The application of the park ride and TOD concepts to develop a new framework that can maximise public transport patronage

THE APPLICATION OF THE PARK & RIDE AND TOD CONCEPTS TO DEVELOP A NEW FRAMEWORK THAT CAN MAXIMISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT PATRONAGE By Simon Ginn BSc (Hons); Dip Mkt Man; Dip Town Planning; MEng Sc(Civil) School of Civil Engineering Queensland University of Technology Australia A thesis submitted for the degree of Masters of Applied Science (Research) in the Faculty of Built Environment, Queensland University of Technology NOVEMBER 2009 ABSTRACT With growing concern over the use of the car in our urbanized society, there have emerged a number of lobby groups and professional bodies promoting a return to public transport, walking and cycling, with the urban village as the key driving land use, as a means of making our cities’ transportation systems more sustainable This research has aimed at developing a framework applicable to the Australian setting that can facilitate increased passenger patronage of rail based urban transport systems from adjacent or associated land uses The framework specifically tested the application of the Park & Ride and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) concepts and their applicability within the cultural, institutional, political and transit operational characteristics of Australian society The researcher found that, although the application of the TOD concept had been limited to small pockets of town houses and mixed use developments around stations, the development industry and emerging groups within the community are posed to embrace the concept and bring with it increased rail patronage The lack of a clear commitment to infrastructure and supporting land uses is a major barrier to the implementation of TODs The research findings demonstrated significant scope for the size of a TOD to expand to a much greater radius of activity from the public transport interchange, than the commonly quoted 400 to 600 meters, thus incorporating many more residents and potential patrons The provision of Park & Rides, and associated support facilities like Kiss & Rides, have followed worldwide trends of high patronage demands from the middle and outer car dependent suburbs of our cities The data collection and analysis gathered by the researcher demonstrated that in many cases Park & Rides should form part of a TOD to ensure ease of access to rail stations by all modes and patron types The question, however, remains how best to plan the incorporation of a Park & Ride within a TOD and still maintain those features that attract and promote TODs as a living entity II TABLE OF CONTENTS PART A INTRODUCTION & LITERATURE REVIEW Chapter – Introduction 1.0 Background 1.1 Hypothesis 1.2 Aim of Research 1.3 Influencing Factors 1.4 Specific Objectives of the Research 1.5 What does this Research Add as New Knowledge? 1.6 Background on the Research Subject 1.7 Structure of Thesis Chapter – Methodology 2.0 Introduction 10 2.1 Research Methodologies to Gather New Knowledge 10 LITERATURE REVIEW Chapter – Land Use & Transport Interactions 3.0 Introduction 18 3.1 Changing Travel Patterns and Impacts 18 3.2 Travel Demand Management Tools 27 3.3 Land Use and Transport Integration 37 3.4 Urban Consolidation and Density 43 Chapter – Transit Oriented Developments 4.0 Definitions of TODs 48 4.1 The Emergence of Transit Oriented Developments (TOD) as a Concept 50 III 4.2 Images of Transit Villages 55 4.3 Contrasting Views on TODs 55 4.4 TOD Examples 56 4.5 General Opportunities & Barriers for Transit Oriented Developments 75 4.6 Experiences and Opportunities with TODs emerging out of North America 76 4.7 Barriers to Implementing TODs in North America 79 4.8 Summary of Barriers and Opportunities for TODs 82 4.9 The Impact on Transit Systems Patronage from Traditional and Neotraditional Neighbourhood Designs 83 4.10 Joint Ventures around Public Transport Interchanges 84 4.11 Conclusion to Literature Review of TODs 85 Chapter – Park & Rides and Interchange Support Infrastructure 5.0 Supporting Public Transport with Good Interchange Facilities 86 5.1 Definitions of a Park & Ride 86 5.2 The Kiss & Ride Component associated with Park & Rides 87 5.3 Park & Ride Concept, Objectives and Realities 88 5.4 Successes and Failures with Park & Rides 96 5.5 Types of Park & Rides 96 5.6 Literature Review of park & Ride Case Studies 97 5.7 Conclusions to Literature Review on Park & Rides 101 5.8 Station Design 102 5.9 Conclusion to Park & Rides and Interchange Support Infrastructure 103 IV Chapter – Transit Patronage 6.0 Introduction 104 6.1 Capacity of Transit Systems and Patronage Levels 104 6.2 Accessibility and Patronage 106 6.3 Access to Stations and Patronage Levels by Distance 107 6.4 Future Patronage Forecasts on Public Transport Systems 111 6.5 Demand Forecasting Patronage 112 6.6 Conclusions on Transit Patronage Demands 114 Chapter – The Influence of Property Values and Growth near Transit Stations as a Derivative of Patronage Demands 7.0 Introduction 7.1 The Influence of Property Values near Transit Stations 7.2 115 and the Derived Patronage Demands 115 Conclusions 118 Chapter – Summary of Literature Review and Implications for Hypothesis & Framework Development 8.0 Summary of Literature Review 119 8.1 Hypothesis against Literature Review 121 8.2 Key Gaps in Literature Review for Examination 8.3 and Incorporation into an Integrated Framework 121 The Influence of Emerging Technologies on the Hypothesis and Research 122 V PART B FRAMEWORK DEVELOPMENT Chapter – Establishing a Conceptualized Setting for a New Integrated Planning Framework to Promote Patronage Levels 9.0 Introduction 127 9.1 Evidence derived from Decisions with Key Experts and Opinion Leaders 128 9.2 Conclusions 134 9.3 Implications of Results for Hypothesis, Specific Research Objectives and the Framework Development 135 Chapter 10 – Institutional, Planning and Attitudinal Issues Affecting TODs Patronage Levels 10.0 Introduction 137 10.1 Ability to Commit to a TOD style of Development and Living as a Prerequisite to Promoting Patronage 137 10.2 Australian TOD Case Studies 144 10.3 World Wide TOD Case Studies 152 10.4 Conclusions 155 10.5 Implications of Results for Hypothesis, Specific Research Objectives and Model Development 156 Chapter 11 – Institutional, Planning and Attitudinal Issues Affecting Park & Rides Patronage Levels 11.0 Introduction 158 11.1 Commitment to Park & Rides 158 11.2 Demand for Access to Park & Rides 159 11.3 World Wide Park & Ride Case Studies 167 11.4 Mixing Park & Rides and TODs to Promote Patronage 170 11.5 Combining TODs and Park & Rides and Associated Infrastructure to Increase Patronage Demands 171 11.6 Conclusion 172 11.7 Implications of Results for Hypothesis, Specific Research Objectives and VI the Framework Development 173 Chapter 12 – How Distance Impacts on Access to Transit – Affecting Patronage Levels from TODs and Park & Rides 12.0 Introduction 174 12.1 Empirical Data on the Inter-Relationships between Distance, Mode and Land Use on Arrival Numbers of patrons at Fixed Guideway Stations 12.2 175 Should TODs and Park & Rides be Mixed Around the same Station /Public Transport Interchange Site? 192 12.3 Conclusions 193 12.4 Implications of Results for Hypothesis, Specific Research Objectives and the Framework Development 193 Chapter 13 – Transit Operational and Station Design Factors Affecting Patronage Levels from TODs and Park & Rides 13.0 Introduction 195 13.1 How Transit and Station Design Factors Affect Patronage Levels 196 13.2 Conclusions 202 13.3 Implications of Results for Hypothesis, Specific Research Objectives and the Framework Development 203 Chapter 14 – The Framework 14.0 Introduction 204 14.1 The Key Guiding Principles for TODs to Promote Patronage in Australia 205 14.2 The Key Principles for Park & Rides to Promote Patronage 209 Part C THE MODEL APPLICATIONS & CONCLUSIONS Chapter 15 – Testing the Framework in a Real Application and the Framework’s Limitations 15.0 Introduction 213 VII 15.1 Potential Application of the Framework to a Test Case Situation within the Australian Setting 213 15.2 Limitations of the Framework 219 15.3 Conclusions 220 Chapter 16 – Transferability & Future Framework Applications 16.0 Introduction 221 16.1 Transferability 221 16.2 Demonstration of the Framework within a 3D Virtual Reality Environment over a Hypothetical Location in Australia and its Application to China 221 16.3 The model as a Research and Teaching Tool 223 16.4 Conclusions 223 Chapter 17 – Conclusions 17.0 Introduction 224 17.1 The Hypothesis under Examination 224 17.2 Summation 230 REFERENCES 234 VIII APPENDICES Appendix Practioners Interviewed on Land Use and Transport Integration around Rail Stations 252 Appendix World Opinion Leaders (Experts) Surveyed by Email 254 Appendix Questions for World Opinion Leaders by Email 257 Appendix Questions for Meetings with Councils, Developers and Operators 259 Appendix Initial Telephone Survey of Households to Engage in Main Household Survey 260 Appendix Demographic Questions of Households in Main Household Survey 261 Appendix Survey of Scale of Life Style Preferences in Main Household Survey 263 Appendix Main Household Survey Using Questions and Images 264 Appendix Perth Station’s Patronage by Origin, Data Collection Form 281 Appendix 10 Surveyor’s by Perth Station, Date and Start Time 282 Appendix 11 Photo of Test Site for Application of Model to Fitzgibbon 284 IX LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Travel Demand Management Classifications Figure 2: Suggested Mix of Housing Types in a Development to Promote 31 Public Transport Usage 44 Figure 3: Population Densities in 1980 per Person per Hectare 46 Figure 4: Total Demand Requirements by Access Mode - Helensvale 89 Figure 5: Capacity Ranges of Different Modes 104 Figure 6: Patronage Levels in Europe and North America 105 Figure 7: Operating Cost Recovery 106 Figure 8: LRT Population and Employment Catchment 110 Figure 9: Support for Transit Oriented Sustainable Developments by Gender 140 Figure 10: Support for Transit Oriented Sustainable Developments by Age Group Figure 11: 141 Support for Transit Oriented Sustainable Developments by Cars per Household Figure 12: 141 Support for Transit Oriented Sustainable Developments by Respondent Suburb 142 Figure 13: Key Advantages of a TOD 143 Figure 14: Key Desirable Features within a TOD 144 Figure 15: Preference to Drive to Station Park & Rides, then take Train to Work Figure 16: 160 Preference to Drive to Station Kiss & Ride, then take Train to Work 160 Figure 17: Preference to Provide Park & Rides at Rail Stations 161 Figure 18: Support the Provision of Park & Rides and Kiss & Rides at Rail Stations 162 Figure 19: Park & Rides are Conveniently Located 163 Figure 20: Free Parking Important at Park & Rides 163 Figure 21: No of Parking Bays Available Important at Park & Rides 164 X Picture H shows a close up of the residential areas with townhouses, apartments, duplexes and smaller blocks with 200 – 500 metres of the station/market plaza Picture I shows a close up of a small park area within the residential area shown in Picture H This image shows a mix of townhouses, apartments and corner store all around a small recreational park Picture J shows a walking trail around the edge of a transit oriented development 270 Picture J shows a walking trail around the edge of a transit oriented development Picture K re-shows the whole concept of a Transit Oriented Development Picture K re-shows the whole concept of a Transit Oriented Development 271 Does the concept of living in a transit oriented development appeal to you now or may so in the future? 10) Mark response Yes (119) No (120) Like Close access to public transport (121) Café society (123) Facilities within easy walking distance (125) Sense of community (127) Don’t have to rely on car (129) Good place to retire too (131) Like the European market plaza concept (133) Apartments (135) Bistro (137) Health Club (138) Flower shop (139) Child care (140) Dislike Child Care (122) Too many people (124) The School (126) Buildings too close (128) Townhouses/apartments (130) Noise from trains (132) Foreign to what we’re used too (134) Higher densities in outer parts of TOD Other, list (136) ………………… …………………………………… Quieter outer parts of TOD (141) Walking tracks within easy access (142) Environmentally sustainable (143) Other, list (144) ……………………………… ………………………………………………… Should Have: Hospital/Clinic (145) Newsagents (146) Pharmacy (147) Convenience store (148) Bank cash machines (149) Night clubs (150) Information centre (151) Other, list (152)…………………………………………………………………………… 11) What part(s) of the Transit Oriented Development you particularly prefer or dislike ? Comments, list (153) 272 ……………………………………………………………………………………………… General Comments on TOD: ……………………………………………………………………………………… (154) Picture L shows the provision of a park and ride and drop off area for passengers adjacent to a railway station 12) Do you consider the provision of this type of facility useful at a rail station? Mark response Yes (155) No (156) 12a) If yes, why Ability to live further away from a rail station and still catch a train (157) Convenient (158) Quicker than bus (159) Others, list (160) ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 273 12b) If no, why Live close to a station (161) Too congested (162) Promotes environmental pollution from cars (163) Others,list (164) ……………………………………………………………………………………………… Picture M shows a railway station that is overlooked by a nearby office and homes, plus has good lighting and alarms for security 13) Is security an issue determining your use/potential use of rail station? If yes, what are the issues (list): ………………………………………………………………………………………(165) If no, what are the reasons (list): ……………………………………………………………………………………….(166) 14) What you like or dislike about picture M ? Like Café society (167) Dislike No privacy (168) 274 Activity day and night (169) Security alarms (171) Lighting for security (172) Overlooking for security (174) Other, List (176) No street landscaping (170) Lack of bike lanes to match lock up bike facilities (173) Lack of trees (175) Too higher density (177) Other, list (178) ………………………… Picture N shows typical road congestion to the city 275 Picture O shows examples of factors causing traffic congestion 15) What you consider are the main causes of traffic congestion ? Too many cars on one road (179) Accidents (180) Road Works (181) Bad Weather conditions (182) Bad drivers (183) New roads encourage more cars (184) Not enough road capacity (185) Not enough roads (186) Special events (ie Olympic Torch relay) (187) Motorists not pay the true cost of travel, hence congestion (188) Other, list (189) …………………………………………………………………………………………… 276 Picture P shows different ways of receiving information about road congestion 16) Which ways would you prefer to receive information about traffic congestion ? Over the radio in your car (190) At work on your computer before you leave (191) At home on your computer before you leave (192) On your mobile phone (193) Via normal telephone (194) Key message signs in large public places (195) Message signs in large shopping centres (196) Message signs in large office complexes (197) Messages above major roads (198) GPS – Global Positioning Systems (199) In – car navigation system (200) TV (201) On roads leading to the freeway which gives people the opportunity to take an alternative route (202) Other, list (203) ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 17) When would you want this information ? 15 mins before I leave (204) 277 en route (205) never (206) rarely (207) every morning and evening (208) Other, list (209) ……………………………………………………………………………………………… Picture Q shows the opportunity for drivers to leave a busy congested freeway and park their cars at a station Park & Ride They then complete their journey by train to the city 18) What information about a road ahead would attract you to a Park & Ride facility to complete your journey by train ? Travel times for road vs rail (210) Parking availability (211) Parking cost (212) Trip cost (213) Other, list (214) …………………………………………………………………………… 19) How important (high, medium,and low)are these in affecting your travel choice ? Read out and mark response Travel times for road compared to rail Parking Availability Parking Cost Trip Cost High (215) High (218) High (221) High (224) 278 Medium (216) Medium (219) Medium (222) Medium (225) Low (217) Low (220) Low (223) Low (226) 20) What features are important to you in a Park & Ride ? Free parking (227) Security (228) Shade (229) Hours of operation (230) Station staff present all hours (231) Proximity (232) Level of train service and frequency (233) Number of parking bays available (234) Other, list (235) ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 21) Should Park & Rides be incorporated within a TOD ? Mark response Yes (236) No (237) Comments (238)………………………………………………………………………… Picture R shows the opportunity for people to access products from shops by ordering them over the internet and then having them delivered either to their homes, work or elsewhere 22) Is there internet access at home ? Mark response Yes (239) No (240) 279 23) Is the internet used for shopping ? Mark response Yes (241) No (242) 24) If yes, is the product delivered or you collected it ? Mark response Delivered (243) Collected (244) Other, list (245)……………………………………………………………………… 25) If yes, what are the main advantages of internet shopping ? Comments, list ………………………………………………………………………(246) 26) If yes, what is being bought ? Food (247) Electrical (248) Furniture (249) Services (250) Other, list (251) 27) If yes, how often ? Mark response Daily (252) Once a week (253) Once a month (254) Less often (255) 26) If no, would you be interested in using the internet for shopping if you had access ? Mark response Yes (256) No (257) 280 Appendix 9: Perth Station’s Patronage by Origin, Data Collection Form Surveyor’s Name: Station Name: Start Time: Finish Time: Park & Ride Rego No Occupants Kiss & Ride Rego No Occupants Bus Number Bus Destination Numbers getting off Bus Maun Pick Up Points & Nos (ask Driver) Walker’s Street Address No Walkers Cyclist’s Street Address Cyclist’s Suburb 281 Appendix 10: Surveyor Craig Watson David Kelly Bret Homer Ben O’Shea Sarwadi Linda MacDonald Robert Tana Rory Dunn Kim Robinson Amanda Whatmore Kelly Bellingham Dirk Foulger Rhondda De Cruz Rosalind De Cruz Jed Appleton Roy Richter Santha Veerappan Rory Dunn Kim Robinson Amanda Whatmore Kelly Bellingham Dirk Foulger Craig Watson David Kelly Bret Holmer Ben O’Shea Sarwadi Linda MacDonald Robert Tana Rhondda De Cruz Rosalind De Cruz Jed Appleton Roy Richter Santha Veerappan Kim Robertson Amanda Whatmore Kelly Bellingham Dirk Foulger Rhondda De Cruz Rosalind De Cruz Jed Appleton Roy Richter Evan Schnell Santha Veerappan Surveyor’s by Perth Station, Date and Start Time Station: Currambine Currambine Currambine Currambine Currambine Currambine Currambine Currambine Joondalup Joondalup Joondalup Joondalup Joondalup Joondalup Joondalup Joondalup Joondalup Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Warwick Fremantle Fremantle Fremantle Fremantle Fremantle Fremantle Fremantle Fremantle Fremantle Fremantle Date: Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Tue 2nd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Wed 3rd June 1998 Thur 4th June 1998 Thur 4th June 1998 Thur 4th June 1998 Thur 4th June 1998 Thur 4th June 1998 Thur 4th June 1998 Thur 4th June 1998 Thur 4th June 1998 Thur 4th June 1998 Thur 4th June 1998 282 Start: 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 5.30am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am Appendix 10: Surveyor’s by Perth Station, Date and Start Time Surveyor Rory Dunn Kim Robinson Amanda Whatmore Kelly Bellingham Dirk Foulger Sharon Backhouse Craig Watson David Kelly Darren Kearney Bret Holmer Ben O’Shea Sarwadi Linda MacDonald Robert Tana Rhondda De Cruz Rosalind De Cruz Tim Morris Jed Appleton Roy Richter Evan Schnell Santha Veerappan Station: Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Midland Date: 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 5th June 1998 283 Start: 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am 6.00am Appendix 11 PROPOSED SITE Photo of Test Site for Application of Model to Fitzgibbon NEW TOD STATION 284 ... within the Australian urban setting A greater understanding of the potential catchment area that a TOD and/ or Park & Ride may take to maximise patronage demands In the case of this latter factor, the. .. the application of the Park & Ride and TOD concepts within the Australian setting, allows for the development of a new integrated planning framework that can maximize public transport patronage. .. facilities around public transport interchanges as a means of increasing public transport patronage The research aims to answer the question: what are the appropriate transport and land use interactions,