Use TOD Approach to Make a Successful Place for Light Rail Transit - Term Paper Example

TOD Approach to Light Rail Transit Student’s name Affiliation Date TOD Approach to Light Rail Transit Introduction Light rail is term that emerged in 1975 during Transportation Research Board (TRB) that was first conference of this kind. The TRB referred to light rail as a metropolitan electric railway line that has exquisite ability to operate single cars and short trains and the exclusive rights of way in aerial structures, ground level, subways and streets to facilitate discharging and boarding of passengers at the car level or track (Ragovin,2011,p.67). On the other hand, Schuman (2009,p.56) adds the TRB original definition of light rail by affirming that it must exist in predominantly on reserved grade separated rights of way. Second, it must operate using vehicles propelled by electricity running singly or in the trains. Third, it must provide variety of passenger’s performance and capacities traits. These attributes make LRT to become a flexible mode of transport in terms of functions because it exhibits underground stations, tunneled alignments all attracting high passenger volumes. The paper seeks to identity criterion for identifying characteristics of a good light rail and indicates government support towards the endeavor. Light rail must have the above characteristics and fulfill the expectations of the people. Various governments that use the LRT has shown considerable support inform of expertise and monetary support. Mix-used Development Light Rail Transit are crucial boosters of the economy and in many cases areas that have the facility w ill tend to develop at higher rate compared to areas that lack the facility. (Ragovin. 2011, p.78) posit that urban rail should not be necessarily a source of development but a parameter that guides growth from all parameters. The retrial business people will find lucrative opportunities at discharging and boarding and they will sell relevant goods at these particular points. Vendors are the possible retailers who will work particularly in these units. Similarly, Cervero (2004,p.69) affirms that the mixed -use development surrounding the area with the transit lines often attracts many people and later translating to congestion because of the rapid economic growth. For example in the case of Denver, Charlotte and Jersey City there is high rate of employment translating to escalated population growth all because of the LRT. These cities expanded economically and population simply because the LRT had passed through the towns. For example in the city Minneapolis, the LRT was a tool of redevelopment with comprehensive utilization of the underutilized regions. Arrington (2003,p.45) advocates that TOD projects must be successful without transits for them to have success with transits. Cervero (2004, p.79) asserts that people are likely to dwell and settle in regions where LRT is accessible because it comes along with bunch of opportunities. For example, through the LRT land, developers will increase and real estate companies will chip in and start making use of the land. This will in turn increase people who will dwell there for business or employment. On the other hand, more automobile oriented cities may not highly benefit from TOD transits because they have a culture of driving and they find it to advocate rail transport rather than occasional driving. Pedestrian network The walking accessibility and overall pedestrian environment are paramount in creating successful light rail transit using the TOD approach. Cervero (2004,p.81) affirms that majority of the residents who live approximately a quarter of a mile from transit stations arrive to the station using either a bicycle or foot. However, the situation becomes worse if the individual comes from environment that is not friendly to the pedestrian. The unfriendliness ranges from psychological to symbolic barriers such as wide and busy highways as well as incomplete sidewalk networks. According to Ewing & Cervero, (2010, p.270), the “walk ability” of neighborhoods and station had a direct relationship with the level of ridership in region of Salt Lake. Curtis, (2008, p.107) affirms that such sites must exhibit quality designs that will acknowledge and engage public spaces, attractive landmarks, and pedestrian connections among other vital networks. An appropriate light rail transit should be in area that supports pedestrian network in terms of walking, cycling and other relevant and related activities that pedestrians will embark on. For the LRT in the centre of highways, it should be safe for pedestrians and make it possible for them to cross to and from the station. The image above describes a bad pedestrian network Source: Curtis, (2008, p.107) The figure above indicates a good pedestrian network. Source: Curtis, (2008, p.107) Accessibility for pedestrian Light railway transit must allow and facilitate free accessibility and movement of people in and out of the stations. For instance, the distance from the residence to the railway station must be realistic to ensure that people will move with ease and comfort. The accessibility should consider the safety of the routes that people will make when moving towards the railway station. For instance, the personnel in proximity of the lines of electricity are a main factor that people must take into account (Jaiswal, Bunker & Ferreira, 2009, p.56). Moreover, congestion within the railway station is another factor would hinder accessibility of the services. Pedestrians will not cherish overcrowded stations and this might discourage them and eventually becoming liability to them. The accessibility aspect must include adequate separation of the pedestrians from the vehicular movements, as this will reduce any possible cases of accidents that emanate from such practices. Pedestrian accessibility extends to the presence of retail and catering facilities in stations making it accessible to all passengers hence preventing from moving out the restricted area for such services. Such movements may endanger the life of the passenger and therefore, making it necessity to instill such initiative. In addition, many LRT stations are secure from extreme weather making it possible for pedestrians and passengers to avoid harsh environment (Jaiswal, Bunker & Ferreira, 2009, p.56). The figure above illustrates a good and articulate pedestrian accessibility Source:(Jaiswal, Bunker & Ferreira, 2009, p.56). The figure above illustrates a bad accessibility of LRT Source (Jaiswal, Bunker & Ferreira, 2009, p.56). Visual quality and comfort Most of Light rail transit stations have appealing and comfort zones making it possible for the pedestrian to enjoy. For instance, the passenger platforms form a great deal of them. The platforms are the waiting sections where passengers wait for the train. Under normal circumstances, ideal train will have one to three platforms that are either side or centre. The side platforms have tracks on the side and they are approximately 240 feet long and 12 feet wide. On the other hand, the centre platforms have tracks on both sides that are 240 feet in length and 30 in width. All the platforms have the same height with the floor of the train to provide a comfortable and articulate way to board the train. The levels makes it possible for all users even those who have wheel chairs and luggage strollers. Moreover, there are platforms for safety gates in every station that separates the customers from tracks where trains don’t stop at the station. These enhancements increase comfort and usability of the premises. Similarly, they are good increasing the visual appeal amongst passengers (McKendrick et al, 2006, p.78.). The image above illustrates a visually attractive and comfortable LRT Source: (McKendrick et al, 2006, p.78.). The image above illustrates non-appealing and uncomfortable LRT Source (McKendrick et al, 2006, p.78.). Riddance, car packs and LRT Light rail transit provides various facilities to people and especially those who require such services. For instance, following the development and introduction of the system in different parts of the world, the rate of riddance has considerably changed depending on the economical set up on the area. A case study carried out in United States and Canada in 2010 indicates the rates of ridership increased in cities such as Toronto while newly developed cities such as charlotte, the riddance decreased significantly. The people in Canada and especially Toronto are rich and they have used cars for a long time,. Emergence of comfortable and convenient rail services appears to be a source of relief for them hence making it an ideal source of transportation. The exhaustion that emanates from long time usage of vehicles prompts them to prefer train to vehicles. On the other hand, the cities Charlotte and developed because of the emergence of the rail station and therefore, they find it difficult to stop using cars. TOD approach to LRT advocates minimal use of cars and that translates to reduced car packs along the boarding and discharge points (Curtis, 2008, p.107). Invention and usage of LRT, car packs have considerably reduced which translates well to some people while others feel devastated about the whole issue. The success of LRT has attracted high levels of ridership and transit-oriented employment in downtown though land use programs has remained limited and stagnant for quite a long time. McKendrick et al ,(2006, p.78) affirms that the program has contributed to development of high-density projects along the LRT corridor towards the downtown core. Moreover, he notes that the transit-supportive uses of land have been slow especially in developing the suburbs served by the LRT. The preclusion of the transit-supportive development agenda by the in compatible uses of land and failure to have a long-term and productive implementation strategy of the TOD have been a great limiting factor development of the approach. For instance, most of the C- train stations have considerable orientations to the automobile access through generous provisions of large park –and riding lots instead of using mixed-use development. Additionally, various LRT stations have spectacular location in the middle of expressways such as Brentwood station. On the other hand, the park- and ride lots normally provide appropriate source for future advancements of the city-owned region and designing of the C-train station(McKendrick et al ,(2006, p.78). The city of Calgary has ended up becoming the active when it comes to adopting policy frameworks aimed at promoting TOD especially the Calgary transportation plan as well as the sustainable study of the suburbs. Transit oriented advancements help in facilitating TOD making an ideal platform for development in these regions. Government support and LRT The government has been in the forefront in creating policies and regulation that will govern the usage of LRT. According to (McKendrick et al, 2006, p.78) strong political leadership is a critical element that facilitates and provides success in development and management of LRT. It requires huge capital and the government must spearhead approval of the taxpayer’s money before channeling to the work. Political success highly determines the success and effectiveness of these projects. As posited above, the exercise is capital intensive and it requires the government and public participation for the program to get through. For instance, if the program is a public undertaking, the government through relevant authorities must engage the public through public participation and ascertain the viability of the project. After public participation, it becomes easy for the government to gazette the project hence becoming a legal undertaking. However, without the legal documentation, the government cannot allow or even the public allows the project to continue. Moreover, the government must ensure that the project is viable and it will have long-term benefits to the taxpayers. Without the undertakings and considerations, the project cannot commence (McKendrick et al, 2006, p.67). In modern democratic society, it is impossible for the government to pass through a bill or policy without good backing from the legislature. The government must therefore, mobilize the legislature to vote for the bill failure to which it will not pass. If the opposition is stronger than the ruling party is, it becomes difficult for the government to go through the undertaking. The process of coordination and streamlining of relevant institutions on board is a role of the government making it instrumental in making LRT a reality. Regulatory authorities are under the government and once the government approves it, it becomes particularly easy for the other parties to participate with minimal interference and red tapes from the regulatory bodies. Finally, the government has mandate over public land that the LRT mainly uses. Therefore, it will allocate the specific sections of land under utilization for that particular use and ultimately make the project a reality (Ragovin, 2011, p.145). Under normal circumstances, the government will support the initiative on the basis that it reduces pollution due to excessive use of cars and minimize loss of town through decreasing parking lots. References Arrington, G. B. 2003. Light rail and the American city: State-of-the-practice for transit- oriented development (No. E-C058). Cervero, R. 2004. Transit-oriented development in the United States: experiences, challenges, and prospects (Vol. 102). Transportation Research Board. Curtis, C. (2008). Planning for sustainable accessibility: the implementation challenge. Transport Policy, 15(2), 104-112. Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. 2010. Travel and the built environment: a meta-analysis. Journal of the American planning association, 76(3), 265-294. Jaiswal, S., Bunker, J. M., & Ferreira, L. 2009. Modelling the relationships between passenger demand and bus delays at bus way stations. McKendrick, N., Colquhoun, D., Charles, B., Hubbell, J., & Director, C. T. 2006. Calgary’s CTrain–Effective Capital Utilization. In Joint International Light Rail Conference St. Louis, Missouri. Ragovin, H. 2011. Getting Around Gets Easier. Planning American Planning Associations. Read More