Evaluating Residential and Employment Change Associated with the Portland Streetcar: Case Study with Planning Implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urban areas are experiencing a renaissance in public transit investments. Although heavy-rail investments seem to have stalled, investments in light rail, bus rapid transit and streetcars are expanding across the US. Research into employment and residential responsiveness to these investments remains sparse, however. In this paper, the authors report employment and residential responsiveness to one form of investment: the Portland, Oregon, streetcar during the 2000s serving Central Portland (the downtown and nearby areas). They find that within one-quarter mile of the streetcar alignment nearly 12,000 jobs may have been displaced by the addition of nearly 13,000 residents and about 9,400 new residential units. Within the next quarter mile jobs increased by more than 2,000 while population grew by about 3,000 and nearly 2,000 new residential units were added. Within the full half-mile distance jobs fell by nearly 9,000 but over the balance of Central Portland more than 10,000 jobs were created indicating jobs were displaced perhaps throughout other parts of Central Portland. But within the same half mile area population increased by nearly 13,000 or about a fifth of Multnomah County’s growth (the Portland metropolitan statistical area’s central county) and accounting for essentially all of Central Portland’s residential growth. While master land use planning for much of the Portland streetcar alignment seems to favor new residential over nonresidential development, its effectiveness has been demonstrated by the market’s responsiveness. The authors surmise that streetcars may facilitate residential redevelopment of existing developed urbanized areas though not necessarily job formation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".