Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
64 Transit and affordable housing coordination is a complex story to tell. While the federal transit program began as part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, today housing and transit issues are often siloed, including at the federal level. Yet, transit is essential to providing mobility for vulnerable and disadvantaged populations. It has the potential to serve riders across income levels and occupations, and for a variety of trips beyond accessing jobs. However, the ability of transit to effectively meet these goals requires alignment and coordina- tion with land-use and housing policies, especially at the local level. Survey results and existing literature on transit job access indicate that there is still considerable work needed be done to better serve transit areas with high concentrations of affordable housing. Research and housing data also show that communities are losing affordable housing stock as housing markets continue to increase faster than incomes in almost every major metropolitan area of the country. Rural areas also face transit access and housing affordability challenges. Racial justice uprisings of 2020 elevated issues of transportation equity. The long history of intersectional housing and transportation racial segregation continues to result in communities of color often not being well-served by transit, or by affordable, quality housing. 5.1 Key Findings In synthesizing the survey responses, literature review, and case examples, several key find- ings emerge. Overall, coordination of transit with affordable housing is limited. The growing housing affordability crisis impacts households across a range of income levels. Regional plan- ning and transit agencies are engaging to better coordinate housing with transportation, both to reduce the combined costs of each and to leverage underutilized transit real estate assets to develop new housing. However, challenges remain. Transit service and fare considerations that explicitly focus on the travel needs and affordability concerns of low-income households are less frequent. Only 41% of survey respondents report offering reduced fares. Of these, most are targeted to vulnerable populations not based upon economic need. Neighborhoods with high levels of affordable housing are not prioritized by all transit agencies when making service decisions. Even more challenging, only one-third of those surveyed report transit service frequencies of 30 minutes or less. Residents of affordable housing are often limited in their mobility options and often face disproportionate cost burdens. Limited transit access to regional jobs and other essential destinations can limit their ability to thrive and move out of poverty. Likewise, this population is core to building and sustaining transit ridership. Suburban communities and rural areas are seeing an increase in poverty and in some cases trying to expand affordable housing options. These communities are a challenge to serve efficiently, C H A P T E R 5 Toward a Research Agenda on Transit and Affordable Housing Coordination
Toward a Research Agenda on Transit and Affordable Housing Coordination 65  with transit leaving many low-income suburban households with limited mobility and higher transportation costs. Beyond housing alignment, coordination and engagement with regional employers, especially those located in suburban areas where transit service is challenging to pro- vide, is a critical factor. Improving engagement with affordable housing tenants and providers can help transit agencies better understand service needs and can build relationships that may also prove beneficial to transit. Case examples and survey responses show a spectrum of ways that this engagement is happening, with coordination between public agencies and with affordable housing developers being the most common. Far less common is engagement with affordable housing residents themselves. Few agencies report disaggregating transportation data to better understand travel patterns, cost burdens, or needs of low-income riders. This may correlate to the survey responses that found a lack of prioritization in regional LRTPs of serving areas with higher levels of afford- able housing, or in coordinating transit with housing policies more broadly. Affordable housing production and preservation tools are not always meeting the needs of very low-income households. Transit systems are feeling the effects, whether in addressing homelessness and related safety concerns, or through reduced ridership as residents are dis- placed from previously affordable neighborhoods served by transit. TOD is one area where coordination and alignment is strongly occurring; however, this is mostly limited to those agencies with high-capacity fixed transit service. An emerging trend by these agencies is to include specific affordable housing goals within their TOD and/or joint development policies. Issues of gentrification and displacement are a growing concern. Transit agencies are struggling to respond, given that housing policy, investment, and tenant protec- tion issues are largely a local matter. Guidance and best practices specifically targeted to transit agencies are lacking. Cross-sector collaboration is a key ingredient to successful coordination. Non-profit part- ners, philanthropic organizations, and academic institutions play important roles in advocating, planning, designing, and implementing solutions for improved alignment of housing, transit, and equity goals, funding, and policy adoption. These organizations often provide the glue that sustains coordination. 5.2 Future Research Needs This synthesis, with its comprehensive framework for considering coordination that cuts across service, affordability, planning, and TOD, covered a lot of ground. Yet more study is needed to better inform practitioners and decision makers. This includes developing a set of recommen- dations or best practices around coordination strategies, especially for transportation agencies that typically lack any authority over land use and housing issues. The following questions and issues are worthy of further study and guidance: ⢠How can transit ridership recovery better support low-income riders? Additional research is needed to evaluate and identify the impact of residential displacement of low-income house- holds on decreasing transit ridership. This trend predated the COVID-19 pandemic and may be key to transit recovery plans. Increased analysis of the impact of affordable housing or ETOD to increase and stabilize transit ridership would be useful to the field, rather than research focused primarily on the potential for displacement near transit to occur. ⢠How do transit network redesigns and affordable fare policies impact low-income riders? Research questions exist around the equitable ways to redesign transit networks and afford- able fare policies that include successful engagement and analysis of low-income rider needs.
66 Coordination of Public Transit Services and Investments with Affordable Housing Policies Similarly, more information is needed on the parking needs and trends of residents living in affordable housing developments near transit, and any disparate impacts that parking pricing or transportation demand management strategies may have on low-income residents who do rely on a car. ⢠How can transit agencies better partner with housing providers on transit issues? New tech- nologies may enable transit agencies to offer reduced fares, but more research is needed on the feasibility and cost of adopting these types of approaches relative to their value. Partnerships with affordable housing and service providers appear to also be critical to their use, yet limited guidance exists on how to establish and maintain these relationships by transit agencies with non-profit and community-based organization and with other public agencies. ⢠How can agencies best engage low-income households, and what strategies yield optimal transit and equity results for them? As more transit agencies are engaging directly in affordable housing, whether through joint development, disposal of surplus properties, and ETOD policies, addi- tional research is needed to inform the types of anti-displacement tools that have the greatest impact on helping existing residents and businesses remain and maintain affordable rents and home values. Best practices on how to partner and fund community-based organizations and non-profits to assist in this type of work are also needed. ⢠How can regional coordination improve to address the suburbanization of jobs and poverty? The changing dynamics of suburban communities and how best to coordinate and provide transit or other types of mobility service for low-income residents and neighborhoods with higher levels of affordable housing are challenges that many transit agencies and regions face. Developing partnerships and rethinking economic development approaches to include inten- tional transit and affordable housing strategies as part of regional and local business location and expansion efforts remain critical and largely unmet needs. Efforts in Kansas City, for example, show innovative ways to specifically coordinate transit with suburban job access and affordable housing. Large employers are stepping forward to provide affordable housing funding, yet transit access is not always sufficiently valued by employers, especially in con- sidering the cost and access challenges low-income workers may face. ⢠How can transportation considerations be elevated in regional and local housing plans and investments? On average, transportation and housing are the two largest annual household costs for American households. Yet consideration of each remains largely siloed. More can be done to align local housing and regional transportation plans to comply with federal fair housing requirements, increase suburban support for HCVs, and remove regulatory barriers to new housing construction. Research is needed to illustrate successful strategies for doing this type of coordination, and to show the impact of improved coordination with transit on housing goals. ⢠How are housing stakeholders helping to fund coordinated approaches? The survey and case examples uncovered an emerging trend whereby transit agencies are partnering with private funders, including CDFIs and banks, and major national employers to establish and admin- ister ETOD funds. Analysis of these pooled funds is needed to better understand how they can be structured, the role of transit agencies or other transportation partners like MPOs, their financial sustainability, and impacts on stabilizing transit-serviced neighborhoods and contributing to ridership. ⢠What role can state agencies play? Ways that state departments of transportation or state housing agencies are engaging to facilitate or impede coordination was not specifically explored in this research synthesis beyond cursory discussion in the case examples. State governmental organizations, funding, and statutory requirements play an important role in facilitating or limiting coordination. Areas for improved coordination between state housing agencies and departments of transportation remain unaddressed. This is particularly important for under- standing opportunities and challenges that exist in rural communities where state agencies play a critical funding role.
Toward a Research Agenda on Transit and Affordable Housing Coordination 67  5.3 Conclusion Significant silos exist within and between government that make the coordination of affordable housing and transit challenging. Coordination that is emerging often results from the growing housing affordability crisis playing out in regions large and small. Yet transit is also in crisis as agencies rebuild ridership and revenues. Stronger consideration and prioritization of the needs of low-income riders who live in afford- able neighborhoods and public housing can be seen as a transit strategy. Yet this requires new tools, mindsets, and partnerships. Tensions may exist between using transit real estate assets to generate revenue to support transit operations, versus to build affordable housing. Likewise, trade- offs exist between subsidizing affordable transit fares versus expanding transit service or increasing frequency and reliability. Future research is needed to examine these areas of potential conflict and provide empirical evidence and best practices that can help transit agencies, local communities, and elected officials make more informed decisions that balance transit and equity needs. This research synthesis focused specifically on affordable housing and low-income households, yet housing affordability and improved coordination between transit and housing more broadly remains an unmet need. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted and shifted the role of mobility in peopleâs lives. While much of the population was able to shift to remote work, many low-income workers are not employed in these jobs but instead continued to rely on transit. The work trip may become a less targeted focus for transportation planners; however, it is likely to remain a critical destina- tion for many who rely on transit. Yet travel needs of low-income riders go beyond accessing regional jobs. How well these households can access regional education, health care, civic insti- tutions, and other essential destinations is critical. Better understanding these linkages is not just a role for transportation practitioners. Those involved in housing must also engage to recognize the importance of location and transit access linkages.
