Advance transit oriented development typology: case study in Brisbane, Australia
Introduction
Transit Oriented Development (TOD) is a relatively recent neighbourhood development model which has been conceptualised as urban development with a combination of nodes (e.g. transit station) and places (e.g. neighbourhood) (Bertolini, 1999, Renne, 2009a). The place criterion has generally been characterised by: moderate to high density development that supports public transport (PT) services at the nodes; a mix of land uses (e.g. residential, commercial, recreational, and institutional) to facilitate and attract activity participation within the places; and well-connected street networks so that activities can be integrated with active transport (AT) (Cervero and Kockelman, 1997, Lin and Gau, 2006). This proximate and connected arrangement of land uses, therefore, reduces the need for motorised travel of people living within a TOD area. However, if people need to travel to access goods and services in other parts of a city (e.g. in other TODs), then they can choose fast, frequent, and well-connected PT services available at TOD nodes. As a result, a TOD is not just a transit station to catch PT services, but it is importantly a place to live, shop, recreate, and socialise. It is a human interaction point and an urban development process characterised by centralised decentralisation (Bertolini, 1999). These qualities of a TOD make PT services a logical alternative to private transport (Bertolini et al., 2009), and as a result, TODs have been identified as a key policy tool to discourage car-based travel to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and traffic congestion, thereby enhancing quality of life, social inclusion, health and well-being (Transportation Research Board, 2001).
The provision of land uses and transport services for a TOD requires long term planning both at the regional and local levels. Planning at the regional scale sets the spatial structure of TODs (e.g. hierarchical distribution of transport nodes, link, and activities), whereas local planning articulates the detailed plan and concentrates on the precise contents of land use types, densities and facilities (Bossard, 2002). However, city planning rarely starts from an empty space, and existing land uses are an important determinant of future development (Atkinson-Palombo and Kuby, 2011). Therefore, a thoughtful analysis of today’s built environment can ease facilitation of tomorrow’s TOD. For example, the formation of overlay zoning in metropolitan Phoenix in 2000 facilitated TOD development after the opening of a light rail transit (LRT) in 2008 – an approach referred to as advanced TOD planning (Atkinson-Palombo and Kuby, 2011).
Zemp et al. (2011) argue that the identification of TOD potential relies on the performance assessment of the existing built environment. However, traditional assessment of the built environment for a TOD employs a binary approach focusing around train stations – i.e. whether a station area is suitable or not for a TOD (see, Bossard, 2002). This approach has been criticised for two reasons. First, it excludes other potential “development oriented transit” sites. Given that TODs are a function of both nodes and places, all neighbourhoods in a city possess some qualities for a potential TOD, irrespective of the availability of train services (Thomas and Deakin, 2008). Second, there is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to TOD development (Center for Transit-Oriented Development, 2010). Researchers are increasingly recognising that TODs can take a variety of forms (Belzer and Autler, 2002); and individual TODs can serve different but complementary functions within a system (Atkinson-Palombo and Kuby, 2011). Therefore, the question is not whether a site is suitable or not, but rather for what type of TODs (if any) or not. Belzer and Autler (2002, p.30) argue that “it may be possible to develop a general typology of places to account for a variety of different scales (large city, small city, town), locations in the metropolitan area (central city, peripheral city, commuter town), transit type (commuter rail, frequent light rail), and other key attributes”.
Few studies to date have empirically identified TOD typology in a quantitative way, despite the many associated benefits (as discussed in Section 2.1). Most of the previous classifications are based on subjective evaluation criteria of the context in which they are built (e.g. city centre, activity centre, specialist, urban, suburban, neighbourhood, commuter town centre, residential) (Calthorpe, 1993, Dittmar and Poticha, 2004, Queensland Government, 2009). These types of classifications provide for specialist functions for TODs, yet fail to take into account the built environmental characteristics that surround the TOD. As such, this generalisation of TOD functions based on subjective judgment may not be an accurate guide to the design and building of TODs (see for example, Schlossberg and Brown, 2004). We argue that a careful selection of built environmental factors and their standards for different areas in a city provide an important context for TOD development to supplement and inform a more generalised approach to a TOD typology.
The need for further research to develop typologies for TODs has also been highlighted in the literature (Jenks, 2005). Unlike train station based TOD typologies of previous studies, research has identified that TODs are equally effective in cases of bus and train services, and in particular in cities where bus rapid transit (BRT) systems operate (Kamruzzaman et al., 2013). In addition, previous studies rarely validate their generated typologies using performance indicators. Belzer and Autler (2002) have mentioned that despite having good place and node characteristics, many TODs do not function well (when measured by performance). As a result, the typology needs to be verified based on TOD outcomes (e.g. mobility choices, transit ridership, auto ownership, transportation costs, vehicle miles travelled (VMT), journey time to work, shop within the same neighbourhood) (Center for Transit-Oriented Development, 2010, Renne, 2009b). Although TOD typologies have traditionally been derived from existing built environment indicators, TODs are actually planned well in advance (for example, the case in Phoenix) (Atkinson-Palombo and Kuby, 2011). Different types of TODs should be planned as a part of the strategic future of a city, and incorporated into the long term vision. As a result, TOD typology planning cannot only be based on environmental indices because the future environment of an area is not known for planning; but should be based on other policy indicators as well – indicators that are readily available and can be projected to plan for future TOD typologies.
Based on the above discussion, the objective of this research is threefold: first, to develop a typology for existing neighbourhoods in order to understand the potential for different types of TODs in Brisbane, Australia; second, to validate the typologies with performance indicators; and third, to support the planning of advanced TOD typologies based on readily available policy indicators. Section 2 reviews the literature on the typology of TODs, aiming to develop a robust method for the development of typologies of neighbourhoods for TOD potential using Brisbane as a case study. The data and method used to derive and validate the typologies are discussed in Section 3. Results of this research are presented in Section 4, and Section 5 concludes, with implications for urban policy.
Section snippets
TOD typology and their benefits
Developing a typology is a way to group together areas that have a common set of characteristics. Therefore, a TOD typology contains several combinations of node and place types, and all of the areas within one combination have some elements in common (Center for Transit-Oriented Development, 2010). Categorisation of TODs into typologies enhances their planning, design, and operational activities in many ways. For example, the similarities within a type allow policy makers and stakeholders to
Study area
This research develops typologies of neighbourhoods in Brisbane (Queensland) in order to assess their potential for different types of TODs. One of the long term strategic visions for the Queensland Government (2008) is to build Queensland as a strong, green, smart, and healthy state by reducing congestion and by cutting one-third of its current carbon emissions. The South East Queensland (SEQ) Regional Plan 2009–2031 provides specific policy guidelines to meet these stated goals (Queensland
Typology of TODs in Brisbane
The cluster analysis resulted in four unique clusters (Fig. 6). The cluster quality chart indicates that the overall model quality is in the “Fair” range. Net employment density was found to have greater influence in forming the clusters followed by net residential density, and PTALs. Based on the mean contributions of different indicators as shown in Fig. 6, the four clusters can be interpreted as:
- •
Cluster 4 – Neighbourhoods featuring the quality of an existing residential TOD: 257 CCDs (15%)
Discussion and conclusions
This research represents one of several attempts in the literature to develop typologies of neighbourhoods with respect to TODs and their effectiveness. While the case studies are based on TODs in Brisbane, Australia – the proposed approach yields a generalisable method for evaluating prospective TOD sites through the selection of built environmental indicators. A number of findings can be deduced from this research, either directly or indirectly, that have significant implications for TOD
References (50)
- et al.
The geography of advance transit-oriented development in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona, 2000–2007
Journal of Transport Geography
(2011) - et al.
Community design of a light rail transit-oriented development using casewise visual evaluation (CAVE)
Socio-Economic Planning Sciences
(2007) - et al.
Travel demand and the 3Ds: density, diversity, and design
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment
(1997) - et al.
Reducing car use: changing attitudes or relocating? The influence of residential dissonance on travel behavior
Journal of Transport Geography
(2012) - et al.
Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form: findings from SMARTRAQ
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
(2005) - et al.
The influence of urban design on neighbourhood walking following residential relocation: longitudinal results from the RESIDE study
Social Science & Medicine
(2013) - et al.
Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment
(2005) - et al.
Self-proxy agreement and weekly school travel behaviour in a sectarian divided society
Journal of Transport Geography
(2013) - et al.
Residential dissonance and mode choice
Journal of Transport Geography
(2013) - et al.
A TOD planning model to review the regulation of allowable development densities around subway stations
Land Use Policy
(2006)
Rail-based transit-oriented development: lessons from New York City and Hong Kong
Landscape and Urban Planning
Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: a focus on methodologies
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological
Classifying railway stations for sustainable transitions – balancing node and place functions
Journal of Transport Geography
What affects commute mode choice: neighbourhood physical structure or preferences toward neighborhoods?
Journal of Transport Geography
Transit-oriented development in a high-density city: identifying its association with transit ridership in Seoul, Korea
Cities
A PTAL approach to measuring the changes in bus service accessibility
Transport Policy
Classifying railway stations for strategic transport and land use planning: context matters!
Journal of Transport Geography
Spatial development patterns and public transport: the application of an analytical model in the Netherlands
Planning Practice & Research
Introduction
HABITAT: a longitudinal multilevel study of physical activity change in mid-aged adults
BMC Public Health
The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community and the American Dream
Do changes in neighborhood characteristics lead to changes in travel behavior? A structural equations modeling approach
Transportation
Cited by (237)
Unraveling the diversity in transit-oriented development
2024, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and PracticeBuilt environment influences commute mode choice in a global south megacity context: Insights from explainable machine learning approach
2024, Journal of Transport GeographyDynamic equity in urban amenities distribution: An accessibility-driven assessment
2024, Applied GeographyEvaluating transit-oriented new town development: Insights from Seoul and Tokyo
2024, Habitat International