Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Figure 1-Del Mar Station, a transit-oriented development located on the southern edge of downtown Pasadena, California [source:www.intransitionmag.org]
Submitted by:
Harshal Wagle
6747332
Index :
1. Transit Oriented Development: Historical Context.
2. Role of Urban Design in Transit Oriented Development
3. Defining the urban design factors for TOD
4. Background: Footscary Railway station, Melbourne, Australia
5. Critical Evaluation of Footscary-Station Area Development
6. Conclusion
7. References
8. Appendix
However in the following years, due to the increase in use of automobile and the
distance between work and residence, most of the cities lost these public realms
that were created due to the development oriented transit. Roads, motorway
became more dominant and transformed into an auto-dependent development.
1.2- Auto-Oriented Transit
Post-World War II saw a significant decline in the transit use and public transit was
limited to the buses as a primary mode. Bus systems were subservient to the
automobile, using the same streets and experiencing the same congestion. In the
majority of cases bus service had less influence on land-use patterns than a fixed-rail
transit and transit became a last resort rather as opposed to a reliable transportation
option tied to development(Dena Belzar June 2002)
In the subsequent years the congestion increased and as a result new transit
systems were envisioned and built. Rapid transit systems were mainly the resultant of
this system. This system was entirely dependent on automobile, it was assumed that
most of the people would drive to suburban station, and hence stations were
considered as nodes without any direct connections into the surrounding. This public
realm was often neglected due to vast presence of the surface parking or parking
buildings that created disconnect between the neighbourhood and the station. But
the entire fundamental of this auto
oriented transit was to consider
automobile as the primary source of
movement and rail transit (public transit)
as secondary. The significant drawbacks
which this system prevails in spite of its
commercial success are that, it created
a fragmented landownership-patterns
and was not able to provide ideal link
between the community and the transit.
local governing bodies. It was argued that this was solely to achieve the financial
rationale rather than how transit would work in the relation with the surrounding
development. Yet the last decade has seen new urbanism movements which led to
a greater recognition of the benefits of linking development and transit. Transitoriented development can realize its full potential only if it emerges as a new
paradigm of development rather than a series of marginal improvements. TOD
cannot be and should not be a utopian vision: It must operate within the constraints
of the market and realistic expectations of behaviour and lifestyle patterns.
However, the market and lifestyle patterns can and do change as a result of both
policy choices and socio-cultural trends. The automobile was not always the
dominant form of transportation, and suburban living was not always the lifestyle of
choice(Dena Belzar June 2002). It has been found at various instances that transit
oriented development can play a pivotal role in finding a solution to the various
socio-environmental issues.
1.4- The Future
A transit station naturally creates catchments for local and regional level activities.
This characteristic if TOD makes it unique from other categories of urban infill
projects. Accordingly the success of TOD is dependent on three Ds- density,
diversity and design (Cervero 1993) and is partial resultant of the built form which is
created. TOD has been successful in creating mixed-use development next to transit
station and it is equally important to consider the physical characteristics in relation
to the larger urban design outcomes.
which is the practical outcome of this theory; hence it is necessary to review the
urban design principles in TOD.
TOD seeks to accomplish a number of interrelated goals for different types of users.
Ideally, TODs provide places for people to live, work, shop, and relax. Affordable
housing often has a prominent place in TODshouseholds with low or moderate
incomes are attracted to transit access and are likely to own fewer cars and
occupy more space efficient dwellings, meaning that they can take full advantage
of the transit orientation. While transit is essential to TODs, access for pedestrians,
bicyclists and automobiles is also important. Aesthetically, the ideal TOD is inviting
and attractive to many types of users, acknowledging that people have different
standards and different reasons for using the same space. TOD designers need to
address these varied concerns in ways that do not sacrifice economic efficiency or
conflict with larger community goals(Forsyth 2008).Hence, while considering the
urban design or the design of the built environment, it is necessary to achieve
hierarchy of spaces in a TOD.
2.2 Regional Level and Local Level Impacts
TOD aims to strengthen
the integration between
public transport systems
and urban development
by creating places in
which public transport is
readily accessible for
many activities(Curtis
2012). Thus it becomes
important to differentiate
between the not just the
regional level and local
level outcomes of TOD but
Figure 6: Waitakere TOD investigation [source:(Jones 2011)]
also the enormity of the
outcomes at these two different scales. While defining TOD as a concept at local
level, it is described in terms of a station area development which includes higher
density residential housing and promotes mixed land use. To achieve this it is
required to invest substantially in a mass transit system at the regional level, however
local area benefits may not translate to regional benefits, especially when weighed
against the costs of the transit investments needed to link individual TOD
centres(Nelson 1999).
Thus it is essential to underline the elements that decide the regional and local level
impacts and success of TOD. This research will focus at the local level and the urban
design outcome of the TOD.
improved mobility and access to retail and other services, TOD contributes in
enhancing the quality of living, accordingly increasing the liveability index.
3.2 Choice
A mix of housing diversities, ownership patterns, price, and building types is desirable
in a TOD. The range of permissible residential densities can accommodate variety of
household needs. Providing a mix housing types will result in more cosmopolitan
communities(Calthrope 1993). TOD also aims to provide high-density residential
development near rail stations, or transit-based housing, such projects will get
more people onto trains, reduce developers expenses, and potentially lower
commuting costs, housing prices, and air pollution(Boarnet and Crane 1997).
form the basis for urban design decisions in places seeking to create highly active
public spaces.
Successful transit environs entice people moving through it. In a conventional TOD,
approach is on the movement of people, however it is the public space where they
can halt and engage with other activities which the public space offers. With a
proper allocation of public space in TOD it will help create a balance between
natural and man-made environment and use each sites intrinsic resources.
3.4 Connections
While it is important to make great places, it is also important to link them through
streets which provide enhance connections. The local street system should be
recognizable, formalised, and inter-connected, converging to transit stops, core
commercial areas, schools and parks. Multiple and parallel routes must be provided
between the core commercial area, residential, and employment uses so that local
trips are not forced onto arterial streets(Calthrope 1993)
It should be noted that by too much emphasis on street design in TOD can increase
the auto travel due to the improved connectivity and accessibility. Hence the focus
of TOD should be to enhance the pedestrian environment and the concept of
shared space. Right design will encourage walking, thereby encouraging
interaction and a greater sense of community and discouraging automobile
dependence(Handy 2007). Places need to be easy to get and should be
integrated physically and visually with their surroundings. This requires paying
attention to how people can get around by foot, bicycle, and public
transportation(Ohland 2004)
3.5 Transit in the urban pattern.
TODs are envisioned as pedestrian-friendly and walkable nodes. Some urban form
measures of accessibility and connectivity. However, these measures do not
distinguish road segments in terms of their aesthetic appeal, pedestrian amenities,
and safety factors that have been shown to affect walkability(Anastasia
Loukaitou-Siders 2012). Although appropriate physical qualities are essential to
make TOD work, a focus solely on these characteristics can obscure the main goal
of transit-oriented development, which is not to create a particular physical form but
rather to create places that function differently from conventional
development(Ohland 2004) It is important for the transit station to be landmark for
10
11
the perception and preference of the transit riders and pedestrians accessing
station.
The combining of physical details like building elements, development design
features, and public space can produce a harmonious environment that enhances
transit access and ridership; how this is achieved needs to be studied and
understood(Porter 1997)
Physical designboth in terms of visual quality and liveabilityis an important
aspect of making TOD projects work, hence is worthy of further attention.
For the process to evaluate urban design outcomes of any transit-oriented
development based on the factors discussed in earlier part. A table is formulated
stating the factors, its description and the desired outcomes at one glance. This
methodology will be useful to analyse how a TOD is delivering from the urban design
values. In this paper only one TOD development is evaluated against these factors.
Dimension
Liveability
Choice
Public
spaces
for human
use
Connections
Transit in the
urban
pattern
Description
Outcomes
Improved air
quality.
Better health and
public safety.
Improved access to
public spaces.
Decreased
congestion.
A diversity of
housing types that
reflects the regional
mix of incomes and
family structures.
Range of
affordable housing.
A balance of
transportation
choices.
Establish a social
increment of
space.
Provide quality
shared space.
Promote shared
space
Street pattern
focusing on transit
station
Create a visual
landmark
Enhance the built
form characteristics
12
4.1FootscaryContext:
Footscary is an inner Melbourne activity centre which is hub of employment,
education, entertainment and commercial opportunities to a culturally diverse
community. It was once a thriving industrial activity centre, which declined since the
1980s. The local city council along with the state government has envisioned the
retrofitting of the centre following the principles of TOD. The paper will discuss the
urban design framework established by the Maribyrmong City Council and also the
Footscary Skyline study and evaluate these two policy documents against the TOD
principles.
Figure 12: Footscary Aerial Photo [Source :(Council 2011, Urban 2012)]
new public realm with a central urban plaza and strong pedestrian links, supported
by a high level of activity / retail uses at street level. The existing heritage station
building is proposed to be re furbished for a range of community uses.(Walsh 2004)
The objectives which were proposed by this document were:
13
Establish the rail precinct as a highly permeable and visually open mixed use
development with strong internal links and external links.
14
i.
ii.
15
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
Medium Scale: the report states that this area can accommodate
consistent medium scale development compromising of residential,
commercial and retail growth. The educational zone along the Victoria
University is given a special consideration. This area will be having mediumlow rise building height.
Areas of minimal change: mainly consisting of the heritage precinct of the
study area, this area will have minimal or even no change in the existing built
form or built height as these are the character areas of Footscary.
Built form edge to highway: this area is been considered as buffer zone and
hence is dedicated for an increased building heights and building form to
shield the inner core.
Transitional edges: in these edges the existing built form will be retained
however special consideration of public realm and shared space will be
considered in these areas.
Public realm spaces : these are the main streets (Maddern square, Nicholson
streetmall, Irving street, Bunbury Street, Warde street), any new development
in this area should give special emphasis on the solar access is maintained to
the public realm and also maintain lower scale fine grain frontages.
16
evaluated. According to Renne the evaluation of TOD should be both crosssectional and longitudinal. Indicators of performance can compare the TOD with
regional and sub-regional averages, since TODs function as part of a larger
whole(Renne 2009). However each TOD has its own evaluation criteria and no
broad terms can be established to analyse it. This research tries to establish TOD
principles which are relevant to the context and then evaluate the case study. In
the next part the Footscary development will be evaluated against the TOD
principles established in the first half of the paper.
17
Choice:
Proposal: most of the area under, consists of existing building stock and hence
there cant be a mass housing project, however the council has framed the
built environment policy through skyline report which outlines the building
typologies.
Outcome: the proposal does emphasis on the choice of the housing but it
may not be affordable housing. The choice of housing provided by the
proposal is limited.
Public spaces for human use
Proposal: very detailed thought to shared space along the Buckley street and
Nicholson street, which is the retail hub adjoining the railway station and
special emphasis on the human scale streetscape concept is being
proposed.
Outcome: very strong thought for the public spaces and at human scale,
which means along the streets which have emphasis for this design will curtail
any high rise development which may impact the sunlight for the street or
which may have a negative impact. Connections to these open spaces are
very strong and shared streets are proposed to encourage pedestrian
activity.
Connections
Proposal: the existing connections are very strong hence they are not altered,
however the only connection which is proposed is the bridge over railway
station.
18
Outcome: The connections are not focused to the railways station as it is not
the main activity hub of the Footscary, and there are very strong other
centres which need connection, however while making these connection
detailed thought was given to reduce auto-dependency through better
pedestrian connection.
Transit in the urban pattern:
Proposal: the vision for the Footscary railway station is that it should become a
gateway and landmark, (McCuskey 2005) and propose a mixed use
activity in its proximity.
Outcome: the station has achieved its goal of being the landmark and
gateway to the Footscary, however the proposed development around it,
which is the main focus at the moment may reduce the landmark status of
the station however it can achieve a functional transit-oriented development.
Figure 24: Proposed Station Area Development Footscary [Source: SJB Urban]
19
6. Conclusion.
The immense challenge which the TOD faces is the absence of an overall vision and
a well organised design. The main impact which TOD creates is that it reduces autodependency and promotes a walkable environment, however it is observed that
most of the times the economics of TOD has a very adverse effect on the design
outcomes which are often compromised to deliver the commercial success. TOD
aims to reach to a wide diversity in terms of household types, income levels and
transit options. In order to achieve this, there is need to emphasize on the urban
design and the physical characteristics of TOD.
Often it is found that TOD is discussed and analysed at a policy level and less
importance is given to the physical outcome, which can be achieved through
appropriate urban design. This research has demonstrated that by organising
fundamentals of the urban design, better goals can be achieved through this
structure. TOD generates a huge amount of synergy which can be utilised easily,
however the physical elements, place-making proposition and pedestrian
environment are the crucial impacts which should be considered at every scale of
the design. TOD is a very site specific and the local-regional context play a pivotal
role in it, however using the five assessment factors defined in this research will
enable to a broadly classify TOD as they are based on very fundamental level
outcomes which is necessary for urban design.
In future the success of TOD will be dependent on the quality of visual and physical
character it delivers and this can be achieved only through cohesive urban design.
Future Research:
The panorama of TOD is meticulous and colossal and hence this research was
limited only to the fundamentals of urban design, there has to be a detailed
discussion of the impact of urban design in various facets which determine the
physical characteristics of TOD. Many more case studies not only at policy level but
also at implementation level are needed to understand TOD in much detailed
manner.
20
7. Refrences.
Anastasia Loukaitou-Siders, D. C. a. H. H. (2012). Up in the air : Urban Design for LRT station in
Highway Medians. http://www.uctc.net/research/papers/UCTC-FR-2012-06.pdf, University of
California Transportation Centre.
Appleyard, A. J. a. D. (1987). "Toward an Urban Design Manifesto." Amercian PLanning Journal 53(1):
112-120.
Boarnet, M. and R. Crane (1997). "L.A. story - A reality check for transit-based housing." Journal of
the American Planning Association 63(2): 189-204.
Calthrope, P. (1993). The next American metropolis: ecology,community, and the American Dream,
Princeton Architectural Press.
Cervero, R. (1993). Transit-Supportive Development in the United States: Experiences and Prospects.
http://escholarship.org/uc/item/3hx4c6r4, Institute of Urban & Regional Development,UC Berkeley.
Council, M. C. (2011). Footscary : City Edge Materplan. C. D. P. Making.
Curtis, C. (2012). "Delivering the'D' in transit-oriented development: Examining the town planning
challenge." The Journal of Transport and Land Use 5(3).
Dena Belzar , G. A. (June 2002). Transit Oriented Devlopment: Moving From Rhetoric to reality, The
Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy
Forsyth, J. J. a. A. (2008). "Seven American TODs: Good practices for urban design in Transit-Oriented
Development projects." Journal of Transport and Land Use(1:2 (Fall 2008)).
Handy, S. (2007). "Urban Form and Pedestrian Choices : Study of Austin Neighbourhoods."
Transportation Research Board 1552: 135-144.
Jones, E. (2011). Realising Development Oriented Transit: Perth Light Rail Masterclass. A. C. f. N.
Urbanism. Perth, Planning Insititue of Australia(W.A).
Link, R. R. (2010). Urban Design Strategy. V. D. o. Transport.
McCuskey, K. W. a. S. (2005). Footscary Transit City : Renewal and regeneration to promote a
walkable Footscary. The 6th International Conference on Walking in the 21st Century, Zurich,
Switzerland.
21
Acknowledgement
I like to thank Kelvin Walsh (Director-Urban Design, Hume City Council) for the inputs
on how Footscary station development was envisioned which was crucial in
understanding the proposal. Also Simon McPherson (Director-SJB urban) who helped
me understand the context of Melbourne and need of TOD as an urban design tool.
Special thanks of Helen Day (Studio Director- Aspect) who guided me regarding the
TOD movement in Australia and also emphasised that TOD is a very site and context
related design. Special thanks to Prof. Errol Haarhoff and Prof. John Hunt for their
constant guidance and support.
22
23
24
25