansions that have been proposed or discussed for Metro Saint Louis. Top left (16),shows the potential routes of the region’s first BRT line. Bottom left (17), shows the routing of the proposed Saint Louis City streetcar. Far right (18), shows the path of the North South line which would connect Florissant Valley College in North St. Louis County to South St. Louis County via Downtown.

Transportation & Metro Saint Louis




Richmond Heights-Galleria Station

To demonstrate that TOD is possible in Metro Saint Louis, the Richmond Heights-Galleria station has been chosen as a case study. The following sections examine existing conditions in the study area as well as proposals for how it can be redeveloped as a more dense TOD district that could be effective in slowing regional sprawl.

Location & Overview

Located within the western part of its namesake city, Richmond Heights station is located in an suburban commercial district in the western inner ring suburbs of Saint Louis, MO. Sitting amongst the intersection of four major corridors: I-64, I-170, South Brentwood Boulevard, and Clayton Road, the station area is well connected to the broader region, and nearby jobs centers such as Clayton, Brentwood, and the slightly more distant Central West End. The district’s main thoroughfare is Brentwood Boulevard which runs north-south and is lined primarily with commercial and office uses, including the Saint Louis Galleria, and The Boulevard a mixed-use development.24 Considered a major shopping destination, the station area is home to the Galleria Mall, a super regional shopping center with three levels, 165 stores, and 5,000 parking spaces. Less than one mile north is downtown Clayton, the region’s second downtown, which is home to 35,000 employees and a daytime population of 80,000 people.25 Within a ½ mile radius of the station there are 2,120 residents, with 73.2% population between 25 and 64, 68.9%, household income more than $50,000, only 7% of rentals are priced below $500 a month, and there are 625 firms and agencies employing 7,068 people.26

Figure 20: The Richmond Heights-Galleria station study area is outlined above. Located at the intersection of two major highways, the area is well connected to the broader Saint Louis Region. In the left of the study area sits the Galleria Mall and its 5,000 parking spaces, at center along Brentwood Blvd is The Boulevard, a mixed use development with residential, office, retail space, and several restaurants, and in the extreme right of the study area is the Metrolink station. To the immediate north is the City of Clayton, and to the immediate south is the City of Brentwood. Single-family residential areas are to the east and west.Courtesy: Google Earth, Retrieved: 4/5/2015

Richmond Heights-Galleria Station Study AreaRichmond Heights, MO

Bre

ntw

ood

Blv

d

StationThe Galleria

Clayton Rd

I-64

I-64

I-170

I-170

Study BoundaryMetro Line

1000 ft



Land UtilizationUnderutilized

Surface ParkingVacant

NB

rent

woo

d B

lvd

Clayton Rd

The Galleria Station

Development Opportunities within the Study Area

Figure 23: This map displays lands within the study area that may be sites for potential redevelopmentCourtesy: Google Earth, Retrieved: 7/5/2015

Figure 21: Above, is a view from the end of Galleria Parkway looking westward toward the main entrance to the Galleria Mall.

Figure 22: Above, is an interior view of The Boulevard mixed use development. The complex which contains a parking garage is designed with a main street style format, with a center street flanked by businesses and upper story apartments and offices.

The Boulevard

The Galleria Mall



Richmond Heights Station

Quarter-mile Area

Metrolink

City Boundaries

Single-Family Residential

Zoning Districts

Multi-Family Residential

Commercial

Industrial

Community Facility

Open Space

Vacant

Figure 24: Excerpt from Richmond Heights-Galleria Station ProfileCourtesy: Metro Transit, www.metrostlouis.org, Retrieved: 4/5/2015



Station Facilities

Situated at the western end of Galleria Parkway, the Richmond Heights station is composed of three major parts: the station platforms and access ramp, a bus terminal/ passenger drop off loop, and a fifty-seven space commuter park and ride lot. The station itself consists of a single island platform that services both inbound and outbound Metrolink Blue Line trains. Access to the platform is via a ramp at the northern end which crosses the southbound track and connects with the ticketing area adjacent to the drop off loop. Bus service to the station is via Metro’s number 02 Red Line bus which offers connections to nearby University City, Brentwood, and Maplewood. Despite its location within a major shopping and employment center, the station is underutilized as it sees only 660 boardings per day.28

Figure 25: A view southeast into Richmond Heights-Galleria Station and the bus terminal/ passenger drop off loop from Galleria Parkway.

Figure 26: A view south to light rail tracks and station platform from the sole access pathway located just to the east of the bus terminal loop.

Figure 27: The view northwest toward the 57 space commuter parking lot and the Interstate 170 northbound on-ramp from Galleria Parkway

Figure 28: The view looking west down Galleria Parkway from the station entrance. Seen in the distance beneath the Interstate 170 overpass is the main entrance to the Galleria Mall, the dominating feature of the station study area.



Design Concerns

The Richmond Heights station and its surrounding study area suffer from numerous design flaws that cumulatively work to undermine ridership and the overall success of the study area. Station Specific

Chief among the station’s design flaws is its frankly incomplete pedestrian infrastructure. The current station configuration provides only one entrance via the bus terminal loop at the end of Galleria Parkway. While this does position the station entrance toward the district’s main asset, the Galleria Mall, it nearly precludes access from the residential area to the immediate south of the station.

Additionally, because the station is not at the center of the shopping area along Brentwood Blvd, the current peripheral location stretches the average distance one would have to walk to access the entirety of the commercial district such as along Clayton road or the south stretch of Brentwood Boulevard. When compounded with district wide design concerns, these situations render the study area as inherently anti-pedestrian.

Figure 29: The station’s less than ideal location and lack of multiple access points forces users to walk much farther than would be necessary if there were more connections between the station and its immediate surroundings. As shown above, riders can only exit the station in the direction of Brentwood Boulevard which creates a dramatic reduction in the station’s accessibility.Courtesy: Google Earth, Retrieved: 4/5/2015


Bre

ntw

ood

Blv

d

StationThe Galleria

Clayton Rd

I-64

I-64

I-170

I-170

Study BoundaryMetro LinePed BarrierSole Walkway

1000 ft

Richmond Heights Galleria Station


Study Area Specific

The Richmond Heights-Galleria station area is defined by the transportation corridors which slice through it: Interstates 64 & 170, Clayton Road, and South Brentwood Boulevard. Unfortunately, in giving access to the broader region, these routes effectively cut up the study area and isolate its various parts. What developments that are present do not engage with the streets, or each other. The net effect is a siloing of each block. Even The Boulevard, a mixed use development, fails to embrace the streets around it due to its lack of storefronts on Brentwood Blvd. A direct result of this siloing is that the study area lacks cohesiveness and a distinct identifiable character. Beyond the presence of the mall, there is not a unique aspect to this place. Combined with the extreme building setbacks and the wide street width, the study area appears to melt away into the distance when seen from a pedestrian viewpoint.

Furthermore, while the study area is transit accessible, it is almost exclusively reached by private automobile. What few pedestrians there are have no comfort in amenities such as benches, shade trees, or safe and adequate crosswalks. Walking in this area is not only feels unsafe, but it is so due to the high speed of traffic and the nearly overwhelming lack of pedestrian safety features.

Figure 30: Shown above is the condition of a pedestrian crossing on Galleria Parkway near to the entrance of the Metrolink station, notice the cracked and buckled pavement, and the severely faded nature of the pedestrian crossing markings.

Figure 31: Shown above is The Boulevard development’s west wall which faces Brentwood Blvd, notice the lack of true street front retail and access points. This uninviting street wall is worsened by narrow sidewalks, lack of shade, and high-speed traffic on Brentwood Blvd.

Figure 32: Above is a stretch of Brentwood Blvd, looking north. The lack of street adjacent development or distinctive features leads to the area seeming to melt away into the landscape.Figure 33: At right is University Tower, the tallest building in the study area. Despite being a major feature, it is completely isolated due to its position at the top of a hill that is ringed with retaining walls and parking lots. Pedestrian access is limited as there are no clearly marked paths to the site. Most visitors to the building drive and park in the attached garage seen at bottom right of the image.


A Plan for Richmond Heights-Galleria Station

Why TOD for Richmond Heights?

Despite its design flaws, the Richmond Heights-Galleria Station study area is an ideal place for comprehensive TOD style development. As it stands, the district is in an advantageous position due to its location, transit access, existing commercial offerings, and the vast tracts of surface parking and underutilized land. The study area could feasibly accommodate an increase in residential and commercial density which would be supported by the subregional development pressures existent in the surrounding communities of Clayton and Brentwood. Downtown Clayton to the north is a major and growing employment center that is seeing increased investment and construction of several new office buildings. However, due to zoning, Clayton’s downtown is constrained, which could force development elsewhere. Logically, this development should continue down Brentwood Boulevard toward the Galleria and its abundant land. If this were to occur, Brentwood Blvd would become the spine of an expanded business district stretching from Clayton, through Richmond Heights, and terminating in Brentwood to the south. The area has the ability to become a much denser, mixed use, and walkable place via improvements to the existing transit station, and across the district itself. More than anything, the lessons learned at this study area can inform how other municipalities could implement anti-sprawl policies within their own borders.

Potential Station Improvements

While the present station serves its purpose, it does not do it well, and it is in need of renovations to boost its capacity, and changes in layout and wayfinding to better connect it to the surrounding neighborhoods. Currently, the only access point is directly off Galleria Parkway, a reality that cuts off the residents of the neighborhood to the south and east. New entrances or connections should be built connecting to Linden Avenue to the south and Clayton road to the north. Such connections would dramatically increase the station’s service area and potentially spur redevelopment east of I-170. While strengthened pedestrian connections might boost ridership, increased bus service may do so as well, so it must be included with any station renovation work.

Complementing the new and improved pedestrian connections should be a redesign of the station’s architecture and public art offerings. At the moment, the existing station possesses no significant or easily identifiable features. The station should be a signature entrance to the study are, which means it must possess a higher design quality than what is present. Preferably this new design will be in a compatible style to the prevailing architecture of the redeveloped study area. Doing so would bring about continuity to the whole study area and lessen the fragmentation imposed by I-170.

Compelling Station Design is a Must

Figure 34: Above is a station on the Charlotte, NC, Lynx system. While the station’s overall design is not that elaborate, the creative form of the canopy provides a note of visual interest and makes the station identifiable.Courtesy: www.sasaki.com, Retrieved: 4/1/2015

Public Art Captures Attention

Figure 36: Above. Good public art has the power to draw in people and enliven places, as evidenced by the crowds and the woman photographing this piece, located in the City Garden in downtown Saint Louis.Courtesy: www.cityparksblog.org, Retrieved: 4/1/2015




Bre

ntw

ood

Blv

d

StationThe Galleria

Clayton Rd

I-64

I-64

I-170

I-170

Lind

en A

ve

Study BoundaryMetro Line

New & StrongerPedestrian

Connections

1000 ft

Needed Pedestrian Connections for the Richmond Heights Metrolink Station

Figure 38: The map above depicts proposed connections between the Richmond Heights Metrolink station and the surrounding area. Currently, the station has only one main access route via Galleria Parkway, however, by creating connections to the residential area along Linden Avenue to the south and to the east portion of the study area along Clayton Road, ridership could increase as would the potential for district wide redevelopment. As the TOD process moves forward, the existing station will prove inadequate without better pathways that link the existing residential areas to the redevelopment zones. Courtesy: Google Earth, Retrieved: 4/5/2015

Wayfinding Streamlines Connectivity

Figure 35: Above. Good and simple wayfinding features make areas more navigable which in turn increases their walkability and distinctiveness as places. Courtesy: www.stltoday.com, Retrieved: 4/1/2015

Multimodal Provisions Boost Ridership

Figure 37: Above. Multimodal provisions can increase a station’s ridership pool, and as the above image shows, things like bike racks can be more than just utilitarian features, but works of functional art.Courtesy: www.flourishonline.org,Retrieved: 4/5/2015



4) Foster Placemaking Through Design

What gets built in this now pedestrian friendly, mixed use, and multi-modal district should be of high quality design to counteract the presently indistinct character of the study area. By using design elements like street facing retail, uniform building heights, human scaled architecture, and complementary styles, the district can better exhibit a cohesive and distinct identity. Supplementing these strategies should be the careful location of parks and public spaces that are designed for different uses depending on their locations. For example, plazas in commercially focused areas.

Having Guidelines Matters

Because they directly address the study area’s most pressing challenges, these guidelines should be used to inform all aspects of the redevelopment process. They will encourage the creation of a dense, walkable, mixed use neighborhood that is wonderful for residents, and that is also an excellent asset for the City of Richmond Heights. Dense, walkable, mixed use places tend to generate more in property and sales taxes for municipalities versus lower density suburban style developments, which makes them worth the investment. Adhering to these guidelines will directly benefit the City of Richmond Heights, and the region as a whole in the fight to slow sprawl.

Potential District Improvements

It has been previously shown that the study area possess a large amount of redevelop-able land that at this point is being used overwhelmingly for parking or low density suburban commercial/ office type developments. Considering the study area’s location and transit access, this is an inefficient use of such a valuable resource. Moving forward, development in the study area must attempt to better capture the value stored in this well connected place.

The first step toward a new Richmond Heights TOD district, or any TOD, needs to be the creation of a set of guiding principles to structure the redevelopment process. These principles should be constructed to directly address local conditions, whether positive or negative. For Richmond Heights, the following guidelines have been drafted to address the core concerns faced in the study area.

1) Increase Residential Density

Single-Family housing is the greatest contributor to sprawl in Metro Saint Louis, so increasing residential density within the study area is paramount. Housing should be varied in size and type, with a mix of single family town-homes, apartments, studios, and condos. The number of units per acre should not fall below 20-25. The use of a mandatory minimum will work to ensure adequate density to support transit usage. Another benefit density and mixed housing types is a greater diversity of age, income, and family

type among potential residents.

2) Build Multimodal Complete Streets

With increased density must come streets that are more urban in format. In reformatting the local street grid, complete streets measures should be adopted. If road-space on the main corridors allows, bus and bike only lanes should be created, on street parking should be allowed as a safety buffer for pedestrians, and traffic calming features like curb bulb outs should be added. Pedestrian and cyclist amenities like well signed crosswalks and bike racks should be amply provided. In all, pedestrian focused infrastructure should be used to create functional and easy to use paths of flow throughout the district by subverting the presence of the study area’s heavily trafficked major streets.

3) Implement a Mixed Use Format New development within the study area must be of a mixed use format to ensure better returns in the long run. Having stores, offices, residential space, and institutions all on the same block or even within the same building, directly contributes to the diversity and vitality of a place. Mixed uses can encourage a pedestrian atmosphere by giving many different people many different reasons to be somewhere across all hours of a given day. It makes sense economically and socially to locate people near to the services, jobs, and amenities they may want or need.

A Plan for Richmond Heights Galleria Station


NB

rent

woo

d B

lvd

Clayton Rd

The Galleria Station

Proposed Land UsesMixed Use(Commercial-Residential)Commercial

Office

Multi-family

Parking Facility

New Street Grid

Park Space

Proposed Land Use Concept Plan for the Richmond Heights Study Area

Figure 40: At right. This map shows the proposed land use concept for the Richmond Heights-Galleria study area. The imposition of a new street grid has given the area a feeling of permeability, and the placement of new or expanded parks now gives several unique neighborhood centers. Along the major corridors, spaces for office and mixed use development have been outlined. Commercial space has been scattered throughout, multi-family residential has been located adjacent to the station, and parking facilities have been sited in several locations across the study area.Courtesy: Google Earth, Retrieved 4/5/2015

Figure 39: Above. Mixing uses can create more vibrant and viable developmentsCourtesy: www.kirkfromm.com, Retrieved: 4/6/2015

Mixed Use Means More Vitality



Complete Streets Create Equity and Safety for All Transport Modes

Figure 41: Top left. Complete streets measures seek to provide modal equity in the design of local streets. As shown in this image from the Overlake Village District in Redmond, WA, pedestrians, cars, and cyclists have spaces dedicated to them in the design of the street right of way. These types of shared space configurations can greatly improve the safety of streets which can lead to a greater pedestrian and cyclist presence.Courtesy: Crandall Arambula, www.ca-city.com,Retrieved: 4/6/2015

A Wide Housing Type Mix Can Foster Residential Diversity

Figure 42: Bottom left. Housing unit type diversity is a must in a TOD district because it not only allows for a greater population density, but it can foster diversity in income, family size, and family type among potential residents. Furthermore, housing diversity has been shown to lead to greater nieghborhood affordability. While much is done and said to make TOD environmentally sustainable, more could be done to highlight the importance of social sustainability in these developments.



Possible Futures for Richmond Heights

Given the study area’s location at the center of Metro Saint Louis and within a growing regional sub-market of the western inner ring suburbs (University City, Clayton, Richmond Heights, Brentwood, and Maplewood), many different development outcomes are possible. So long as future developments show awareness of the four main redevelopment guidelines, this nascent TOD district has immense potential to become a dense, walkable, mixed use place. As has been previously stated, these guidelines are not meant to be inflexible, they are intended to help potential developments best meet the primary goal of the study area, which is to become a dense and vital urban center which is necessary if the City of Richmond Heights is to make an impact on regional sprawl control.

Example TOD District Proposal, Northgate Redevelopment, Seattle, WA

Figure 43: Above. This image depicts one of many proposals that were put together for the Northgate Redevelopment Project in Seattle, WA. This district is a valuable example of what could be possible at Richmond Heights and elsewhere across Saint Louis because of the importance of design and quality of life guidelines that were created early in the redevelopment process. These guidelines are thorough and address valid concerns held by the City of Seattle and local residents, such as green provisions and walkability. While all proposals differed, they all used the district specific guidelines to structure their approaches.Courtesy: www.via-architecture.com, Retrieved: 4/6/2015


Conclusion

Having explored the transit oriented development opportunities for the study area surrounding the Richmond Heights-Galleria Station, a question still remains. Can TOD that is carried out by smaller municipalities, really work to slow sprawl in the Saint Louis region considering the political difficulties the metro area faces? Despite the challenges, the answer is yes, small towns across Metro Saint Louis can indeed help slow sprawl by developing transit oriented districts. While TOD is not a panacea that can stop sprawl completely, it is a positive step in the right direction which alone justifies its implementation. As has been previously stated, until such time as the region works to solidify a unified voice against sprawl, the local level use of TOD will be Metro Saint Louis’ best sprawl control measure. Therefore, by using Richmond Heights-Galleria Station as an example of what is possible with TOD, the Saint Louis region’s towns must move forward and pursue further studies into the value of and possibilities for TOD within their communities. After greater analysis, localities will be better prepared to stage a comprehensive TOD processes. Once TOD planning and development become commonplace at the local level, the region stands to benefit greatly

Conclusion


Figure 44: Above. A map of the existing Metrolink networkCourtesy: www.urbanrail.net, Retrieved: 4/6/2015

Transit is Valuable So Embrace it as a Resource


Appendix

Sources1) Caplow, Theodore, Louis Hicks, and Ben Watten-berg. “THE FIRST MEASURED CENTURY: An Il-lustrated Guide to Trends in America, 1900–2000, Chapter One; Population.” Urban, Rural, Suburban. Accessed March 7, 2015. http://www.pbs.org/fmc/book/1population6.htm.

2) “Location Efficiency.” CNT: Center for Neighbor-hood Technology. Accessed March 8, 2015. http://www.cnt.org/tcd/projects/location-efficiency/.

3) Dittmar, Hank, and Gloria Ohland. The New Tran-sit Town: Best Practices in Transit-Oriented Develop-ment. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2004. 39-41.

4) Kelly, Jon. “What Would Britain Look like without a Green Belt?” BBC News Magazine. September 15, 2011. Accessed March 8, 2015. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-14916238.

5) Kelly, Jon. “What Would Britain Look like without a Green Belt?” BBC News Magazine. September 15, 2011. Accessed March 8, 2015. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-14916238.

6) “History of Oregon’s Land Use Planning.” Oregon.GOV: Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. Accessed March 8, 2015. http://www.oregon.gov/lcd/pages/history.aspx.

7) “TOD 101: Why Transit-Oriented Development and Why Now?” Reconnecting America and the Center for Transit-Oriented Development. Accessed March 8, 2015. http://ctod.org/tod-ucation.php.

8) “TOD 101: Why Transit-Oriented Development and Why Now?” Reconnecting America and the Center for Transit-Oriented Development. Accessed March 8,

2015. http://ctod.org/tod-ucation.php.

9) A Guide to Neighborhood Placemaking in Chicago. Chicago, IL: Project for Public Spaces & Metropolitan Planning Council, 2008.

10) A Guide to Neighborhood Placemaking in Chicago. Chicago, IL: Project for Public Spaces & Metropolitan Planning Council, 2008.



13) Dittmar, Hank, and Gloria Ohland. The New Tran-sit Town: Best Practices in Transit-Oriented Develop-ment. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2004. 89.






19) “The 1990s.” Metro Transit - St Louis. 2014. Ac-cessed March 23, 2015. http://www.metrostlouis.org/About/History/The1990s.aspx. 20) “Metro Moves the Community” Metro Transit - St Louis. 2014. Accessed March 23, 2015 http://www.metrostlouis.org/About/MetroMovesTheCommunity.aspx

21) “The 1990s.” Metro Transit - St Louis. 2014. Ac-cessed March 23, 2015. http://www.metrostlouis.org/About/History/The1990s.aspx.



24) Richmond Heights Station Profile, http://cmt-stl.org/transit-oriented-development-clearinghouse/metrolink-station-profiles/

25) Saint Louis Galleria, “St. Louis’ Premier Shopping Center,” http://www.ggp.com/properties/mall-prop-erties/saint-louis-galleria

26) Citizens for Modern Transit, “Richmond Heights Station,” http://cmt-stl.org/transit-oriented-develop-ment-clearinghouse/metrolink-station-profiles/

27) Saint Louis Galleria, “St. Louis’ Premier Shopping Center,” http://www.ggp.com/properties/mall-prop-erties/saint-louis-galleria

28) Citizens for Modern Transit, “Richmond Heights Station,” http://cmt-stl.org/transit-oriented-develop-ment-clearinghouse/metrolink-station-profiles/

Appendix


Turner_MastersProjects_LowRes

Documents

Transcript of Turner_MastersProjects_LowRes