Description

Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) is a cornerstone of California’s climate and land use policy, promising walkable, compact neighborhoods near high-quality transit. However, these benefits are not always distributed equitably. This study introduces a scalable framework for identifying and scoring Affordable Transit-Oriented Development (A-TOD) across the state’s High-Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs). The goal is to equip policymakers, planners, and housing agencies with tools to evaluate station areas based on their physical form, affordability, and equity outcomes. Using a 1.5-mile network-based pedestrian buffer around over 66,000 transit stations, the research team developed a three-stage clustering and scoring system. Station areas were classified by built environment characteristics, modeled housing and transportation cost burdens, and social vulnerability indicators, including minority population concentration. Each station received a composite raw score (0.5 to 6), which was normalized to a 0–100 scale to create an accessible equity index. Key findings reveal that while most HQTA stations are nominally affordable, nearly all are located in historically marginalized or currently vulnerable communities. High-scoring station areas tend to cluster in dense urban cores such as Los Angeles, Oakland, and Sacramento, while lower scores are concentrated in exurban and auto-oriented regions such as the Inland Empire and northern San Diego. These insights underscore the need for policy interventions that align transit investments with affordability and racial equity. The resulting typology and web-based equity map provide a powerful planning tool for guiding equitable development, CEQA streamlining, and preserving transit-oriented housing across California.

Publication Date

1-2026

Publication Type

Report

Topic

Planning and Policy, Transit and Passenger Rail

Digital Object Identifier

10.31979/mti.2026.2463

MTI Project

2463

Keywords

Transit oriented development, Geographic information systems, City planning, Low-income groups, Public transit

Disciplines

Social Policy | Social Welfare | Transportation

Download

Additional files available below

Share

COinS