GHG Reduction Through TOD: Why It's (Almost) Illegal

For only $180, get a full year of unrestricted access to APA's extensive learning library. Kickstart your journey by subscribing to Passport, then take the next step by enrolling in the courses that pique your interest.

Sign in for Options

Certification Maintenance

CM | 1
L | 1

Learning Outcomes

  • Explain the legislative rationale for laws that promote TOD and how TOD, combined with frequent all-day transit, can reduce GHG emissions and increase equity.
  • Outline why land use regulations make TOD difficult and why attempts throughout California to make TOD more feasible have not resulted in many TOD projects.
  • Consider ways that land use regulations could be changed to achieve better TOD outcomes.

More Course Details

We know that good transit-oriented development (TOD) will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, help the environment, and promote equity; there are examples in California and across the United States. Many metropolitan areas have adopted TOD as a major tool in their climate action plans. California passed SB 375 almost a decade ago and has streamlined provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to promote TOD. Nevertheless, TOD remains difficult to entitle.

Presenters are an engineer-turned-transit planner and an architect-turned-land-use-attorney who entitles development projects and litigates land use issues, with a focus on CEQA. They combine planning theory with legal reality, outlining how transit and TOD should work and discussing what works — or doesn’t — under California's environmental regulations. They hypothesize future changes the state could make to eliminate more regulatory barriers that drive up the cost and complexity of building near transit.