Urban Design Dissertation - Cardiff University by Jafar Abbas

Role of a transit-oriented development (TOD) to reduce community severance caused by rail infrastucture: The case of Sandhurst Road station, Mumbai

Abbas Jafar RbDP MA Urban Design 2016-17 Cardiff University 1

CANDIDATE’S ID NUMBER

1664176

CANDIDATE’S SURNAME

Abbas

CANDIDATE’S FULL FORENAMES

Jafar

DECLARATION This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree. Signed …………………………Jafar Abbas……………………. (candidate)

Date 02/10/2017

STATEMENT 1 This dissertation is being submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MA in Urban Design Signed ………………………… Jafar Abbas …………………. (candidate)

Date 02/10/2017

STATEMENT 2 This dissertation is the result of my own independent work/investigation, except where otherwise stated. Other sources are acknowledged by footnotes giving explicit references. A Bibliography is appended. Signed ………………………… Jafar Abbas …………………. (candidate)

Date 02/10/2017

STATEMENT 3 – TO BE COMPLETED WHERE THE SECOND COPY OF THE DISSERTATION IS SUBMITTED IN AN APPROVED ELECTRONIC FORMAT I confirm that the electronic copy is identical to the bound copy of the dissertation Signed ………………………… Jafar Abbas ………………. (candidate)

Date 02/10/2017

STATEMENT 4 I hereby give consent for my dissertation, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for inter-library loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations. Signed …………………………… Jafar Abbas ………………. (candidate)

Date 02/10/2017

STATEMENT 5 - BAR ON ACCESS APPROVED I hereby give consent for my dissertation, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for inter-library loans after expiry of a bar on access approved by the Graduate Development Committee. Signed …………………… Jafar Abbas …………………. (candidate)

Date 02/10/2017

To the professors, friends and family who helped me get through this year in Cardiff.

Abstract This research explores the effects of railway infrastructure on its neighbourhood and how communities get severed from each other in due course of time. Although rail infrastructure helps in physically connecting the neighbourhood to different places at a macro level; it has adverse effects on the lives of people living on either sides of that same infrastructure. Principles of transit-oriented development play an important role in mitigating this severance and its role has been discussed in this research. A literature review of these two aspects and their inter-relation, supported by a precedent analysis, served as the basis of a broader framework to conceptualise design strategies and ideas which were then used on the design site in Mumbai, India. Even though the research conclusion gives a general framework which can be used in different contexts, each location has its own unique attributes and issues which need to be dealt on a local level. This research doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t give a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;one size fits allâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; solution, but helps in providing a foundation for reducing community severance caused by rail infrastructure.

Table of contents PART 1 - RESEARCH 1. Introduction 09 2. Literature Review 12 3. Precedent Analysis 24 4. Research Conclusion 40

PART 2 - Design Project 5. Site introduction 43 6.Site analysis 52 7. Vision and spatial strategies 62 8. Masterplan 64 9. Evaluation of design and conclusions 82 Appendices 84 Bibliography 90

PART 1: RESEARCH

01 Introduction 1.1. Research background and justification Transport infrastructure is ideally used to connect people and places. Community severance is caused when this infrastructure creates a barrier for people to access goods, amenities, services, or personal networks at local level. This concept is usually linked to the barrier effect of roads on pedestrian movement and accessibility (Anciaes, 2015; Mindell and Karlsen, 2012). However, severance is a broader phenomenon, impacting peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s choice of what to do or not, and their perception of a place (Appleyard and Lintell, 1972; Appleyard et al., 1981). According to Handy (2003), severance is the converse of connectivity (which relates to the physical characteristics of the street network) and/ or community cohesion (which relates to the social implications of those physical characteristics). Existing research on community severance is mainly focused on urban roads and highways (Lassiere, 1976; Guo, Black and Dunne, 2001). Transport infrastructure which has restricted access for pedestrians such as railway lines (Chang et al., 2014; Lee and Sohn, 2014), tend to be a bigger barrier for mobility and social cohesion, and need to be studied in depth. If not planned properly, rail infrastructure can be a major detriment in bringing the community together and creating an inclusive environment. It separates people, reduces use of shared amenities and creates fragmented urban network. According to Calthorpe (1993), a transit oriented development (TOD) has a pedestrian friendly street network, mix of housing types and densities, high quality public space, mix of uses within walking distance and encourages infill and redevelopment along transit corridors within existing neighbourhoods..The research would, therefore, try to emphasize and highlight the adverse effects rail infrastructure has on communities and the potential of a TOD approach to reduce the severance caused by it, taking into account the physical and social setting of a particular site. The purpose for this research is not to discourage the building of rail infrastructure because it might lead to community severance, but to find ways to optimize its benefits and bring communities together in more effective ways.

1.2. Research question, aim and objectives 1.2.1. Research question

How can community severance, caused by rail infrastucture, be reduced by principles of Transit Oriented Development (TOD)?

1.2.2. Research aim and objectives The primary aim of this research is to investigate the relationship between community severance and its mitigation by a development based on TOD principles, and use the lessons learnt to be applied on a neighbourhood scale design site. In order to fulfill this aim, a number of objectives have to be achieved which are described below: a. Collect definitions and identify methods to assess community severance from literature b. Examine community severance mitigation methods in the literature c. Collect definitions and identify principles of TOD d. Synthesize literature from the above objectives and establish a co-relation between community severance mitigation and TOD principles. e. Examine a precedent to supplement literature synthesis on the co-relation between community severance mitigation and TOD principles. f. Formulate design principles and strategies for mitigating community severance on a neighbourhood scale. g. Apply and test design principles on neighbourhood design site. To answer the research question, the literature review needs to find the relationship between community severance and transit-oriented development. Combined with a precedent analysis, the research will help in formulating design guidelines and strategies that decrease community severance by applying principles of TOD.

Community Severance

Transit Oriented Development

Carry out a comprehensive literature review and identify relations between the two concepts

Precedent Study - Kings Cross Redevelopment Analyse community severance before the redevelopment and how it has reduced after the development started. Identify potential for transferability of policies in different site context

Identify a set of design principles and strategies that can be applied to reduce community severance caused by railway infrastructure

1.3. Research limitations This research largely relied on literature and secondary data due to time and financial constraints. One precedent analysis has been done so as to replicate the development model in the design site context. Relying on more than one precedent would have required additional data to support the selection of individual parts of the development model to be replicated. Ideally given a longer duration for research, more precedents could have been analysed and a series of variables could have been selectively extracted to develop a model increasing the relevance of the research.

02 Literature review The following review of literature to date will cover the concepts of community severance and transit-oriented development separately. There will be an effort of inter-relating these concepts thorugh the literature. The conlcusion will give a better understaning of the effects of community severance and how the principles of transit-oriented development can help in mitigating them.

2.1 What is community severance?

The concept of community severance was initially used by those concerned with the development of dormitory suburbs and the increase in journey length and time to work. Pigou (1924) explains severance as the divorce of residence and the work place while Liepmann (1944) discusses the severance of dwelling and the workplace and its impact on the community. In the late fifties, the social and psychological dimension of severance started to be noted by researchers and practitioners. A summary of different concepts relating to community severance has been summarised in table 2.1. and shows how the definition has evolved from severance of physical dimension to that of different dimensions which include social and psychological aspects. There are different variants to describe the issue of severance, which includes terms such as community severance (UK DOT, 1983; Clark et al., 1991), social severance (Lee and Tagg, 1976; Tate, 1997), barrier effect and community effects. It is noted that there is a lack of collective agreement on one single definition of community severance and it is still being studied widely and new definitions with new dimensions being introduced by researchers with time. Community severance is regarded as a transport issue because the majority of the barriers separating urban neighbourhoods, such as roads and railways, and other big infrastructure such as railway stations, airports, and car parking areas are essentially related to transport system (HĂŠran, 2011). It limits the freedom of movement of users of non-motorised means of transport such as cycling (Emond and Handy, 2012) and walking (Hine, 1996) and also limits the social contact of residents living on opposite sides of a road (Appleyard and Lintell, 1972).

Table 2.1. Evolution of the concept of community severance Originator

Year

Definition and meaning

Pigou

1924

Severance is the divorce between residence and work place

UK Urban Motorway Project Team

1972

The sum of the divisive effects a major urban road has on the inhabitants either side of it

Lee et al

1975

A complex social response to the presence of a physical barrier and is measured at the levels of perception, cognition and behaviour

Ministry of Transport, Manual of Environmental Appraisal, Part B, S 4

1983

The separation of residents from facilities and services they use within their community, from friends and relations and perhaps from place of work as a result of changes in road patterns and traffic levels

Clark et al

1991

Community severance is the sum of the divisive effects a road has on those in the locality

Department for Transport DMRB Volume 11, 1993

1993

The separation of residents from facilities and services they use within their community caused by new or improved roads or by changes in traffic flows

SACTRA, 1999

1999

Separation of adjacent areas by road or rail infrastructure or heavy traffic, causing negative impact on human beings or flora and fauna

Egan et al

2003

Reduction of access to the local amenities and disruption to the social connections due to presence of a physical barrier in the city

GrisolĂa, Lopez and Ortuzar

2015

Community severance changes the travel pattern of the people due to impact of the transport infrastrucutre and its impact on the psychological and physical aspects. Main effects of severance are separation of the communities and limitations in accessibility.

Source: Compiled and adapted from Bradbury et.al., 2007, Egan et al., 2003 and Grisolia, Lopez and Ortuza., 2015.

2.2 Dimensions of community severance: Anciaes, Jones and Mindell (2015) state that the the problem of severance can be untangled into four aspects (Fig. 2.1.) The arrows represent two different type of movements: the dominant motorised mode of transport using large infrastructure and the other less dominant motorised or non-motorised mode using local infrastructure. The dominant mode of transport acts as a barrier or obstacle for people using the less dominant mode of transport to access services, facilities, social interactions and public transport. Fig. 2.1. Elements to define community severance

2. WHO? - residents - other people using the area - only vulnerable groups

3. HOW? - walk - cycle - motorised modes

4. WHERE? - services and facilities - work - social interaction - public transport nodes

1. WHAT? - transport infrastucture - motorised traffic Source: Anciaes, Jones and Mindell, 2015. p.295. Redrawn by Author.

There are numerous facilities that attract people in a neighbourhood to cross the severing railway infrastructure on a daily basis. Schools, clinics, hospitals, shops and leisure facilities are few of them. New patterns of accessibility evolves if a severing feature develops within a community, as shown in Fig.2.2. Despite these changes, findings suggest that severance is a perplexing concept for people to grasp (Clark, et al., 1991, p.11) unless it gets characterized by being associated with noise, danger, pollution or delay. But community severance has more dimensions to it and is explained diagrammatically in Fig.2.3. Fig. 2.2. Schematic diagram of typical community severance BEFORE

AFTER Shopping

Shopping

Homes

Shopping

Homes

School

Source: Department of Transport (UK), 1983. Redrawn by Author.

Homes

Shopping

rin

Homes

tur

School

Fig.2.3. Different dimensions of community severance Individual

Physical Barrier

a. Static (Guo, Black and Dunne, 2001): - Controlled crossing points (Guo, Black and Dunne, 2001) - Street network (Jones, Boujenko and Marshal, 2007) - Railway line (Chang et al., 2014; Lee and Sohn, 2014). b. Dynamic (Guo, Black and Dunne, 2001): - Vehicular flow (Guo, Black and Dunne, 2001; Mindell and Karlsen, 2012; Anciaes, Jones and Mindell, 2015)

Psychological Barrier

- Traffic noise (Clark et al., 1991; SEU, 2003) - Traffic pollution (Clark et al., 1991) - Percieved danger (Clark et al., 1991)

Cumulative effect of physical and psychological barrier Social Barrier

- Disruption of neighbourhood lifestyle (Lee and Tagg, 1976) - Inhibition to social interaction (SEU, 2003)

Effects on individual and community (Adapted from Anciaes et al., 2016)

Dimensions of community severance

- Mobility - Accessibility - Travel decisions - Independence - Active travel - Physical and mental health - Well-being - Healthy Ageing

Community

- Sense of place - Social encounters - Social contacts - Social networks - Resilience - Gender inequality - Socio economic inequality - Distributive justice

Source: Compiled by author.

2.2 Methods to assess severance: Since there is no fixed definition of community severence, the methods to assess it vary greatly. A list of different methods prescribed by different government manuals from the United Kingdom and New Zealand have been stated in Table.2.2. Majority of these methods are focused on residential users and do not encompass non-residential users to a great extent. People who have parked their cars nearby and who use public transport to come to the neighbourhood are left out of the vulnerable group and the catchment area though they also face the same physical and psychological severance.

Table 2.2. Different methods to assess com Originator The Manual of Environmental Appraisal (Department of Transport, UK) - 1983

SACTRA (Standing Advisory Committe for Trunk Road Appraisal, UK) - 1986

London Assessment Studies (1986)

Appriasal of Community Severance (Transport Research Laboratory) - Clark et al., 1991

Proposed New Zealand Evaluation Framework - Tate, 1997

New Zeland Transport Agency - Marsh and Watts, 2012

Source: Summarised from Cleary, 2016

mmunity severance Assessment method - Four stage classification of severance: none, slight, moderate, severe. - Data collected is: • changes in pedestian walking distances to key facilities • changes in vehicle journey time to key facilities - Data collection same as above method - Additional data required: • delays to pedestrian should be included in economic evaluation • attention given to access to facilities required by vulnerable groups living within particular catchment areas - Four parts of London were assessed by different consultant groups. Key methodological components included: • Two studies defined most likely vulnerable groups within population and sub-populations. List of facilities required by them was made and trip beginnings and ends were therefore described to assess severance. • One study focused on delays on crossing points. Counting and classifying of physical attributes of pedestrian crossings. • two studies defined 400 mt catchment areas for community facilities. Gross severance was defined by number of people within the catchment area but on the wrong side of the road link. - Three essential components to assess potential community severance: • defining facilities to which access is potentially impaired. • defining cathcment areas. Boundaries should be halfway to nearest alternative facility • Estimating total vulnerable population groups: i)groups without full mobility, ii) groups with a need for safety, iii) groups depending on locality, iv) and other less vulnerable group - Assessment would entail: • understanding the number of people in each vulnerable group • qualitative assessment of difficulties likely to be encountered done by filed officers • counting the number of trips made to each facility - A three-step framework for evaluating community severance: • Identify and match cathcment areas and destinations, particularly for young children and elder people. Consult community to generate walking patterns • Observe/survey to determine trip patterns. Classify them for different user groups such as children, adults, elderly and people with impaired mobility. Calculations are used to determine change in trip pattern. • Calculate the probability of a child to be allowed to cross a road unaccompanied. - Adopt the following index for vulnerable populations: • for a particular vulnerabel group, indetify the catchment area and the destinations they want to go. • then count the number of trips by each vulnerable group separately using origin/destination surveys - Data could be collected by three different sources and triangulated to define the effect of severance: • Quantitative – surveys, observation, use and frequency of public transport, usage statistics for key destinations, traffic volume and speed, actual measurements of noise and pollution. • Qualitative - focus groups and interviews to investigate individual’s perspective for severance • Desk-based research - changes in the attractiveness and comfort for vulnerable groups for a particular area in terms of air quality, noise, visual amenity, vibration, etc.

Researchers, over the last four decades, have produced a number of methods to measure community severance more objectively than the methods contained in government or official documents (Anciaes, Jones and Mindell, 2015). Table 2.3. shows the questions addressed and the resultant attributes measured by each question. Though the focus of the table is on the effects of roads on pedestrians, many of the listed points apply to other transport infrastructure such as railways and other groups such as cyclists (Anciaes, Jones and Mindell, 2015).

Table X: Indicators of community severance Indicator

Assessment method

Attributes

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Crossabilityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

How easy is it to cross the barrier?

Charecteristics of roads, motorised traffic and, crossing facilities vs. pedestrain delay, flows, routes, crossing behaviour

Walkability

Does the barrier reduce the ability to walk around?

Connectivity; obstacles to walking

Accessibility

Does the barrier prevent people from reaching certain destinations?

Attractiveness of destinations; walking opportunities

Quality

Does the barrier reduce the quality of the walking experience?

Amenity; safety; perceptions

Source: Anciaes, Jones and Mindell, 2015. pp. 298.

This research makes no conclusion about which method or indicators should be used for measuring severance for the design site, since all these approaches need substantial additional data and that is beyond the scope of this research.

2.4. Traditional mitigation methods as a solution to severance Community severance causes trip delay, diversion or suppression, which affects the ability of people to access key services and maintain social bonds across the other side of the severing infrastructure. James, Millington and Tomlinson (2005), say that majority of the available severance mitigation methods are physical infrastructure facilities and are mode-specific, like footways, pedestrian, cycle and equestrian crossings, traffic calming and refuges. They are applied to improve walking and cycling atmosphere and also lessen barriers to walk and cycle. But often these methods are not suitable for all members of the society. Underpasses and overbridges have their own set of problems, for example, underpasses are generally disliked and there is a sense of fear to go through them if they are not maintained properly (Bradbury et al., 2007). There are other factors which contribute to severance and are not discussed by existing mitigation measures in the literature. A majority of them deal with the physical aspect of severance and less importance is given to psychological and social effects of community severance. Removing physical barriers is seen as the only solution to severance. In the next chapter, TOD will be discussedThe next section in the study would deal with TOD and how it can help in mitigating severance in areas with railway infrastructure.

2.4. What is transit-oriented development (TOD)? Transitâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s origin can be traced back to the advent of horse-drawn streetcar. Transportation modes such as walking, streetcars, or automobiles have helped shaping cities at least partially. Many of the urban design patterns we tend to reinstate today were common in cities before the rise of automobiles because they simply arose spontaneously in cities for pedestrians (Dittmar, Belzer and Autler, 2004). TOD is a combination of city revitalization, suburban renewal, regional planning and walkable neighbourhoods combined together (Calthorpe, 2004). The evolution of this concept is summarised in Table.x. A public place surrounding the transit infrastructure serves as a community gathering spot like a modern version of the Greek agora (Bernick and Cervero, 1997, p. 5) which can help in improving the physical and social connections in a neighbourhood. TOD is also claimed to improve the quality of urban life by providing more opportunities for meetings in the public domain, creating a more urban environment, as opposed to the socially segregated urban environment of the more automobile-oriented developments (Curtis, Renne, & Bertolini, 2009). Fix.x. Evolution of the concept of TOD Originator

Year

Definition and meaning

Calthorpe

1993

Moderate and high-density housing, along with complimentary public uses, jobs, retail and services, concentrated in mixed-use developments at strategic points along the regional transit system

Salvensen

1996

Development within a specified geographical area around a transit station with a variety of land uses and a multiplicity of landowners

Bernick and Cervero

1997

A compact, mixed-use community, centered around a transit station that, by design, invites residents, workers, and shoppers to drive their cars less and ride mass transit more. The transit village extends roughly a quarter mile from a transit station, a distance that can be covered in about 5 minutes by foot. The centerpiece of the transit village is the transit station itself and the civic and public spaces that surround it

Boarnet and Crane

1998

The practice of developing or intensifying residential land use near rail stations

Still

2002

A mixed-use community that encourages people to live near transit services and to decrease their dependence on driving

2.5 Key design principles of TOD

Improved public transport - Less dependency on private vehicles (Calthorpe, 1993; Susilo et al., 2012)

Mix of land use (Calthorpe, 1993; Belzer and Autler 2002; Olaru et al., 2011)

Transit-Oriented Development

Pedestrian friendly - walking and cycling (Calthorpe, 1993; Bernick and Cervero, 1997 )

High density (Curtis, 2008)

Public plazas/spaces adjacent to station

2.6. What are the benefits of TOD? A recent study, Factors for Success in California’s Transit-Oriented Development, by Arrington and Parker (2001) commissioned by the California Department of Transportation, identified potential benefits of TOD. The study cites research showing that TOD can: Arrington and Parker (2001) identified potential benefits of TOD in a report comissioned by California Departmnet of Transportation. Few of these benefits which relate to this research are stated below: 1. Provide mobility choices: They create “activity nodes” which are linked by transit and provides options for mobility. They increase the ability of young people, elderly, people who prefer not to drive to get around. 2. Increase public safety: They create active places which are busy during different times of the day by providing “eyes on the street”. TOD also increases safety for the pedestrians, transit users and other people. 3. Conserve resource lands and open space: By using less land it opens up space for open spaces.

2.7. Gap in knowledge Literature on community severance is mainly focused on itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s definitions and assessment methods. It provides weak solutions for mitigating severance. Literature on TOD lacks the assessment of the community cohesion and does not give an in depth understanding of their inter-relation. Many large scale redevelopments along transit corridors have mitigated or alleviated community severance knowingly or unknowingly. There is a need to identify the best practices which mitigate the impact of community severance in the best possible way. Such successful precedents need to be analysed in depth to understand how the policy and design principles have tried to achieve the reduction in severance.

TOD Principles

Mix of Uses

Pedestrian Friendly

- Provides opportunities for vulnerable people to access the neighbourhood freely - Provides people the ability to get around the nieghbourhood

Effects on Physical Severance

Psychological Severence

- Keeps streets active through different times of day - Reduces perception of fear by putting more eyes on street

- Better walking facilities increases peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s desire to walk on the streets - Better crossing facilities reduces fear of being hit by a vehicle

Social Severance

- Brings people of diverse socio-economic backgrounds together -

- Increases chances of meeting and increasing social contacts in the neighbourhood

2.7. Conclusions - Linking community severance to TOD The following table attempts to connect dimensions of community severance and transit-oriented development as a synthesis of the literature review put forward in this research.

High Density

Better Public Transport

Public places/plazas around transit stations

- Reduces the amount of vehicles on road - Encourages people to walk and access transport facilities if they are within comfortable walking distance

- Connects the station area with an open and accessible place

- Increases eyes on the street - Less chances of crime

- Fear of crossing roads decreases as there are less vehicles on road

- Makes the surrounding more active, vibrant and enjoyable

- Increases opportunities for social encounters

- Gives opportunity for the people to connect with other people at a macro scale - Makes neighbourhood easily accessible for physically impaired or people with reduced mobility by increasing bus services or routes passing across the tracks

- Brings people together from either sides of the railway track providing a space to gather

03 Precedent Analysis This chapter aims to study the redevelopment of King’s Cross Central in London. It will help in understanding how the former railway lands had divided communities and how the new development is trying to reduce this severance through the ongoing redevelopment. Different aspects will be studied and analysed which have helped in improving the spatial character of the area and made it permeable and welcoming to it’s neighbourhood. Conclusions will then entail a model of development which is portable across geographical boundaries and can be applied in different contexts.

3.1 Overview of King’s Cross Central The site is located adjacent to the King’s Cross and St Pancras station in central London, extending towards the north direction. Before the development started on this brownfield land, the site consisted mainly of railway sidings, warehouses, disused buildings and contaminated land as well as a variety of listed historic buildings and structures. The plan to move the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL) from Waterloo to St Pancras proved as the main catalyst for the regeneration of the site. London and Continental Railways Limited (LCR) and Exel (now DHL), who owned the majority of the lands, decided to develop it and appointed Argent in 2001 as the development partner. The redevelopment plan for this 67 acres of land included constructing 50 new buildings, 1900 new homes, 20 new streets, 10 new public parks and squares and aimed to bring 30,000 people for living, working and leisure activities by 2016 (King’s Cross, 2017).

3.2. Selection criteria - The selection for the precedent analysis needs to fulfill two criterion - firstly the site has to be a railway infrastructure which shows signs of community severance evidently and the second criteria is of it’s redevelopment using principles of TOD, fully or partly with other planning and design principles. - In King’s Cross, the physical barriers of the rail infrastructure (see fig.3.2.) have contributed to severing communities historically as well as created lack of opportunities to meet through shared open places and facilities for people living in it’s vicinity (Camden Council and Islington Council, n.d.). Apart from the physical neglect, the place had become synonymous with prostitution, drugs and physical crime (Brenner, 2014). - The redevelopment at King’s Cross Central is a 67 acre mixed use development with the buildings organised around 26 acres (40%) of internal streets and open spaces to form a new public realm for the community. Thousands of students, workers, residents and tourists inhabit King’s Cross today, which is the largest city-centre redevelopment in whole of Europe (ULI Case Studies, 2014).

3.3. Methodology for analysis Spatial analysis Community severance Transit Oriented Development

Accessibility Mix of uses Public places and public realm

Role of actors involved in the development

Model of development applicable across geographical boundaries

St Pancras station

London Borough of Camden

King’s Cross station

London Borough of Islington

Fig. 3.1. Proposed development of King’s Cross Central (Image source: Designleb, 2014. Edited by Author)

Fig. 3.2. Historical evolution of King’s Cross Area (Source: Extracted from https://www.kingscross.co.uk/) Year - 1746

Year - 1827

Year - 1862

Year - 1957

Collage of Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Central area depicting itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s industrial past (Source: Author)

Collage of Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Central area depicting itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new development and the thriving community life (Source: Author)

3.4 Analysis

King’s Cross Central

3.4.1. Spatial analysis Before the development: - The site forms a large urban void with limited connections for vehicular or pedestrain access - Disrupts urban grain of the surrounding neighbourhoods - As seen in fig.3.3., the site is least integrated with its surrounding - The map below (fig. 3.4.) depicts similarities with the space sytax analysis, where in the south-east part of the site being the centre of community life. - The site acts as an edge for the community, driving away the communities it.

Edge

Centre Living and working Major transport interchange Major public buildings Shopping, eating and drinking Heritage buildings on King’s Cross Central site

Fig. 3.4. Map showing existing uses and the community life and integration around the King’s Cross site before the development.

(Source: Argent St George, Continental Railways and Exel, Not Dated. p. 25)

High

Low

Integration

Fig. 3.3. Integration analysis through space syntax before the development of King’s Cross Central (Source: Author)

After the development:

King’s Cross Central

- The redevelopment will help in bridging the gap between the communities by creating a netwrok of vehicular and pedestrian paths. - The urban grain is still fragmented due to the presence of two station complex of St Pancras and King’s Cross and their associated railway tracks. - As seen in fig.3.5., the integration level of the site will increase from extremely low to medium and high, once the development completes in the year 2020. - The map below (fig. 3.6.) depicts similarities with the space sytax analysis, with the centre of the new development showing a pattern of increased activity and life. - The development will create a subcentre for living and working bringing more people from the surrounding communities together along with a number of people from other parts of London and abroad.

Edge

High

Low

Integration

Fig. 3.5. Integration analysis through space syntax after the development of King’s Cross Central completes in 2020 (Source: Author)

Centre Living and working Major transport interchange Major public buildings Shopping, eating and drinking Heritage buildings on King’s Cross Central site

Fig. 3.6. Map showing existing and proposed land uses and the envisioned community life and integration around the King’s Cross site after the completion of development in 2020. (Source: Argent St George, Continental Railways and Exel, Not Dated. p. 61)

3.4.2. Accessibility - After the development gets completed, King’s Cross Central will have a variety of street network and pedestrian/cycling paths (see Fig.3.7.) - The main vehicular route runs north-south across the site. The route gets slightly detoured at the northern end, limiting the chances of an increase in vehicular traffic coming from York Way towards Euston road. - Vehicular paths are provided with excellent sidewalks for pedestrians and cyclists along with the many pedestrian/ cyclists only areas and a few shared streets. Many cycle stands are also provided througout the site as seen in Fig.3.7. - Car parking is limited on the streets with few underground car parks

Yor

s nt’ ge Re l na

Ca ay

York Way

d oo

Pedestrian route

St ras n tio

Sta

King’s Cross Station

dla Mi

Shared streets

to us

Vehicular route

Entrance to railway stations Cycle stands

Fig. 3.7. Routes through the area (Source: Author)

- The site is well connected with public transport network. There are three railway stations in the vicinity and 40 bus stops within 10 minutes walking distance from the center. - There are 14 bus routes originating or passing through the entrance of King’s Cross St Pancras station (King’s Cross Central Limited Partnership, 2014. Appendix B). 4 new bus stops and a potential new bus route is planned as seen in fig.3.8. (Argent St George, Continental Railways and Exel, n.d. p.46), connecting the area to the wider urban fabric of London. - The King’s Cross St Pancras station is connected through the following networks: International - Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL) National - Great North Eastern Railway (GNER) Midland Main Line Regional - Thameslink and Thameslink 2000 - 6 London underground tube lines

1000 mt radius

King’s Cross Station St. Pancras Station

Euston Station

Existing bus stops Proposed bus stops Proposed new bus route

Fig. 3.8.Public transport (Source: Author) 31

3.4.3. Mix of uses - The different uses spread across the site ensures that the place is vibrant throughout the day and creates opportunities for interactions and socialising. - Due to the permeable network of the development (without gates and barriers between buildings) neighbouring communities will be able to take maximum advantage of the commercial, retail, cultural and open spaces in the area. - The office uses attracts workers from the wider area of London, This diversifies the social interactions for the locals increasing community cohesion at a macro level.

- There is a provision of 42% affordable houses (ULI Case Studies, 2014) which diversifies the neighbourhood with people from different financial conditions living in the same area. N

Office Residential Retail Educational and cultural

Fig. 3.9. Proposed uses Source: Kings Cross (2015). Redrawn by Author.

Table 3.1. Proposed Floor Space for different uses Uses

South of Canal (sq.m.)

North of Canal (sq.m.)

Triangular Site (sq.m.)

Total (sq.m.)

Percentage

Business and employment (B1)

221,510

234,000

455,510

52%

Residential

2,200

171,275

21,100

194,575

22.3%

Hotels (C1)/ serviced apartments

32,625

14,600

47,225

5.43%

Shopping, food and drink

15,060

30,865

2,500

48,425

5.57%

Uses within D1

3,950

67,880

Cinemas (Area included in D2)

8,475

3,000

100,860

11.60%

Uses within D2 and nigh club

4,455

24,275

Multi-storey car park

21,500

2.47%

Other

1,375

0.15%

869,470

100%

Total proposed built up area Source: Data compiled from Argent (Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross), LCR and Exel (2005a, 2005b)

40 % TOTAL SITE AREA = 67 acres = 271,139 sq.m. Therefore, Gross F.A.R. = 869,470 sq.m./ 271,139 sq.m. = 3.20

67 Acres

Principal open space

Built space (Includes associated spaces such as gardens and courtyards)

60 % Fig.3.10. Ratio of built to unbuilt space Source: Kings Cross (2015). Redrawn by Author.

3.4.4. Public space - The new development will have a heirarchy of parks, squares, streets and pathways. - The north-south spine (fig.3.11.) acts as the main public realm axis connecting different smaller spaces throughout the site . - The hard-scaped and soft-scaped open spaces provide opportunities for relaxation and play, open-air concert, summer festival, temporary exhibition and public art. - These spaces act as an inclusive and welcoming destination bridging the gap between residents, neighbours and visitors of the site and help build a strong and vibrant community thriving with life.

List of Activities that take place in public places of Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Central

- Markets - Food festival - Seasonal/ yearly cultural festivals - Art exhibits - Fitness camps and marathons - Urban gardening - Concerts

- Movie screenings - Music and dance performances - Play spaces for local families - Water features (Source: Extracted from https://www.kingscross. co.uk/)

Principal public realm axis Neighbourhood public spaces Major visual attractor

Fig. 3.11. Public spaces in Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Central (Source: Author)

All images on this page sourced from: Kings Cross (2015).

1 3 5

Public Green spaces

Fig. 3.12. Public green spaces in and around Kingsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Central (Source: Author)

3.4.5. Public-Private Partnership: A group of actors at play - The development was taken forward by a public-private joint venture where the principal land was provided by the public entity and the development done by a private entity. - Kings Cross Central Limited Partnership was formed in 2008 which became the single landowner of the development. It comprised of three main groups: Argent (50% stake), state-owned LCR (36.5% stake) and Exel(now DHL) with 13.5% stake (ULI Case Studies, 2014). - LCR sold its share to AustralianSuper pension fund in 2016 ending UK government’s role in the development. The current owner of the development are Argent (along with Hermes, on behalf of BT pension scheme) and AustralianSuper with each owning 32.5% and 67.5% respectively under the King’s Cross Central Limited Partnership (Evans, 2016). - A participative and communicative planning approach was adopted and extensive community consultation was done by the developers and the local Boroughs of Camden and Islington (Holgersen and Haarstad, 2009). - The diagram (fig.3.13.) shows how the planning documents included inputs from the wider community through the community group KXRLG. Such type of participatory approach leads in increasing the sense of place for local and neighbourhood residents by involving them in the process from an early stage. This helps in decreasing the alienation of the local communities due to such large scale developments by bringing them together on a single platform and giving them power to influence decisions.

Table 3.2. Agents and their role in the development as of 2009. (Source: Adapted from Holgersen and Haarstad, 2009. p. 363)

Agents

Role

Argent

Developer, Financer, becoming the landlord.

LCR

Landlord

Exel (now DHL)

Landlord

King’s Cross Railway Lands Community group (Umbrella Group (KXRLG) organisation) King’s Cross Conservation Promote conservation Area Advisory Committee of historical buildings (KXCAAC) Kings’ Cross Business Forum (KXBF)

Local capital, LB of Camden organized “Business Coordinator”

Fig. 3.13. Timeline of published planning documents (Reports, Proposals and Statements) (Source: Brenner, 2014. p.18. Redrawn by: Author) 1988 1991 Alternatives Towards a for King’s People’s Plan Cross: Report 1990 - King’s on a Pilot Social Audit Cross Railway Lands: Peoples Brief

1985

1990

1997 Emerging Principles 2001 Camden Unitary Plan (Chapter 12)

1995 - King’s Cross: A New Quarter for London

1995

2000

2005

1997 - Kings’s 2001 Cross: Past, Principles for a Present, Human City 1989 - King’s Future 2001 1997- King’s Cross Outline Parameters Cross Railway Planning Lands: Site for Application Regenration Implementation Environmental Study Statement

2010

2006 - King’s Cross Central Planning Application 2012 2307 Shaping the Future Report

2015

2001 Framework for Regeneration

2004 - King’s Cross Central: Regenaration Strategy

2004 - King’s Cross Central Implementation Strategy

Document Authors: King’s Cross Rail Lands Group (KXRLG) Camden Borough Development Consortia

3.5. Model of development Even though the design is the main aspect of this research, there are other factors which help to realise this design. The following table helps in listing these factors and give an idea of how a large scale development is realised. In order to implement a design you have to involve people from different professional and technical backgrounds and and then devise a method to manage it in the long term. This development model (Rose, 2005) is a generic description of how the programme works. A model’s purpose is to describe a programme in such a way that it makes it portable across geographical boundaries.

Table 3.3. Elements of King’s Cross Central development model. Elements of the model

Attributes

Laws and regulations

Hierarchical Order. 1. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2. London Plan (2004). 3a.Camden’s Unitary Development Plan (UDP) (2000). Islington UDP (2002). 3b. Supplementary Planning Documents

Organistaion

King’s Cross Central Limited Partnership

Personnel

Masterplanners - 3 firms Architects - 34 firms Interior Design - 3 Firms Contractors - 3 Firms

Money

Public-Private partnership

Programme outputs

Building new buildings, conserving listed buildings, alignment of roads, constructing new roads, creating a new public realm with a network of open spaces

Programme recipients

New residents, business owners, employees, wider neighbourhood

Goal

Sustainable vibrant and inclusive development

(Table adapted from Rose, 2005. p.72. Edited by Author)

(Source: Kings Cross, 2017b)

3.5. Conclusions King’s Cross Central serves as a best practice example for other similar projects to learn from, one reason is that it is the largest inner city redevelopment in Europe right in the heart of a world city, London. Though the project is not yet complete it already shows the improvement in community integration in it’s many open spaces which are accessible to the date this report is prepared. It has changed it’s image from an isolated block in London to a thriving place with new offices, residences, public open space and adaptive reuse of it’s listed buildings. The community groups from the wider neighbourhood played an important role in giving suggestions and asserting their ideas throughout the development process, giving them a platform to socialize with other people of the area which was previously missing. The design ideas, innovative planning approach and policy of consulting the community has collectively helped in reducing community severance due to the former railway lands.

Key Learning Outcomes: Community involvement at development stage brings people from severed neighbourhood on a single platform - Cultural and educational uses attract people and increases chances of socialising - Good quality public realm and open spaces gives opportunities for people to come together for leisure, play, or enjoy temporary attractions.

04 Research Conclusion The research helped in understanding the concepts of community severance and TOD in depth. The literature review highlighted few links between these two broader concepts. But the literature did not cover strategies to mitigate severance other than giving physical connections. The precedent analysis of Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Central showed how a new development can be incorporated in an inner city context and make it an inclusive and vibrant area for the wider neighbourhood to benefit from. A set of design principles have emerged from the literature review and precedent analysis and is summarised below which will be used in the design project:

Make strong physical connections across railway line

Create community hubs for increasing social interactions

Provide high density mix of uses with varying size and shapes for each use

Create visually and physically permeable blocks with wide footpaths for walking and cycling

Create varying sizes of open spaces connected to a pedestrian network

Link station to outdoor plaza.

Create open spaces that are flexible in use and accommodate variety of users

Give limited on street parkings and accommodate extra parking in dedicated underground parking lots

PART 2: DESIGN

05 Site introduction 5.1. Regional setting of Mumbai, India Mumbai is the capital of the state of Maharashtra in India. Greater Mumbai serves as the core city of Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR). Geographically, Greater Mumbai is a linear stretch of land constrained by water from three sides. According to a report by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM, 2016a), the city faces substantial challenges due to the extremely limited supply of land, explosion of slums due to unavailability of affordable housing, an overloaded public transport system, long commutes as people stay far away from places of employment, inadequate physical and social infrastructure and an even more degraded physical environment. 60% of all the jobs available in MMR is concentrated in Greater Mumbai. The availability of affordable homes in other cities in the MMR region has forced people to migrate from Greater Mumbai but have to commute back for work everyday. This daily flow of people is made possible by the suburban rail network (commonly referred as Mumbai Local) of the Central and Western Railways. The evolution of this network will be discussed in the next section.

District: Thane

Western Suburb (District: Mumbai Suburban)

POPULATION TREND (in millions)

2001

2011

MMR

16.7 M

19.6 M

17.3 %

Greater Mumbai

11.9

12.4

4.2 %

Island City

3.33

3.08

-7.5 %

Eastern Suburb

3.50

3.82

9.1%

% Growth

5.52 7.6 % Western 5.13 Suburb Table. 5.1. Population trend of Mumbai (Source: MCGM, 2016a)

India

Part of District: Thane

Mumbai Metropolitan Region

Maharashtra State

Eastern Suburb (District: Mumbai Suburban) District: Raigad Island City (District: Mumbai)

Mumbai Metropolitan Region Greater Mumbai Divisions within Greater Mumbai

Part of District: Raigad

Fig. 5.1. Regional context of Greater Mumbai (Source: Author) 43

5.2. Evolution of Mumbai and its rail network

City on Seven Islands

Pre 1665

Fortressed City

- The city of Mumbai developed from seven separate islands into the large metropolitan region today. - The port and the mills in the south of Mumbai were the main industries in early days of the development of Mumbai - The twin suburban railway lines helped the city to expand northwards connecting it to different parts of the region. - Most of the city growth was confined to Greater Mumbai until 1968, after which the suburbs in Greater Mumbai grew along with the areas surrounding it (MCGM, 2016a. p.16) - The suburban rail network has played an important role in the story of Mumbaiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s urban expansion. - In recent years, new modes of rail network are under development which include the mono-rail and metro-rail for cross connection of the previous linear sub-urban railways.

Port CIty

After 1860

Productive City

- Most part of the suburban railway is at grade level and the mono-rail is above grade level. The proposed metro-rail (only 1 line out of 7 lines operational as of date) will be a combination of under grade, at grade and above grade levels. - Such large railway infrastructure will divide the city in fragments. A thorough and careful consideration in finding ways to connect these fragments is required before communities and neighbourhoods are severed from each other and forced to develop new connections within the severed part of the railway line.

Fig. 5.2. Evolution of Mumbai and it rail network (Source:

After 1812

Metropolitan City

2016 N

After 1950

Suburban Railway (Mumbai Local) Metro Rail Mono Rail

: Compiled from Mehrotra, 2017. pp. 80-81 and MCGM, 2016a. p.106. Drawn by Author)

5.3. Design site profile - The site selected for this research based design project is the Sandhurst road station in the B-Ward of Greater Mumbai. - It is a local railway station from where the Central and the Harbour Line of the Suburban railway diverges and goes further to different parts of the city. - At this particular junction, the Central Line is surface based whereas the Harbour Line is on an elevated rail corridor. Sandhurst Road Station

Fig. 5.3. Proposed TOD zones and administrative ward boundaries in Mumbai (Source: MCGM, 2016a. p. 297)

5.4. Selection criteria There are various criteria for the selection of this particular site in Mumbai: i) Large rail infrastructure on site dividing the communities on either side with few connections ii) Hancock bridge demolished in 2015 for reconstruction. It has not been built again to this date increasing the divide between the two communities. (Express News Service, 2017) iii) Sandhutrst Road station marked as a TOD node in the Draft Development Plan 2034 proposed by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (Fig.5.3.) iv) Proposed Metro Rail (Line 8) going from the east of the site. Potential for providing a metro station and connecting it with Sandhurst Road station through public realm. v) The Eastern Waterfront Development project has kick-started which will see the conversion of 500 hectare land owned by Mumbai Port Trust, along a 28 km stretch, for the development of new housing, educational amenities, promenades, marinas, public parks, cycling tracks, among others (Yerunkar, 2017). Fig. 5.4. Satellite image of Sandhurst Road Station area (Source: Google Earth, 2017. Edited by author) N

1 km radius

tra

ine

0.5 km radius

E Ward

Dockyard Road Station

B Ward Barrier due to suburban railway Central & harbour Line

C Ward

Railway Yard

Sandurst Road Station

Proposed Mumbai Metro Line 8 (GPO to Wadala) Demolished Bridge Proposed Eastern Waterfront Development

Masjid Station

Ward Boundary

5.4. Policy review

“Greater Mumbai as a Competitive, Inclusive and Sustainable City.” Vision 2034 - Vision statement by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Source: MCGM, 2016a, p. xi.

The Development Plan 2034 adopts a multi-faceted approach that integrates Greater Mumbai’s vision with a bottom-up perspective. Below are the objectives stated in the DP 2034 along with their strategies. Objectives

Strategies

Enabling Urban Transformation

1. Promote polycentric development 2. Strengthen Transit-Oriented Development 3. Create a responsive development framework 4. Initiate Local Area Plans

Ensuring equitable development

5. Plan for equitable access for amenities 6. Facilitate inclusionary housing 7. Strengthen livelihoods 8. Plan for universal access

Strengthen existing environmental networks

9. Preserve the ecologically sensitive areas 10. Green the grey 11. Mandate environmentally sustainable codes

Ensuring efficient mobility for all

12. Transit first 13. Optimize the road networks 14. Create inclusive streets 15. Adopt a parking demand management approach

Reinforce Mumbai’s diversity

16. Continue a pattern of mixed land use 17. Adopt a place based development regulation framework

01 02 03

Source: MCGM, 2016a. p. 246-251. Compiled by author.

Fig. 5.5. Proposed Land Uses 2034 Source: MCGM, 2016a. p. 293

Sandhurst Road Station

- Most of the station area comes under CR zone (Commercial Residential). There is some industrial zone to the east, which includes the rail yard. - According to the Development Control Regulation 2034 through Regulation 14.B., industrial zones can be converted to residential or commercial zone. (MCGM, 2016b) - If plot area of conversion is more than 5 Ha., then 25 % of land area should be designated as amenity space out of which 50 % should be public open space.

Fig. 5.6. Proposed Net Bulk FSI (Gross F.A.R.) Source: MCGM, 2016a. p. 322

Sandhurst Road Station

- Proposed Net Bulk FSI for the area ranges from 3.5 to 5 - Rail yard comes under railway land and no provision of FSI is proposed. However, for this project, the FSI assumed for the rail yard will be 5 because: a) Majority of the area around the Sandhurst Road station has a proposed FSI of 5. b) The proposed metro rail line also helps in supporting this assumption since it will increase the connectivity of this node.

Fig. 5.7. Proposed TOD Buffer Zones

Fig. 5.8. Coastal Regulation Zones

Source: MCGM, 2016a. p. 280

Source: MCGM, 2016a. p. 196

Sandhurst Road Station

- TOD buffer zone of 500 mt radius for Sandhurst Road station

- East side of Sandhurst Road station comes under Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) II.

- The objectives of development in TOD zones are (MCGM, 2016a. p. 296):

- Development in CRZ II zone is permissible but only on the landward side of the existing road or structure.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;

a) Create Poly-centric growth nodes around public transit stations b) Reduce use of cars, promote sustainable development, decongest roads & promote efficient travel c) Promote affordable housing stock around station areas

â&#x20AC;?

Fig. 5.9. Identified Growth Nodes Source: MCGM, 2016a. p. 275

Sandhurst Road Station

- South side of Sandhurst Road station area is identified as an employment node. - DP 2034 proposes to boost development potential around these nodes, assuming that these areas will grow at a higher intensity in the future, provided that a responsive development climate is achieved.

Fig. 5.10. Streetscapes

Source: MCGM, 2016a. p. 431

Sandhurst Road Station

- Majority of the Sandhurst Road station area in B Ward comes under area where no front setback shall be provided. - There is also a mandatory arcade provision on few streets in the area.

- The selected area is adjacent to an employment node. The employment node could be broadened to encompass the design site in it.

06 Site analysis 6.1. Methodology for analysis The site analysis will be done in a clear systematic way. The principles of TOD will be analysed in view of the three dimensions of community severance stated in the literature review - physical, psychological and social severance. A community consultation involving a questionnaire was done, to help in understanding the issues of the people on the neighbourhood scale. These two steps will help in developing the spatial strategies. Station influence zones are large areas of 500 to 1000 mt radius around a station and it was not physically possible to collect thorough data of such a large area. There might be some missing links in the analysis due to the short duration of site visit and the research overall. A longer duration for research would have given more insightful and precise data which would have lead the design project in a more appropriate way. Mix of Uses

Pedestrian and Cycle accessibility Physical Severance Density

Psychological Severance Social Severance

Accessibility to public transport

Public plazas/places

+ Community Consultation

Spatial Strategies and Site Design

6.2. Analysis 6.2.1. Mix of Uses - The site has a good mix of use towards the west of the railway line. - Large transport infrastructure and commercial blocks dominates the eastern side of the railway line. - West side of the railway tracks has a finer grain of residential units whereas the north has bigger residential blocks. - Slums are in close proximity to railway line while few of them are clustered around commercial blocks in the south east of the site. - Four blocks in the south-east have vacant land, which can be utilised for other uses. - Presence of a large hospital block in the north-west.

Fig.6.1. Existing land use map 2012.

Source: Compiled from maps for each Ward from MCGM website. Available at: http://www.mcgm.gov.in/irj/portal/anonymous/qlddevplan

Fig. 6.2. Educational Institutes. Source: Redrawn by author.

- Educational institues which include primary school, secondary school, special schools and colleges are marked. - Institutes in the south are smaller in size as compared to the north. In addition to this, they donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have enough open space around them to support the number of people that come there daily.

Fig. 6.3. Active frontage Source: Redrawn by author.

- South-east of the site is dominated by active frontage

- Smaller blocks with retail at the ground floor and residential on the above floors is peculiar characteristic of this area. - Lack of active frontage in other part of the sites.

Psychological Severance Social Severance 54

Due to the commercial and transport zones in the south-east and east part respectively, the area represents an unwelcoming image for other people in the neighbourhood. This restricts round the clock movement of people towards this part of the site, reducing eyes on the street

6.2.2. Pedestrian accesibility

and

cycle

Fig. 6.4. Educational Institutes. Source: Redrawn by author.

- Railway station acts as the main attractor for pedestrian movement throughout the site. - The south-west part of the site has more pedestrian thoroughfare because of a better mix of use and an abundance of active frontage - There are no dedicated cycle lanes in the neighbourhood making it difficult to ride a cycle in this area.

- The east side of the railway yard does not have a good walking atmosphere due to the presence of a highway and the commercial blocks.

Intensity of pedestrian movement from high to low Flyover bridge

View 1: Broken and low quality of footpaths

View 2: Footpaths encroached by vehicle parking

Physical Severance Psychological Severance Social Severance

View 3: Unsafe roads with heavy traffic.

Lack of connectivity at regular intervals across the railway lines Low quality footpath and inadequate crossing points make walking less desirable. People cycling in the streets is hardly seen because of the excess of vehicles on the road. Lack of physical connections have made people develop their own connections within each side of the tracks and deterred an inclusive environment. 55

6.2.3. High Density - Since the area lies between 3 different wards of Mumbai, the data for density was not available for this 1 km radius. However, a look at the existing FAR (which was readily available) gives us an idea of the density of the area. - Blocks adjacent to Sandhurst Road station have lower densities than the oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s which are far away. Fig. 6.5. Educational Institutes. Source: Redrawn by author.

Net Bulk F.S.I. (F.A.R.) Less than 1.33 1.33 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 and above

Psychological Severance Social Severance 56

The high density area increases eyes on the street and reduces chances of crime.

Chances of meeting people and other social interactions are high.

6.2.4. Accessibility to public transport - Sandhurst road station has two more suburban railway stations around the 1 km. - The neighbourhood has 68 bus stops within the 1 km radius, which is more than the number of bus stops in the precedent analysis area in Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Central. - There is also a ferry terminal in the east which transports people

Fig. 6.6. Vehicular and public transport Source: Author.

Main vehicular movement around the site Bus stops Ferry terminal Suburban train station Railway infrastructure

Physical Severance

The at grade level rail infrastructure is the main severing factor in the neighbourhood along with the large railway yard.

Psychological Severance

The railway yard forms a big urban void due to which pedestrians face trip diversion or suppression.

Social Severance

The railway lines have seperated communities and reduced social connections due to less number of connecting bridges across the tracks. 57

6.2.5. Public plazas and open spaces - There are limited public open spaces as compared to the high density of people living in the vicinity. - There is no public plaza in front of the station entrance and people spill out directly on the road. - The public spaces are too small and do not attract a variety of users. Main entrance to station. Small ramp connects the road and the platforms inside the station (Source: Author) N

Physical Severance Psychological Severance Social Severance 58

The at grade level rail infrastructure is the main severing factor in the neighbourhood. The railway yard forms a big urban void due to which pedestrians who want to go to the ferry terminal avoid this station and alight at the next station in the north. The railway lines have seperated communities and reduced social connections due to less number of connecting bridges across the tracks.

6.3. Community Consultation: To gain information from a local perspective, a short community consultation was undertaken. A questionnaire was made to gain some insights of the current situation on the site. 10 people from each side of the station responded to the questionnaire. Out of the 35 people approached, only 20 of them were keen on filling the questionnaire. Few people had difficulty in reading and understanding english, which was then translated orally to them and their answers recorded. 6.3.1. Questionnaire survey

Q1. The Hancock Bridge connecting across the

railway lines was demolished 2 years ago. Did it affect your travel route? The survey showed that the demolition of the Hancock bridge has affected the travel route of most respondents. 75% people said that it has affected them.

Q2. How do you travel there now? The survey showed that the maximum number of respondents traveled via private vehicles. A few of the respondents also walked or used public transport to access areas on the other side of the railway infrastructure. It was recorded that no respondents cycled or used taxis as a mode of transport.

Q3. What was the purpose of your travel to the other side? The survey showed that the maximum number of respondents traveled across the railway infrastructure to meet friends and family. The second highest number of responses for purpose of travel were received regarding work or religious purposes. Moreover, the survey also indicated that a few respondents traveled for leisure and educational reasons.

Q4. Which of the following do you think will improve

the physical and social connections between areas on either side of the railway track?

The survey showed that the maximum number of respondents chose better bridges and more retail and shopping facilities as a means to improve social and physical connections in the area. The second highest number of responses were recoded regarding provision of better open spaces and more religious buildings and events. A few respondents also voted for a cinema, more restaurants and more educational institutes.

6.3.2. Questionnaire evaluation: The survey gave insightful information regarding the habits of the local residents. The railway infrastructure along with a weakend physical link shows signs of community severance in the neighbourhood. The design implications from this survey are that new physical connections are desired by the local neighbourhood since most of them made trips to the severed part of the rail infrastructure. People made a lot of trips for work and religious gatherings, which should be given importance in the new development. A respondent said â&#x20AC;&#x153;This area is a hub of religious gatherings and events in Mumbai. More people take part in religuous events than any other social events.â&#x20AC;? It shows that providing a platform where people can commemorate religious festivites can reduce community severance to a certain extent by bringin people from a wider network together.

07 Vision and spatial strategies Vision Statement Sandhurst Road station area as a new commercial, retail and residential hub of Mumbai which is accessible, inclusive and inviting to people from all walks of life. Mix of Uses - Increase intensity of mix of uses - Transform clusters of single use to mixed use - Active frontage on ground floor Walking/ Cycle friendly - New and improved links across railway line - Improve and enhance footpaths - Provide dedicated cycle lanes - Provide cycle stands near station - Realign staggered urban form for better permeability and accessibility - Make footpaths accessible for disabled High Density - Increase density along transit corridor by providing higher FSI - Relocate people and businesses to new and higher density buildings to create more open spaces for public.

Accessibility to public transport - Encourage last mile connectivity to station through bus networks and private taxi stands - Diversify bus routes across the railway line - Dedicated parking spots for disabled near station - Provision of parking lots near station to decrease on-street parking

Public plazas/places - Provide public plaza at station entrance - Create new open spaces and link with existing open spaces - Provide opportunities for play, leisure, temporary market,

Design Principles

Provide metro station stop

Strategic View towards sea

Add new physical connections Increase FAR to 5.0 Convert to mixed use area Add a bus route loop through the site Make open spaces Redevelop as a TransitOriented Development Suburban rail network Proposed metro rail Urban block grid Railway infrastructure

08 Masterplan 8.1. Block study Three different types of block are analysed in this section so as to develop the design site. The blocks have the same dimensions and the buildings in each block acquire the same total built-up area. The preferred option is Block 03. Since it increases the walkability of the neighbourhood. The internal open space acts as a spill out for the users of the block and the internal active frontages.

100.0 Mt

Ground Coverage = 3823 sq.mt. Perimeter = 346 mt.

BLOCK 01

100.0 Mt

Block 1

- Perimeter block structure - Enclosed from all sides - Space for private open space inside the block - Perimetre for active frontage is limited - Same building typology

Block 2

- Free standing structure - Open from all sides - Space for public open space around the block - Perimeter for active frontage is limited - Same building typology

Block 3

- Combination of structure - Internal pathways - Space for semi-private open space inside the block - Perimeter for active frontage is maximum - Mix building typology

100.0 Mt

BLOCK 02

100.0 Mt

Ground Coverage = 1655 sq.mt. Perimeter = 230 mt.

100.0 Mt

BLOCK 03

100.0 Mt

Ground Coverage = 3781 sq.mt. Perimeter = 606 mt.

8.2. Masterplan N 0m

100 m 50 m

ail

Pro

d se

R tro

an uburb

Railw

8.3. Mix of uses

Design Principles

- Ground floor is highly mixed with various size and of residential, commercial, retail, cultural and educational uses. - Retail makes active frontage in every block so as to increase â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;eyes on the streetsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and reduce the perception of fear and crime. - A shopping mall is provided near the entrance to the Sandhurst Road station. 0m

100 m

50 m

Commercial Residential Retail Educational and cultural

- Residential uses will be divided into a mix of typologies and a minimum of 42% affordable housing should be provided as taken from the development model of Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Central.

100 m

Design Principles

50 m

Commercial Residential Retail Educational and cultural

8.4. Pedestrian and cycle movement

Design Principles

- Blocks are designed so that they give physical permeability for walking routes - Dedicated cycling tracks provided in addition to wide footpaths where cycling can be done at reduced speeds

100 m

50 m

Walking routes Proposed cycling routes Bike rent shed

8.5. Accessibility to public transport

Design Principles

- Feeder bus line connects to the main railway public transport and supplement the movement within and outside the neighbourhood. - Bus stops are provided at regular intervals so that each bus stop is within a 200 mt distnace from each other.

100 m

50 m

500 m influence zone (Suburban Rail Network) Entrance to Sandhurst Road station 500 m influence zone (Proposed Metro Station) Entrance to proposed metro station Proposed bus stops Proposed bus routes Existing bus routes

8.6. Density - FAR of 5.0 was used to develop this site in view of the policy review discussed in the earlier section.

Design Principles

- Maximum heights of building is given near the railway station in the central part of the site.

100 m 50 m 01

Site Area= 223,364 sq.mt. = 22.33 H

01 01

Proposed FAR = 5.0

01 01 01 16

Total floor space consumed = 1,116,726 sq.mt.

01 01

Total floor space required = 1,116,820 sq.mt.

01 01

01 01 01

FAR consumed = 4.999

8.7. Public plazas/spaces

Design Principles

- A hierarchy of open spaces which are accessible to public are provided. - Different size of open spaces will support different functions as stated in the precedents on next page.

100 m

50 m

Pocket Park Block Park Neighbourhood Park Public Park

8.7.1. Precedents for open spaces Pocket Parks Features: • Small lawned areas between buildings to serve as places to pause, sit and relax • Ground floor retail outlets with seating along the green areas

1. Pancras square, Kings Cross Central

Block Parks Features: • Green spaces within blocks with play furniture for children • Community garden with weekly gardening, cooking and craft workshops

2. Skip Garden, Kings Cross Central

3. Lewis Cubitt Park, Kings Cross Central

Neighborhood Open Spaces Features: • Green areas for sports, outdoor yoga, movie screenings, etc.

4. Lewis Cubitt Park, Kings Cross Central

5. Lewis Cubitt Park, Kings Cross Central Image source: Sturrock, 2016 Images 1-4 on this page are sourced from: Kingscross.co.uk.

Public Plaza Features: â&#x20AC;˘ Paved square for public gatherings, art exhibitions, food stalls,etc.

6. Granary Square, Kings Cross Central Image source: Access London, 2015

Image source: Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Central Limited Partnership, n.d.

8.7.2. Religious gatherings as a means of community cohesion - Public Plaza Ganpati celebrations

Garba celebrations

Image source: India.com, 2017

Image source: Flikr.com, 2008

Moharram, Eid and Milad celebrations

Diwali celebrations

Image source: Indian Express.com, n.d.

Image source: Maqbool, 2013

8.8. Sections and views Commercial Residential Retail Educational and cultural

Section X-X’

A B

X’

View A

View B

Commercial Residential Retail Educational and cultural

Section Y-Y’

Y’

A B

View A

View B

Commercial Residential Retail Educational and cultural

Section Z-Z’

A Z

Z’

View A

View B

09 Evaluation of design and

Conclusions 9.1. Evaluation through space syntax The space syntax analysis of the design site along with the additional connections from spatial strategies show that the design site is highly integrated to its neighbourhood. This integrated network along with a the land uses and open spaces create a vibrant hub for people to converge and develop social contacts.

High

Low

Integration

Fig. 9.1. Integration analysis through space syntax after the development of the design site

9.2. Conclusions The research followed a systematic way of learning about the concepts of community severance and TOD. The design principles devised from the research paved a way for mitigating the community severance to a certain extent. However this method was not tested on a variety of sites and more research can be done by analysisng more precedents and doing case studies and adding new design principles.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;The causes and extent of differentiation and separation differ from place to place, but are often connected to processes associated with managing city life in its diversity and complexity and with trying to improve the physical conditions of urban living... Thinking spatially about addressing some of the problems of segregation means bearing both these kind of spatialities in mind - borders and boundaries as well as crossing and connections. If it is more and better connections with other parts of the city, country, continent or world that need to be encouraged as a way of changing the spaces of segregation in cities, then we will have to be aware of the many different kinds of connections that are possible - physical and imaginary, productive and destructive... The dynamism of the city can make our efforts to improve city life somewhat unpredictable!â&#x20AC;? - Robinson, 1999. p.189

Appendices Appendix 1. Ethics Approval form

Appendix2. Questinnaire survey for community consultation

Bibliography Anciaes, P.R. (2015). What do we mean by “community severance”? (Street Mobility and Network Accessibility Series’, Working Paper 04). London: University College London. [Accessed 20 June 2017]. Available from: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1527807/ Anciaes, P.R., Jones, P., and Mindell, J.S. (2015). Community severance: where is it found and at what cost? Transport Reviews. 36 (3), 293–317 [Accessed 20 June 2017]. Available from: http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/01441647.2015.1077286 Appleyard, D. and Lintell, M. (1972). The environmental quality of city streets: the residents’ viewpoint. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 38(2), pp. 84-101. Appleyard, D., Gerson, M.S. and Lintell,M. (1981). Liveable Streets. Berkeley: University of California Press. Argent (King’s Cross), LCR and Exel (2005 a). King’s Cross Central Main Site Revised Development Specification. London: Argent (King’s Cross) Ltd. p.13. Argent (King’s Cross), LCR and Exel (2005 b). King’s Cross Central Triangle Site Revised Development Specification. London: Argent (King’s Cross) Ltd. p.20. Argent St George, Continental Railways and Exel (n.d.). King’s Cross Central Urban Design Statement. London: Allies and Morrison Architects, Porphyrios Associates and Townshed Landscape Architects. Argent St George, London and Continental Railways and Exel (2004). King’s Cross Central Regeneration Strategy. London: Arup. Arrington, G. B. and T. Parker. (2001). Statewide transit-oriented development study: Factors for success in California. Sacramento: California Department of Transportation. Bradbury, A., Tomlinson, P. and Millington, A.(2007) Understanding the evolution of community severance and its consequences on mobility and social cohesion over the past century. European Transport Conference. [online] Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242208640_ Understanding_the_evolution_of_community_severance_and_its_consequences_on_mobility_and_ social_cohesion_over_the_past_century [Accessed: 10 July, 2017] Brenner, D., 2014. King’s cross railway lands: A “good argument” for change?(No. 171). DPU Working Paper. British Library (2017). Bombay: History of a City. [online] Available at: http://www.bl.uk/learning/ histcitizen/trading/bombay/history.html [Accessed 11 Sep. 2017]. Calthorpe, P. (1993). The next American Metropolis Ecology, Community, and the American dream. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Camden Council and Islington Council (n.d.). King’s Cross: shaping the future A plan for the wider King’s Cross area. [online] Available at: https://www.kingscross.co.uk/the-story-so-far [Accessed 4 Sep. 2017]. Chang, J. S., Han, S., Jung, D. and Kim, D. (2014). Benefits of rerouting railways to tunnels in urban areas: a case study of the Yongsan line in Seoul. International Journal of Urban Sciences. 18 (3), pp. 404-415.

Clark, J. M., Hutton, B. J., Burnett, N. Hathway, A., and Harrison, A. (1991) The appraisal of community severance, Contractor Report 135, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne. Cleary, J; (2016) Review of non-academic literature and resources relating to community severance. (Street Mobility and Network Accessibility Working Papers 6). University College London: London. [online] Available at: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1540330/ Department of Transport (1983). Manual of Environmental Appraisal. London: H.M. Stationary Office. Egan,M., Petticrew, M., Ogilvie, D. and Hamilton, V. (2003). New roads and human health: a systematic review. American Journal of Public Health.; 93(9): 1463–1471. Emond, C. R., & Handy, S. L. (2012). Factors associated with bicycling to high school: Insights from Davis, CA. Journal of Transport Geography, 20(1), 71–79. Evans, J. (2016). UK sells stake in King’s Cross redevelopment. Financial Times. [online] Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/5f2b4e74-c123-11e5-9fdb-87b8d15baec2 [Accessed 3 Sep. 2017]. Grisolı´a, J. M., Lo´pez, F., & Ortu´zar, J de D. (2015). Burying the highway: The social valuation of community severance and amenity. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 9(4), 298–309. Guo, X., Black, J. and Dunne, M. (2001). Crossing pedestrians and dynamic severance on urban main roads. Road and transport research. 10 (3), pp. 84-98. Handy, S. (2003). Amenity and severance. In Hensher, D. A. and Button, K. (ed). Handbook of Transport and the Environment. pp. 117-140. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Hine, J. (1996). Pedestrian travel experiences—Assessing the impact of traffic on behaviour and perceptions of safety using an in-depth interview technique. Journal of Transport Geography, 4, 179–199. Holgersen, S., & Haarstad, H. (2009). Class, Community and Communicative Planning: Urban Redevelopment at King’s Cross, 41(2). London: Antipode. Pp. 348–370. [online] Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1467-8330.2009.00676.X James, E., Millington, A. and Tomlinson, P (2005). Understanding Community Severance Part 1: Views of Practitioners and Communities. Unpublished TRL Report produced for the Department for Transport ed. Crowthorne, Berkshire: TRL Limited. Jones, P., Boujenko, N., and Marshal, S. (2007) Link and Place: A Guide to Street Planning and Design. London: Local Transport Today. King’s Cross Central Limited Partnership (2014). Area Travel Plan Report. London:JMT Consultant Ltd. Kings Cross (2015). Overview King’s Cross. London: King’s Cross Central Limited Partnership. King’s Cross. (2017a). About the redevelopment of King’s Cross. [online] Available at: https://www. kingscross.co.uk/the-story-so-far [Accessed 4 Sep. 2017].

King’s Cross. (2017b). Who is developing King’s Cross. [online] Available at: https://www.kingscross. co.uk/whos-developing-kings-cross [Accessed 11 Sep. 2017]. Lassière, A. (1976). The environmental evaluation of transport plans. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office. Lee, J. and Sohn K. (2014). Identifying the Impact on Land Prices of Replacing At-grade or Elevated Railways with Underground Subways in the Seoul Metropolitan Area. Urban Studies. 51 (1), pp. 44-62. Lee, T. and Tagg, S. (1976) The Social Severance Effects of Major Urban Roads. In: Stringer P., Wenzel H. (eds) Transportation Planning for a Better Environment. New York, NY: Plenum Press. pp.267–281 LIEPMANN, K. K. (1944). The journey to work: its signifiance for industrial and community life. London, Routledge. MCGM (2016a). Greater Mumbai Report on Draft Development Plan 2034. Mumbai: EGIS Geoplan Pvt Ltd and MCGM. [online] Available at: http://www.mcgm.gov.in/irj/go/km/docs/documents/ Draft%20Development%20Plan/5.%20Draft%20DP%20Report/DRAFT%20DP%20REPORT%20-%20 2034%20Final.pdf MCGM (2016b). Draft Development Control Regulation 2034. Mumbai: EGIS Geoplan Pvt Ltd and MCGM. [online] Available at: http://www.mcgm.gov.in/irj/go/km/docs/documents/Draft%20 Development%20Plan/ENGLISH%20DRAFT%20DCR%202034%20(27May2016)/Draft%20DCR-2034%20 English%20.pdf Mehrotra, R. ed., (2017). Extreme Urbanism IV: Looking at Hyper Density - Dongri, Mumbai. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Graduate School of Design. Mindell, J.S. and Karlsen, S. (2012). Community severance and health: What do we actually know? Journal of Urban Health. 89(2), pp. 232–246. PIGOU, A. C. (1924). The concentration of population. Essays in applied economics. New York: Kelley. Robinson, J. (1999). Divisive Cities: power and segregation in cities. In: S. Pile, C. Brook and G. Mooney, ed., Unruly Cities? Order/Disorder. London: The Open University, p.189. SEU (Social Exclusion Unit). (2003). Making the connections: Final report on transport and social exclusion. London: Stationery Office. Tate, F. N. (1997) Social severance. Transfund New Zealand Research Report No. 80. Wellington: Transit New Zealand ULI Case Studies. (2014). King’s Cross | ULI Case Studies. [online] Available at: https://casestudies.uli. org/kings-cross/ [Accessed 4 Sep. 2017]. Yerunkar, C. (2017). Development Plan 2034 gives boost to Mumbai’s eastern waterfront revamp. Hindustan Times. [online] Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/mumbainews/development-plan-2034-gives-boost-to-mumbai-s-eastern-waterfront-revamp/story8wMI2dWQrWGB4UI5L3h3RI.html [Accessed 7 Sep. 2017].

Image reference: Access London (2015). Lumiere London – Kings Cross. [image] Available at: https://www.keatons. com/access-london/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/86382-kings-cross-granary-square-main-locationhub-image-lumiere-1030.jpg [Accessed 1 Oct. 2017]. Flikr.com (2008). Graba Raas. [image] Available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/restless_ mind/2926228885 [Accessed 1 Oct. 2017]. India.com (2017). Ganpati Festival: Ganesh Chaturthi. [image] Available at: http://s3.india.com/ wp-content/uploads/2017/08/ganpati4.jpg [Accessed 1 Oct. 2017]. Indian Express.com (n.d.). How Muharram is being observed in India and around the world. [image] Available at: http://images.indianexpress.com/2016/10/pti10_12_2016_000099b.jpg?w=820 [Accessed 1 Oct. 2017]. King’s Cross Central Limited Partnership (n.d.). Pancras Square, King’s Cross. [image] Available at: https://www.kingscross.co.uk/media/P_KXC_ECA_PSQ_N133_kxweb-600x406.jpg [Accessed 1 Oct. 2017]. King’s Cross Central Limited Partnership (n.d.). Things to do with kids at King’s Cross. [image] Available at: https://www.kingscross.co.uk/things-to-do-with-kids-at-kings-cross [Accessed 1 Oct. 2017]. Maqbool, R. (2013). Diwali Festival: Food, Arts & Games. [image] Available at: https://vedicambassador.wordpress.com/2013/11/page/2/ [Accessed 1 Oct. 2017]. Sturrock, J. (2016). Lewis Cubitt Park. [image] Available at: http://www.landezine.com/wp-content/ uploads/2016/06/Lewis-Cubitt-Park-03-Spring-Crocus-copyright-John-Sturrock.jpg [Accessed 1 Oct. 2017].