Findings

Light Rail Transit Station Impacts (on Average)

Residential Mobility; Neighborhood Change

  • Does not disrupt the neighborhood income profile of loan applicants. Delmelle et al. (2020a)
  • Nationally, racial composition is unlikely to be impacted by the introduction of an LRT station. Nilsson & Delmelle (2018)
  • Density increases in some affluent neighborhoods. Nilsson & Delmelle (2018)
  • Does not impact income diversity. Nilsson & Delmelle (2020a)
  • Does not impact income segregation. Nilsson & Delmelle (2020a)
  • Generally, impoverished neighborhoods near LRT stations are more likely to gentrify. Nilsson & Delmelle (2018)
    • Domino effect of middle to higher income residents and developers coming to light-rail adjacent neighborhoods and buying up homes at lower price points, renovating, and flipping them. Once it occurs to a few homes, it spreads quickly through the neighborhood.
    • Light rail is a selling point (advertised amenity) for new luxury apartment complexes even though most new residents own cars. Schuch & Mushipe (2021)
  • Perceived to have a positive impact on neighborhoods. Nilsson et al. (2020)
  • Middle to high-income earning homeowners more likely to move to neighborhoods of higher socioeconomic status. Nilsson & Delmelle (2020b)
  • While neighborhood changes associated with light rail investment are typically viewed positively by planners, developers, and local media, responses are mixed among residents. Schuch & Mushipe (2021)
    • Residents’ perspectives are more focused on the individual or neighborhood scale compared to developers and transit/planning officials who tended to have a more macro-level perspective, seeing benefits for the city as a whole.
    • Not all residents felt like their voices were heard in the decision-making process.
  • Rezoning areas surrounding the stations from industrial to TOD means attracting higher density, mixed-use development. Schuch & Mushipe (2021)
  • Light rail considered as much or more about economic development as/than transportation. Schuch & Mushipe (2021)

Displacement

  • Does not disproportionately displace low-income residents on average. Delmelle & Nilsson (2020)
    • That said, there are widespread concerns among residents living along the Charlotte rail as rents and property taxes increase (affecting mostly lower and fixed-income residents). Displacement is happening anecdotally but it’s still statistically difficult to quantify, perhaps because it happens at smaller scales (e.g. at the block level rather than the census tract level) and not uniformly across neighborhoods.
    • Increasing housing prices across the metropolitan area make it difficult to pinpoint the exact influence of the light rail on displacement.
    • Homeowners hassled by developers to sell their homes at sub-market rates, which can be tempting to those in need of cash. However, with rising housing prices, their options for buying elsewhere is limited.
    • Potential for indirect displacement as long-term residents feel like the new residential and commercial development is not built for them and they lose a sense of belonging. Schuch & Mushipe (2021)
  • Does not increase eviction rates on average. Delmelle et al. (2020b)
  • Surveyed residents are neither more nor less likely to move on average. Nilsson et al. (2020)
  • Developers do not see current city incentives as desirable enough to build affordable housing and most of the land is bought up so the city cannot use it to build affordable housing. “NIMBY” sentiments also hinder affordable housing. Schuch & Mushipe (2021)

Conclusions

Delmelle & Nilsson (2020) found that, on average, throughout the United States, residents do not have statistically different chances of leaving a neighborhood with a new transit line than other neighborhoods without a transit line. These results were consistent across time, residential typology, and geography. Specifically, low-income residents do not leave new transit areas at a disproportionate rate, on average.

Delmelle et al. (2020a) examine the effect of the announcements of new LRT stations on income and racial compositions of neighborhoods through loan application data. Their work postulates new transit line announcements have no impact on the income profile of new applicants in LRT neighborhoods. White resident loan applications disproportionately increased with higher walkability neighborhood characteristics. White to black ratios increase modifying racial composition after the development of new LRT stations.

Delmelle et al. (2020b) found that eviction rates did not increase near new LRT stations in Newark, Sand Diego, Seattle, and St. Louis when compared to other gentrifying neighborhoods without LRT stations.

Nilsson & Delmelle (2018) used neighborhood classes identified through the clustering process on the data. Overall, LRT stations seldom altered the fundamental neighborhood characteristics. However, they found that low-income neighborhoods are more likely to experience gentrification. Affluent neighborhoods increase in density but experience little to no change in other characteristics. Socioeconomic ascent following gentrification has did not appear to significantly alter the racial composition in the neighborhood.

Nilsson & Delmelle (2020a) examined 11 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) between 200 and 2005 and found no statistical evidence that new LRT stations impact neighborhood-level income diversity. After examining 50 MSAs, the study did not find statistical evidence that new LRT stations affect income segregation.

Nilsson & Delmelle (2020b) provide a comprehensive study of transit-induced migration over 43 years. Homeowners in new transit areas are more likely to move to more affluent neighborhoods. Low-income residents are equally likely to stay in the same neighborhood or move to another neighborhood of similar socioeconomic characteristics if the transit system covers a larger area of the neighborhood. If a small portion of the neighborhood is covered by the rail service, low-income residents may move to more impoverished areas after LRT station development.

Nilsson et al. (2020) gathered survey data from residents in Charlotte neighborhoods concerning the LRT stations. Residents included many factors that impact their property values including the LRT presence. However, the data suggest that the presence of LRT stations does not increase inclinations to move out of transit areas. On average, residents see the LRT presence as having a positive impact on their neighborhood.

From their Charlotte case study, Schuch & Mushipe (2021) found that light rail investments and associated neighborhood changes are typically viewed positively by planners, developers, and local media but have received mixed responses from residents. These concerns revolve around increases in rent and property taxes and changes in neighborhood feel. Change is considered positive and part of life for some, but others fear losing history and belonging.

Drawing on focus group and survey data with 514 residents in light rail adjacent neighborhoods, Schuch & Nilsson (2021) concluded that residents shared mostly positive experiences and perceptions of the rail. Car access, gender, age, and proximity to downtown and a station influence rail use, though most respondents still rely heavily on their car. Barriers to accessing stations included a lack of sidewalks and bus connectivity. Some of the long-term African American residents felt the rail was not built for them but rather for newer and younger residents.

In a forthcoming paper, Schuch & Mushipe share how community conversations about the Charlotte light rail extension acted as an entry point for residents to bring up a range of issues they are dealing with such as housing cost, economic and educational opportunities, safety, government distrust, and feeling left-out in a growing and changing city. On one hand, this demonstrates how the light rail is connected to a range of other issues. On the other hand, the rail acted as a symbolic and physical infrastructure through which residents could channel their frustration of not feeling included in the city’s growth, development, and change.