Homes on Track: Connecticut — Part Two

The analysis identifies 19 locations where new investments and land use changes could unlock TOC potential in the near- term. Additional catalytic investments and regulatory changes could unlock potential in another 21 locations in the mid-term.

To conduct the TOC classification system, RPA examined all 63 rail and bus rapid transit stations in Connecticut served by Metro-North Railroad (MNR), CTrail, Amtrak, and CTfastrak, as well as the characteristics of neighborhoods within a half-mile radius of each station. In this assessment, we describe the distribution of built form and transportation attributes per station across all of Connecticut’s Regional Councils of Government (COGs), using the most recent data available as of 2025 Two of those regions, Northwest Hills and Northeast CT, are not served by rail or bus rapid transit and therefore excluded from this analysis.

The classification system is based on analysis across five information categories:

• Mobility, which focuses on jobs accessible via transit and walk time from stations (accessibility isochrones)

• Built form, which includes residential density and land use mix

• Environment, which encompasses sewer infrastructure and flood risk areas

• Underutilized land, which uses land cover and vacant land classifications to identify property with infill development potential

• Growth rate, which uses changes in housing stock from the past decades to highlight where growth is already taking place

Mobility

The metrics in this section focus on walking accessibility, job location, and transit service, providing insight into the robustness of the public transportation system, safer pedestrian movement, and reduced car dependency, essential components of successful TOC. To study these components, we examined a set of indicators, including walk time to rail stations and transit access to jobs.

Access to employment via various transit modes—including a combination of walking, bus, and train—highlights Connecticut’s multiple job centers rather than travel time to Manhattan’s Central Business District (CBD). In Connecticut, the stations that provide the best access to jobs are primarily located near established regional employment centers such as Hartford, New Haven, Bridgeport, and Stamford.

Multimodal job accessibility, assuming this one-hour travel time, is most robust in the Capitol Region, where stations average 278,000 accessible jobs, and CTfastrak BRT stops average 315,000. South Central CT follows with an average of 98,000 jobs, while regions like Western CT, Greater Bridgeport (also referred to as MetroCOG), and the Naugatuck Valley show a varied distribution averaging between 27,800 and 87,500 jobs. In contrast, Southeastern CT and the Lower CT River Valley have the lowest regional accessibility, with averages of roughly 11,300 and 11,700 jobs, respectively.

Our analysis also factored in the average walking time to reach each station from any point within a half-mile radius of it. This walk time largely depends on the street network configuration and the size of the neighborhood blocks surrounding each station. As a result, average walking times are shorter in places with smaller blocks and more uniform grid patterns and longer in places with suburban dead-end roads (also known as cul-de-sac streets).

Walking accessibility is strongest in the Capitol Region, South Central, and Western CT COGs, which have the most stations with walk times below 8.5 minutes (five, four, and three stations, respectively). However, Western CT also shows significant internal variation, containing seven stations where average walk times exceed 10.5 minutes. Some of the most walkable stations statewide include Mystic, Windsor, Riverside, and Wallingford, all averaging approximately 7.6 minutes.

Built Form

The intensity and composition of land use in a given area indicate the likely scale and programming of potential future development. Places with a greater land-use mix and moderate-to-higher residential densities are generally better suited for near-term TOC opportunities.

Residential densities near transit are generally low, with Stamford in Western CT being the state’s densest at 15 dwelling units per acre (DU/acre). While Western CT has the largest number of stations, the majority fall into moderate (10 stations) or low (9 stations) density categories. The Capitol Region COG contains the highest concentration of relatively high-density stations (five), defined as 5 DU/acre or more, whereas the Lower CT River Valley exclusively features relatively low-density stations at 2 DU/acre or less.

Land use diversity, measured by the Shannon Index, is most prominent in Greater Bridgeport, where 60% of stations have high diversity, and in Southeastern CT, where all stations are highly diverse. The Capitol Region and South Central CT exhibit strong mixed-use patterns, with nearly 90% of their stations categorized as high- or moderate-diversity. Conversely, Western CT has the highest share of low-diversity stations (39%), and all stations in the Lower CT River Valley fall into the moderate- or low-diversity categories.

Density and Job Access

The analysis of the relationship between residential density and job accessibility in Connecticut highlights the state’s polycentric pattern, with multiple established downtowns and urban areas—rather than a single dominant center—serving as regional employment hubs. While there is a moderate correlation between residential density and job access across the state, variations among COGs also indicate several distributed employment centers.

Notably, the Capitol Region stands out for its exceptionally high job accessibility, with estimates ranging from 200,000 to 400,000 jobs reachable within an hour or less, and residential densities ranging from 1 to 8 DU/Acre. Job access is largely attributed to the introduction of the CTfastrak bus rapid transit system a decade ago, which significantly enhanced connectivity. Relative to the number of accessible jobs, the residential densities along the CTfastrak corridor are modest compared to other centers, such as Stamford and New Haven, which have densities of 15 and 9 units per acre, respectively. This suggests that there is still ample opportunity to create more TOCs along the corridor through infill development.

On the other hand, Western Connecticut shows a wide range of densities and a stronger relationship between job accessibility and residential density. Stamford, in particular, emerges as the densest station area in the state, with 15 dwelling units per acre (DU/Acre).

South Central Connecticut also shows a relatively positive correlation, with stations typically having residential densities ranging from 1 to 9 DU/Acre and providing access to 50,000 to 200,000 jobs. In contrast, regions such as the Naugatuck Valley and the Lower Connecticut River Valley are positioned towards the lower end of both scales. The Lower Connecticut River Valley is particularly noteworthy for having the lowest residential densities, with figures below 2 DU/Acre, and the state’s lowest job accessibility, at around 11,700 jobs.

Environment

This category focuses on climate-related risks, such as flooding, and the environmental impacts of insufficient wastewater treatment capacity. Indicators such as access to sewer infrastructure and areas at risk in the FEMA 100-year floodplain are considered in the study to assess potential environmental impacts.

Sewer connectivity, essential for increased density, is highly accessible in 51 of the state’s 63 station areas. In this analysis, RPA estimated the share of the housing stock served by a sewer system for each station area. While this does not measure individual system capacity, it provides an indication of existing sewer infrastructure in a given area. The Capitol Region, Naugatuck Valley, Greater Bridgeport, and Southeastern CT all maintain high access (i.e. 75% or more of the station area has sewer access) across 100% of their stations. This suggests that a significant infrastructure gap exists in the Lower CT River Valley, which has no stations with high sewer access, while Western CT and South Central CT show mixed levels of connectivity, particularly along branch lines and coastal areas.

The FEMA 100-year floodplain comprises areas that are susceptible to both coastal and riverine flooding, with a 1% chance of flooding in any given year. Flood risk varies widely by geography. In South Central CT and Southeastern CT, 33% and 50% of their stations, respectively, face high exposure, defined as over 100 acres in the floodplain. In the Naugatuck Valley, risk is notably low, with two-thirds of the stations having minimal acreage exposed and no high-risk stations. Western CT and the Capitol Region also show relatively low environmental risk, with only 13% of their stations categorized as highly exposed.

Potential Development

We conducted an analysis of historical housing growth alongside the availability of underutilized land. This examination provided valuable insights into market demand and development opportunities in station areas.

Stations in Connecticut are located near approximately 15,150 acres of underutilized land, which is roughly the size of New Haven. To identify areas with high development potential, we examined indicators such as unbuilt lots and vacant land. A screening process was implemented to exclude natural areas, parkland, cemeteries, and irregularly shaped or small lots that are difficult to develop.

Unbuilt lot cover, used for identifying potential for infill development, is highest in Western CT, where all 23 stations are classified as having high or moderate unbuilt area. Similarly, all stations in the Lower CT River Valley have high unbuilt lot cover. In the Naugatuck Valley and South Central CT, the majority of stations (five and nine, respectively) also show high or moderate potential for infill, highlighting significant opportunities to redevelop existing underutilized parcels.

Vacant land, defined as undeveloped parcels with no use, was also considered in assessing the development potential of station areas. The Naugatuck Valley leads the state in ground-up development potential, with 67% of its stations classified as having high amounts of vacant land, averaging 21 acres per station. This is significantly higher than in Greater Bridgeport, where only 20% of stations fall into the high-vacant-land category. Most other regions exhibit a moderate distribution of undeveloped parcels, offering varied opportunities for new transit-oriented development.

Recent housing growth can indicate potential market demand in station areas. Station areas in Southeastern CT had the highest average growth rate at 15.9%, followed by Western CT at 13.6%. The Capitol Region stations experienced the slowest expansion, at 8.4%, while Greater Bridgeport, the Naugatuck Valley, and the Lower CT River Valley all saw similar, moderate housing growth rates of 10.2% to 11.4%. South Central CT followed closely behind Western CT with a 12.7% growth rate.

TOC Types

RPA developed a data-driven framework that classifies and visualizes the many aspects of land use and transportation interactions in the state’s rail and bus rapid transit station areas. After analyzing the existing conditions of these station areas for TOC suitability, RPA created a scoring system to estimate opportunity levels by location.

RPA identified 19 locations where investments and new regulations could unlock TOC potential in the near term. Additional catalytic investments and regulatory changes could unlock potential for another 21 locations in the mid-term. The classification system is meant to inform and support TOC-related policy decisions in two ways:

• Investments: Inform the level of planning support and infrastructure funding needed to make each station area fully transit-oriented. Classifying stations can help guide redevelopment decisions, identify programs to pursue, funding sources to prioritize, and determine the timing and scale of those investments.

• Regulations: Identify places where more flexible land-use regulations and/or streamlined procedures would enable more housing near transit. Many locations have appropriate physical and transportation-related characteristics to support TOC, but their potential is severely limited by restrictive regulations. This approach can help identify places where relief from land use and environmental review procedures, including zoning, could unlock development potential.

The primary aim of most TOC strategies should be to transform areas through programmatic investments and regulatory changes, creating thriving districts with greater availability of homes and improved access to amenities and employment opportunities. To be truly effective, regulatory changes and investments should generally be targeted toward transit communities with some existing local strengths that can support TOC. Other areas that lack such strengths can still benefit from investments and long-term plans for TOC. However, in such cases, investments must be carefully targeted and monitored to ensure their full value is captured over time.

By evaluating the built form, mobility, infrastructure, and other characteristics of transit communities, we can identify where and what resources to allocate, and where regulatory reforms are needed to achieve the greatest impact. Based on this, RPA defined TOC Types in categories that range from near-term to longer-term opportunities:

• Near-Term: These represent the most ​“TOC-ready” commuter rail and bus rapid transit station areas in the state. Most of these stations are concentrated in metropolitan hubs, with Western CT holding the most (seven stations) and the Capitol Region following with five. These locations already have most of the physical and mobility attributes that influence ridership and enable TOCs. At the same time, stations in this category tend to be surrounded by significant amounts of underutilized land, presenting infill opportunities. The combination of relatively strong transit-supportive characteristics and meaningful development potential is what distinguishes these station areas as near-term TOC opportunities. Some of these locations need regulatory relief to enable their full potential. Others might be transforming more slowly and could benefit from proactive measures to prime development activity and encourage walkable neighborhoods.

• Mid-Term: In most cases, these locations could be described as auto-oriented downtowns and village centers. Other locations in this category, typically neighborhoods in urban areas, might have the right physical attributes to support TOCs but lack sufficient underutilized land for infill. These areas offer a foundation for development but need more substantial public-sector support, such as more reliable and expanded transit service and targeted infrastructure investments (e.g., sidewalks or last-mile transit connections), to fully catalyze private investment.

• Long-Term: Most stations in this category could be described as auto-oriented commercial nodes, rural branch-line stops, or park-and-ride stations. While these areas tend to have significant amounts of underutilized land, they lack other key physical and mobility features needed for successful TOCs. It is the combination of relatively limited transit-supportive characteristics and lower overall TOC readiness that places these station areas in the long-term opportunity category. Consequently, most could be considered low-priority areas for investment and regulatory changes. However, this does not mean that efforts should not be advanced; investments and long-term plans can be made, but they need to be carefully targeted and monitored to capture their full value in the future.

The variables examined in this report can help identify areas most suited for catalytic changes through regulatory reforms and investments. By modeling urban form, mobility, environmental factors, and characteristics of underutilized land, the TOC Types capture growth potential and transit-supportiveness. However, these types are only indicative of TOC potential based on relative physical, transportation, and potential development characteristics. The scores reflect the relative ranking of station areas within Connecticut rather than adherence to fixed TOD best practices or planning benchmarks. Each station area is unique, and some may be more or less primed for development than the types suggest based on local factors such as previous or ongoing planning activity, strong developer interest, or community and political consensus.

A total of 19 stations in Connecticut are classified as having near-term TOC opportunities. The largest cluster is in Western CT, where seven stations show strong transit-supportive conditions along the southwestern rail corridor—primarily along Metro-North’s New Haven Line, and two stations on the Danbury Branch Line. Five near-term stations are located in the Capitol Region, including four along the CTfastrak bus rapid transit corridor. South Central CT and the Naugatuck Valley each contain three near-term stations: New Haven Union Station, New Haven State Street, and Wallingford in South Central Connecticut, and Ansonia, Beacon Falls, and Seymour in the Naugatuck Valley. Greater Bridgeport has one near-term opportunity at Fairfield–Black Rock.

There are an additional 21 stations in Connecticut classified as having mid-term TOC opportunities. These stations are more evenly distributed throughout the state, with a significant presence in both urbanized corridors and suburban areas. The Capitol Region has the largest number of mid-term stations (seven), followed by Western CT (five) and South Central CT (four). In the Naugatuck Valley, Derby–Shelton and Waterbury are classified as mid-term opportunities. Greater Bridgeport, the Lower Connecticut River Valley, and Southeastern CT each have one mid-term station. An additional 23 stations are classified as long-term opportunities, with more than half located along the coastline.

The distribution of TOC types throughout Connecticut reflects the state’s multiple regional centers and downtowns. Rather than a single dominant center, Connecticut follows a polycentric pattern with multiple long-established downtowns and urban areas that function as employment hubs and regional anchors. Near-term TOC opportunities are concentrated around these areas, particularly near the state’s largest cities, including Stamford, Hartford, New Haven, Norwalk, Danbury, and Waterbury. In these locations, existing density, employment concentrations, and multimodal connections provide strong conditions for transit-oriented growth. At the same time, stations across the state span the full range of types, indicating that TOC potential exists in both larger cities and smaller communities.

This pattern differs from the findings in RPA’s 2024 Homes on Track report, which examined commuter rail stations within the New York and New Jersey metropolitan region. In that analysis, the distribution of TOC types followed a largely concentric pattern based on proximity to New York City’s central business district. When the same methodology was adapted to Connecticut’s context, development anchors with near-term opportunities emerged across a broader, more diverse geography. These anchors correspond to the state’s oldest and most established urbanized areas.

Scoring System: Transit Orientation and Potential Development

The TOC Types classify transit communities based on two key variables: relative transit orientation and potential development. These variables were chosen to capture growth potential and transit supportiveness through modeling urban form, mobility, environment, and underutilized land characteristics. Together, these two dimensions allow station areas to be evaluated based on both their transit-supportive built environment and their capacity for future development.

Transit Orientation

The Transit Orientation Score indicates how supportive the surrounding physical environment is for transit-supportive uses, including density, mix of uses, mobility, and environmental characteristics. The transit orientation measure is a composite of the following elements describing a station’s TOD-supportive characteristics:

• Built Form: Includes residential density (number of dwelling units per acre on parcels currently used for residential purposes) and land use diversity (mix of uses based on the acreage of different use classifications).

• Mobility: Includes the number of jobs available within a 60-minute commute (using intermodal forms of transit) and walking time to the station (based on grid network configuration and size of neighborhood blocks).

• Environment: Factors include the number of acres of land affected by the FEMA 100-year floodplain and the number of households with access to sewer infrastructure.

The Transit Orientation Score ranges from low (transit-adjacent) to moderate (transit-related) to high (transit-oriented).

The state’s highest concentration of transit-oriented stations is in the Capitol Region, where 60% of its stations scored ​“high,” and none scored ​“low”. This is largely driven by high job accessibility, relatively compact development patterns, and supportive environmental infrastructure, including widespread sewer access and limited floodplain exposure. Despite these advantages, densities around many stations remain modest compared with the state’s other employment centers, like Stamford and New Haven. The stations along the CTfastrak corridor were introduced only a decade ago, while Connecticut’s rail network has supported station-area development for decades.

Western CT shows a more polarized pattern. Stations in major urban centers along the New Haven Line rank among the most transit-oriented in the state. However, nearly 35% of the region’s stations—primarily on branch lines—fall into the ​“low” category due to low residential density, limited land-use diversity, and more limited access to sewer infrastructure. Greater Bridgeport, Naugatuck Valley, and South Central CT in particular, all maintain strong transit orientation scores, with most stations falling into the ​“moderate” or ​“high” categories. Southeastern CT’s two stations rank as ​“moderate.”

The Lower CT River Valley faces the most significant physical constraints. All three stations in the region receive ​“low” scores, reflecting limited residential density, job accessibility, sewer access, and floodplain protection. Together, these conditions limit transit’s potential to support more intensive development in these communities.

Potential Development

The Potential Development Score measures growth potential based on the amount of undeveloped land and recent growth patterns. Area and dimensional lot characteristics largely define the future land-use program for new development, including the types of development, infill strategies, and urban design features. This score also factors in changes in the number of residential units over the last 30 years to indicate potential market demand.

• Underutilized land: Includes acres of parcels classified as vacant land and acres of unbuilt lot area.

• Growth Rates: Indicate potential market demand based on changes in residential units from 1990 to 2019.

The Potential Development Score ranges from low (mostly built out) to medium (moderate infill options) to high (vacant land and significant infill opportunities).

Relative to its size, the Naugatuck Valley shows significant growth potential, with two-thirds of its stations receiving ​“high” potential development scores. With the right investments, this corridor is highly primed for catalytic, ground-up development on vacant or underutilized parcels. 56% of South Central CT’s stations receive ​“high” scores, and none fall into the ​“low” category. The region offers a mix of vacant land and infill opportunities, making it well-positioned for mid-term transit-oriented growth.

20% of the Capitol Region’s station areas receive ​“high” potential development scores. While the region has significant underutilized land and vacant acreage, its potential development scores are moderated by slower recent growth relative to coastal markets. There is a significant opportunity to grow, given that the stations in the Capitol Region offer some of the highest job accessibility in the state. Greater Bridgeport shows a similar share of high-potential stations, with 20% receiving ​“high” potential development scores. Western CT has a broader mix of conditions, with 35% of stations receiving ​“high” potential development scores. In many cases, this opportunity lies less in large vacant parcels and more in underutilized portions of existing lots, suggesting potential for infill development and conversions of parking or other low-intensity uses.

Southeastern CT and the Lower CT River Valley both offer significant growth capacity, with 50% and 67% of stations receiving ​“high” potential development scores, respectively. Despite the high availability of underutilized land in the Lower CT River Valley, a lack of supportive infrastructure and transit-oriented built form acts as a bottleneck for TOC readiness.

Merging the Two Scores

While some station areas have high development potential and high transit orientation scores, others may be strong on one measure but moderate or limited on the other. The performance of each transit station area against these measures has important implications for the scope of investments and regulatory reforms intended to promote TOD.

The transit orientation and potential development scores were calculated by ranking station areas relative to one another statewide. RPA then plotted the two scores on a matrix, with the potential development score on the horizontal axis and the transit orientation score on the vertical axis, and divided the results into three equal intervals, representing high, moderate, and low scores (tertiles). Based on their relative positions in the matrix, stations were grouped into TOC opportunity categories ranging from near-term to long-term.

While the current analysis provides a foundational understanding of station area characteristics, several critical factors should be addressed to further refine future planning and policy strategies. Moving forward, it is essential to move beyond historical growth trends by incorporating alternative population growth projections that reflect evolving market conditions and recent policy shifts. Additionally, expanding the scope of commute time constraints beyond the 60-minute threshold will offer a more nuanced view of regional job access, particularly for Western Connecticut’s connection to Manhattan. To ensure equitable outcomes, future research must evaluate socioeconomic vulnerability and displacement risk alongside the potential for physical development. Finally, addressing technical barriers—specifically sewer infrastructure capacities and the untapped brownfield redevelopment potential in former industrial corridors—will be vital to unlocking the state’s full housing and economic capacity.

These themes should be considered for further analysis:

Population Growth Projections
This analysis relies on a linear projection based on historical Census data from 1990 to 2019, assuming that past growth rates will continue over the next 30 years. This approach may understate future population growth and housing demand in Connecticut, particularly in communities where restrictive zoning historically constrained residential development. Recent policy changes, evolving market conditions, and climate migration patterns may alter long-term growth trajectories in ways that are not reflected in pre-2020 trends. Future analysis could incorporate alternative forecasting methods, including scenario-based population projections and updated demographic data, to better capture the potential effects of changing development patterns and housing policy reforms on future growth.

Commute Time Constraints and Access to Manhattan’s Central Business District
This analysis was limited to travel times under 60 minutes. As a result, it does not fully capture access to employment in Manhattan’s Central Business District (CBD), particularly in Western Connecticut. Network constraints, including station area walkability and service headways, limit the ability to reach the CBD within 60 minutes. Expanding the analysis to include 90-minute commutes and beyond could provide a more comprehensive understanding of regional job access and likely increase the ranking of stations in Western Connecticut.

Socioeconomic Vulnerability and Displacement Risk
This analysis does not evaluate the socioeconomic characteristics of station areas or the potential for displacement associated with development. A complementary analysis examining income levels, housing cost burden, and demographic trends could help identify communities that are both well-positioned for growth and vulnerable to rising land values. This would support more targeted policy interventions, including tenant protections and affordability strategies, to ensure that TOC benefits are equitably distributed.

Sewer Infrastructure Constraints
In some corridors, particularly along Shore Line East, development potential is limited due to sewer infrastructure constraints. In this analysis, RPA estimated the share of the housing stock served by a sewer system for each station area. While this does not measure individual system treatment capacity, it provides an indication of existing infrastructure in a given area. Future analysis could estimate actual sewer treatment capacity and the additional housing that could be unlocked through sewer expansion, helping to clarify the potential return on infrastructure investments and inform state prioritization of capital funding.

Brownfield Redevelopment Potential
In former industrial areas such as the Naugatuck Valley, brownfields pose both constraints and opportunities for TOCs. A targeted analysis could identify the extent of brownfield sites, estimate remediation costs, and evaluate their feasibility for near-term redevelopment. This would help align environmental remediation efforts with housing and economic development goals.