Editing Transit-oriented development (section)

==Description==
[[File:Transit Oriented Development.png|thumb|left|Transit Oriented Development]]

Many of the [[new town]]s created after [[World War II]] in [[Japan]], [[Sweden]], and [[France]] have many of the characteristics of TOD communities. In a sense, nearly all communities built on [[Land reclamation|reclaimed land]] in the [[Netherlands]] or as [[exurban]] developments in [[Denmark]] have had the local equivalent of TOD principles integrated in their planning, including the promotion of [[bicycle]]s for local use.

In the United States, a half-mile-radius circle has become the de facto standard for rail-transit catchment areas for TODs. A half mile (800 m) corresponds to the distance someone can walk in 10 minutes at {{Convert|3|mph|abbr=on}} and is a common estimate for the distance people will walk to get to a rail station. The half-mile ring is a little more than {{Convert|500|acres|km2|abbr=on}} in size.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.uctc.net/access/42/access42_halfmiletods.shtml|title=Is a Half-Mile Circle the Right Standard for TODs?|last1=Guerra|first1=Erick|last2=Cervero|first2=Robert|author-link2=Robert Cervero|work=ACCESS, [[University of California, Berkeley]]|date=Spring 2013|number=42|access-date=June 7, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130804141425/http://www.uctc.net/access/42/access42_halfmiletods.shtml|archive-date=August 4, 2013|url-status=dead|df=mdy-all}}</ref>

Transit-oriented development is sometimes distinguished by some planning officials from "[[transit-proximate development]]" because it contains specific features that are designed to encourage public transport use and differentiate the development from [[urban sprawl]]. A few examples of these features include mixed-use development that will use transit at all times of day, excellent [[pedestrian facilities]] such as high quality [[pedestrian crossing]]s, narrow streets, and tapering of buildings as they become more distant from the public transport node. Another key feature of transit-oriented development that differentiates it from "transit-proximate development" is reduced amounts of [[parking]] for personal vehicles.

Transit-oriented development has many benefits including but not limited to:
* Easy access to transit, making it easy to get around without a car.
* Dense, due to TODs being made for getting around transportation, other than private vehicles, allowing access to stores and private business.
* Improved access to jobs and city services.
* Increased population near transit stops, such as a commuter rail stop, which ultimately increases transit ridership across the board.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Mudigonda|first1=Sandeep|last2=Ozbay|first2=Kaan|last3=Ozturk|first3=Ozgur|last4=Iyer|first4=Shrisan|last5=Noland|first5=Robert B.|date=2014-01-01|title=Quantifying Transportation Benefits of Transit-Oriented Development in New Jersey|url=https://doi.org/10.3141/2417-12|journal=Transportation Research Record|language=en|volume=2417|issue=1|pages=111–120|doi=10.3141/2417-12|s2cid=110775275|issn=0361-1981|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

Opponents of compact, or transit oriented development typically argue that Americans, and persons throughout the world, prefer low-density living, and that any policies that encourage compact development will result in substantial [[utility]] decreases and hence large social welfare costs.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Moore|first1=Adrian.T.|last2=Staley|first2=Samuel.R.|last3=Poole|first3=Robert.W.|title=The role of VMT reduction in meeting climate change policy goals|journal=Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice |date=2010|volume=44|issue=8|pages=565–574|doi=10.1016/j.tra.2010.03.012|bibcode=2010TRPA...44..565M }}</ref> Proponents of compact development argue that there are large, often unmeasured benefits of compact development<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Winkelman|first1=S.|last2=Bishins|first2=A.|title=Planning for economic and environmental resilience|journal=Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice|date=2010|volume=44|issue=8|pages=575–586|doi=10.1016/j.tra.2010.03.011|bibcode=2010TRPA...44..575W }}</ref> or that the American preference for low-density living is a misinterpretation made possible in part by substantial local government interference in the land market.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Levine|first1=Jonathan|title=Markets and Choices in Transportation and Metropolitan Land Use|date=2006|publisher=Resources for the Future|location=Washington|isbn=978-1933115153}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Boarnet|first1=Marlon|title=A Broader Context for Land Use and Travel Behavior, and a Research Agenda|journal=Journal of the American Planning Association|date=Summer 2011|volume=77|issue=3|pages=197–213|doi=10.1080/01944363.2011.593483|s2cid=153346863}}</ref>