Infrastructure Planning for TOD Zone of Chikkabanawara of Sub-urban Station, Bengaluru

Abstract

One of Karnataka, India\\\'s cities with the fastest population growth is Bengaluru. Inadequate walking and cycling infrastructure made people choose personal vehicles over sustainable transport options more often while the city focused on infrastructure to reduce traffic. By 2035, the Comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP) Bengaluru (2020) seeks to expand public transportation\\\'s mode share from 42% to 70%. In order to reach this goal, it is crucial to guarantee that more people have easy access to public transport options in addition to increasing the mass transit infrastructure, as increased access to PT tends to encourage more people to utilise it rather than their own motorised vehicles. To this end, the city of Bengaluru has developed a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) policy. Walkability, Cyclability, Quality of Public Transport Infrastructure, Safety Infrastructure at Junctions, Quality of Intermediate Public Transport, and Public Amenities that Support the Uptake of Sustainable Mobility Modes are the parameters taken up as part of. The study region of Chikkabanawara is situated on the outskirts of the city of Bangalore and has the distinctive feature of greenfield development with prominence of educational institutions, commercial businesses, residential areas, and high-rise flats in the 500-meter buffer zone. 17.8 km of roads make up the Chikkabanawara study area\\\'s overall road network, with a ROW of 6–9 m on one-third of those roads. A ROW of 9–21 metres is present on all major roadways. Most roads have a carriageway of 3-6 metres. Only 6.08 kilometres of the 17.8 km overall road network are good for walks. The majority of the existing footpath network, which is made up of about half of them, is only 1-2 metres wide and is only found on major highways; internal roads are not equipped with footpaths. Out of the whole 6.09km footpath network that is now in place, there are only 1.47km of decent and usable footpaths. Especially on the major roadways, around one-third of the existing sidewalks are uneven and broken apart.

Introduction

I. INTRODUCTION TO PARAMETERS

 the criteria used to establish a region for an infrastructure. Since NMT was the main topic, pertinent parameters were chosen to determine the current state of the chosen locations. The currently assigned infrastructure will serve as a general indicator of the station's current infrastructure quality.

A. Carriageway

The carriageway is the portion of the road that is open to automobile traffic. An asphalt, white-topped (concrete), or unmetalled (kutcha road) roadway surface are all options. This parameter takes into account the number of lanes, the flow direction, and the median widths.

B. Footpath Infrastructure

The presence of a distinct pedestrian path, whether it be a covered drain or paved paths, is referred to as footpath infrastructure. The parameter evaluates a continuous path's width, curb height, and condition and records problems with the walking surface, obstruction of the path by trees, protruding tree roots, etc., and discontinuous paths caused by property entrances and exits. Additionally, the criteria look for ramps and tactile pavement that permit universal accessibility.

C. Footpath Encroachment

Once the presence of footpath is established, the footpaths are further surveyed to check for any external disturbances in the form of construction debris, signages, street vendors, transformers etc., that obstructs a clear and continuous pathway.

D. Junctions

Junctions are points of contact between different roads. Data pertaining to junctions, number of arms, level of control and surveillance are collected. Pedestrian crossings and availability of ramps are also examined to understand the walkability of the junction.

E. Amenities

Two amenities such as public toilets and dustbins are mapped and recorded for the entire demarcated area. The quality of services of public toilets and segregation of dry and wet solid waste in dustbins are also recorded.

F. Bus Stop

 Bus stops in and around the TOD boundary are mapped which include details such as the availability of shelter, seating, signages, dustbins, adequate lighting, route information map etc.

II. AIM

To provide the accessibility of the transit stations by creating pedestrian and Non-motorized (NMT) friendly infrastructure to the sub-urban station of Banaswadi and Chikkabanawara.

III. OBJECTIVE

1. The enhances existing public transport systems by providing secure access to the public transport through walking & cycling.
2. To establish a dense road network within the area for safe and easy movement and connectivity of NMT and pedestrians between various uses as well as to transit stations.

VI. STRATEGIES

1. Creating an accessible and integrated transit infrastructure integrating and layering the sub-urban station with other public transport options to create a network for sustainable mobility.
2. Preparing for busy streets constructing a network of bicycle and pedestrian paths in the central area of the TOD that will improve the condition of the streets and provide a strong, universally accessible link between the demand zones and the sub-urban stations.
3. Improving security and safety through junction design, lighting, and readable wayfinding signs, among other things. By using safe junction designs, well-lit streets, and readable wayfinding signage, we can create a safe and secure infrastructure for pedestrians.

VII. PROPOSAL

Conclusion

With regard to road widths, a distinct hierarchy of streets is seen. Only 66% (14.5km of 21.9km) of the network\\\'s overall length is covered by footpaths. 70% of the footpaths—10.1 km of the 14.5 km—are encroached, with parking making up the majority. The pedestrian network, which includes walkways and crossings, is unfinished and disjointed, particularly at intersections. Poor facilities for pedestrians are indicated by the absence of amenities like public restrooms, trash cans, and benches. At bus stops, there is a lack of cover, signage, benches, and lighting.

References

[1] Brandon Bukowski, D. B. (2013). A Comparative Study of Transit-Oriented Developments in Hong Kong. [2] Choerunnisa, P. D. (2018). Development of Methodology to Evaluate TOD Feasibility in Built-up Environment (Case Study:. PlanoCosmo International Conference. [3] CURTIS, C. (2008). Evolution of the Transit-oriented Development Model for Low-density. [4] Galetzka, T. (2015). Amsterdam, infrastructure and transit oriented development. [5] Megawati. (2020). Study of Vertical Residential Development in the Poris Plawad Mass Transportation Development. Materials Science and Engineering. [6] Priyanshi Dhimole, N. K. (2014). Strategies and Land Use Restructuring for Transit Oriented Development in Ahmedabad, using . Esri India User Conference. [7] Renne, J. L. (n.d.). Evaluating Transit-Oriented Development Using a Sustainability Framework: Lessons from . [8] shaofei, A. H. (2021). measuring build of green envinorment of green oriented development: A factor cluster - anaysis of rail station areas in singapore. www.keaipublication.com. [9] Vergel, D. A. (2013). BRT-Oriented Development in Quito and Bogotá.

Copyright

Copyright © 2023 Mudavath Meghanath, Dr. Muhammad Danish. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.