Declaration
I, PRANATHI USN: 1BM09AT036 do hereby declare that the work being presented as the Thesis project entitled
“MULTIMODAL TRANSIT HUB ; An urban insert�, Hebbal is a record of the work that has been carried out at the Department of Architecture, BMS College of Engineering, Bangalore
Under the guidance of Prof. S Sathish Rao, Ar. Ajaichandran C K, Ar. Bhagyalaxmi M, Ar. Kiran Keswani, Ar. Sanjog Shetty Ar. Aditya Kiran, Ar. Abhinav Gaurav, Ar. Jaiganesh M, Ar. Namith Shirali
The work contained in this thesis report has not been submitted in part or full to any other university or institution or professional body for the award of any degree or diploma or any fellowship.
Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge some people who have helped shape this project from initial stages to completion without whom this project would be incomplete or lacking another dimension. I wholeheartedly thank my friends and family for the love and support they have rendered to encourage me in addressing this project with a vigour and passion I have only hoped to have. I’d like to mention Ar.Sanjay Shridhar who suggested I look into the transit scenario of Bangalore and encouraged me to pursue this project. Professor Shivanandswamy of CEPT, Ar.Swapna Wilson and Professor of Planning and Public Policy, CEPTAr.Abhijit Lokre and also Ar.Radha Chanchani from CiSTUP,IISC have helped me understand the basic concepts of rapid transit. I thank them immensely for setting up the foundation of this project. I would like to mention Ar.Venkatesh who guided me through the norms of a mixed use development and Urban designer Ar.George Kuruvila who helped me broaden my perspective of transit oriented development. I am grateful to all the Government officials I have come across from BMTC,BMRCL and DULT. I am especially grateful to my thesis guide and external faculty, Ar.Sanjog Shetty for being an inspiration and helping me achieve my best. It would have been impossible to accomplish this task without his guidance.
This project found a new dimension by the ideas and concepts suggested by SIT alumni Ar.Gregory Antonio over informal discussions. I would like to conclude by saying this project has helped me interact with practicing architects and professionals from allied fields and has lent a new perspective to the field of Architecture itself!
Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary
Page no …………………………………………………………………….01
2.0 Foreword ……………………………………………………………………………………….02 2.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………….03 2.2 Need for Study - Context and Challenges …………………………………….04 2.3 Background …………………………………………………………………………..………..05-07
3.0 Case Studies – Indian context 3.1 Rajiv Chowk Metro station, New Delhi ………………………………………….08-10 3.2 Subhashnagar IMTC proposal, Bangalore ……………………………………….11-12 3.3 Yelahanka IMTC proposal, Bangalore ……….…………………………………….13-16 3.4 Yeshwanthpur IMTC proposal, Bangalore ……………………………………….17-20 4.0 Review of Literature – International context 4.01 Transbay Transit Centre, San Francisco, U.S.A ……………………………….21-27 4.02 King’s cross station terminus, London ………………..…………………….28-30 4.03 Usak Inter-city Bus Terminal, Usak, Turkey …………………………………….31 5.00 Other requisite case studies 5.01 BRTS system, Ahmedabad …………………………….……………………………32-33 5.02 HSRL Terminal proposal, M.G.Road Bangalore, India ………….………34-35 5.03 HSRL Terminal statistics, Hebbal …………………………………..36 5.04 Phoenix Mall, Whitefield, Bangalore …............……………………..……..37 5.05 Orion mall , Rajajinagar, Bangalore …………….…………………………………38 5.06 Comparative analysis …………………..……..…….…………………………………39-40 6.0 Site and Site Analysis ……………………………………………………………………….41-43 6.1 Site location and Site Surroundings ……………………………………………….44-45 …………………………………..………………….…………………….46-50 6.2 Site Analysis 7.0 Design Program …….…………..…………………………………….…………………….52-59
8.0 Sketch Scheme / Design Rationales ………………………………………………….60-64 9.0 Design Development ……………………………………………………………………….65 10.0 Technical Papers 10.1 Technical Paper -1……………..…………………………………….…………………….71 10.2 Technical Paper -2……………..…………………………………….…………………….72-73
Executive Summary Vision Bangalore 2020: The objective of this Bachelor's Degree thesis project was to explore the grounds of infrastructural developments and to take into consideration the impact and implications of people, culture, and communication, also keeping in mind a futuristic vision. Purpose -- Creating a public realm amidst a bustling yet rather loosely knit cityscape of Hebbal. Project definition – The project initiative was derived from proposals made by the likes of BMTC/BMRCL and Government proposals for HSRL/Monorail/BRT systems.
Project Typology : PPP Infrastructure and urban development project Building Typology : Traffic and Transportation ; Mixed use development Site Location, Area: Abutting the Hebbal flyover junction ; Total site area= 50 acres Ownership
: BMTC/KSRTC/BMRCL/HSRL and Retail/Commercial/Hospitality openings for rent.
Project Outline -- Working with a futuristic vision for Hebbal, the basic criteria for this urban insert would be managing the interests of all the various users, providing for all the means and modes of transport-both projected and preferred. It’s functionality and design always to be pitted against the viability factor. Key Issues – Complexity in Site and it’s surroundings’ physical features. “Hebbal” is the emerging urban chunk which was merely a Portal to the North. It lacked a sense of repose ; One zips past it just catching a glimpse of what was once a thriving ecology ,yet has a lot to offer in these times of degrading lakes and fauna.
The site alongside the proposals was a challenge and to address both equally important factors so that they are compatible was the real challenge. The existing layer of ecology, infrastructure and the neighborhood add to it’s character. The essence of the project is for the commuters to be able to enjoy the Lake’s leisure potential as well as seamlessly be transported between varying frequencies and speeds of the numerous transport options.
01
Foreword
This present thesis finalizes my B.Arch degree at BMSCE, Bangalore. The thesis was conceived between March 2013-June2013. The main report of the thesis contains the inception, the process of understanding the scheme of the project and finally a solution based on the various case studies and the facts and figures which were gathered via internet study or through discussion with officials in their respective fields.
The report is a culmination of the insights and understanding achieved by interacting with the involved professionals and understanding the larger scheme of things within their vision for urban infrastructure.
- Author, June 2013
02
Transportation is one of the integrated part for the functioning of a society. Transportation system improves the social, economic, industrial and commercial progress and further transforms the society into an organized one. It is one of the vital force for determining the direction of development To achieve the desired transportation balance for the system to be efficient, it is essential to provide organized facilities in the system. As transportation involves the movement of people and goods, there is need for an access point in the system for use. These access points are known as ‘Terminals’ or ‘Fixed Facilities’ due to their fixed location in the system. The demand for the fixed facility is dependent on the scale of the movement and the size of the city. The metropolitan cities are growing at a faster rate due to their functional characteristics and employment potential. Bangalore as the nucleus of the Information Technology in India, also known as the Silicon Valley of India, falls into this category.in the present situation the demand and supply of public transport in the city is growing in a alarming rate. Bangalore with its rapid growth in economy and development has to cater to a large group of population. to balance this gap between demand and supply of the transport system considering the present and future scenario mass transport system along with proper facilities have been proposed based on the CTTP report prepared. The importance of the terminals/fixed facility in the transport system becomes especially important as the existing facility is not capable of meeting the demands of the day. Significantly, the location of the transport hub is most important in integrating the transportation system within a metropolitan city like Bangalore, The problems are more pronounced in central areas where the available transportation facilities are unable to meet the demand. The increased inter-city traffic is in direct conflict with the intra-city traffic thus creating problems of movement. Due to inadequate space, the existing inter-city bus terminal at Hebbal is inefficient. It is against this background that the planning and development of mass transport system with a methodological approach becomes very important.
7
Introduction 03
OPPORTUNITIES
CHALLENGES
Hebbal can create its identity as an urban node and a hub of activities apart from being a mere commute point.
The opportunity to create a one of a kind multimodal transit hub with the latest modes of transport and the biggest retail/commercial or mixed use development to attract footfalls and create a space which is truly urban.
The site happens to be at the junction of flyovers and roads and is automatically an important landmark or a site, hence it’s identity already exists. This can help build the value of the project and will strengthen the proposal. It also has excellent connectivity to the Airport and is a portal of sorts for passengers commuting through North Bangalore.
Hebbal is only used as a transit node at present and it needs more coreactivities that centre on its potential to be a complete node in the urban fabric of greater Bangalore. To be able to induce such urban/nodal activities into the site to attract not just the neighbourhood but potentially the entire Northern portion of the city.
The challenge if creating a pause point amidst the chaos and fast paced transit activities for people to enjoy, be it in a mall or a hotel or any other introduced activity.
This portal corresponds to heavy footfall, be it inter-city or intra-city. Passengers to and from BIAL and the expanding IT scenario and the thriving housing population are all expected to come to this space to relax, unwind or simply catch a bus or the rail. To accommodate all their needs and make sure the respective zones do not coincide is a challenge in itself
Need for study : context and challenges
04
Scenario 1: This scenario considers a ‘do minimum’ situation wherein Improvement & augmentation in existing system for the bus network and roads already proposed. The purpose of the scenario is to capture the intensity of the problem if no measures are taken to overhaul the transport system in the city
Scenario 2: in addition to what has been considered in scenario 1, scenario 2 considers the implementation of metro project as planned, a mono rail system covering 50 km, a BRT system covering 30km, commuter rail system covering 62 km, elevated core ring road of 30 km, a peripheral ring road of 114 km and intermediate ring road of 188 km as proposed IN Master Plan.
Scenario 3: this scenario is developed to address the anticipated demand with extensive public transport system as the focus for development. It is developed upon scenario 2 with additional lines of mass transport systems (about 650 km). Considering the success percentile of scenario 3 various transport corridors proposed along with relevant facilities to meet the transport demand for Bangalore city have been proposed based on the CTTP report prepared.
Introduction: Background
05
The Metro facing corridors have extended due north since the first 2 phases of Namma Metro. The expected underground Metro corridor will be at Nagavara closer to the business district of Manyata tech park.
Major infrastructure projects are forecast for the near future and its vicinity due to its prime location and urban infrastructure such a high speed rail link is proposed to be implemented for better connectivity between the city and Airport which passes through the projects influence area. Other expected infrastructure includes a Metro rail(underground station at Nagavara is proposed already to be underground) and a Monorail link elevated to cater to the other ends of the city towards Mathikere side.
A proposed BRT route from Silk board to Hebbal further strengthens the case in point that Hebbal is the next big thing for Bangalore’s extended IT hub and it also has the capacity to accommodate further expansion . Thus these facts tend to point to the fact that a modal integration is of utmost importance to ease the scenario and avert chaos for a passenger or even a local.
Background : Proposed Infrastructure 06
An illustration presenting the case in point. The need for creating a space which not only accommodates the ingress and egress of traffic but also is a space of stillness amidst the fast paced vehicular movement.
Legend Context and Proposals Source:Author
Proposed bus movement Proposed car/taxi/auto movement Proposed HSRL Alignment 07
Case Studies Indian Context
Location of the interchange in the heart of the radial plan of C.P, New Delhi The Rajiv Chowk is a Metro station in Delhi, forming an interchange similar to the M.G.Road counterpart in Bangalore. It is a transfer station between the East-West Line on the upper level and the North-South Line on the lower level. It is one of the busiest stations on the network, serving Connaught Place in the heart of Delhi. Many businesses and important buildings, restaurants and cinemas are situated just outside the station. There are many exits, including some inside the Central Park, which is seamlessly blended into the urban fabric and sits above the metro interchange.
Google Earth imagery of the interchange complex The Rajiv Chowk is a Metro station designed right below the central park of Connaught Place in the CBD of Delhi, located in the center of a historical monument of Victorian style of architecture. It has 8 entry and exit points to the main interchange.
Case Study : Rajiv Chowk Metro Interchange Connought Place,New Delhi 08
Site plan of the interchange complex
The master plan of CP revolves around the CBD of old DelhiPaalika Bazaar, which is an underground market located between the inner and outer circle of Connaught Place
These diagrams explains the different levels of the interchange, which clearly segregate the passengers from visitors and shoppers.
09
Entrance plaza
Landscaped surroundings
Central park Central Park at Connaught Place is situated over forty thousand square meters.the park has a history of about a century old.the park comprises of more than 700 trees and 2700 varieties of plants from all over india.it was completely reworked in the year 2000 to build Rajiv Chowk interchange station. The central park has an interactive water feature which enhances the pedestrian's experience and is derived from the concept of a community oriented landscaped space.
Amphitheatre
Connaught Place is synonymous to the British phase of Imperial Delhi. Hence, the planning concepts were geometric. The urban insert of the metro interchange seamlessly fits into the urban fabric of CP.
Water feature
10
KSRTC PROPOSED INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTRE AT SUBHASH NAGAR,BANGALORE... THE VISION : KSRTC & BMTC proposes to develop the existing Subhashnagar bus station as a state of the art Intermodal Transit Centre. Integrate Metro Interchange/station with the bus stations and city Railway Station are also looked into in this proposal
The Metro underlay
Views and perspective renders
Case Study : Subhashnagar IMTC Proposal Majestic,Bangalore
11
The levels are so planned that the passenger loading for different modes is split up. This reduces confusion and enhances loading capacity per floor
This zoning map indicates the various parameters taken into consideration in designing this IMTC in order to cater to all the modes of traffic flux
The view explains the relationship between the varying masses of the interchange complex.
The adjacent flow diagram explains the interconnectivity between KSRTC and BMTC. The section explains the varying levels which are functionally segregated as per the type of transportation.
12
Intermodal Transit hubs are a particularly strategic consideration in the present scenario of traffic growth and congestion in roads in Bengaluru. An Intermodal Transit Facility gathers many modes of transportation together and is strategically located so that the commuter has different transit alternatives to reach the destination. It describes an approach to planning, building and operating the transportation system, emphasizes optimal utilization of transportation resources and connections between modes.
Yelahanka is one of the oldest towns in Karnataka and is believed to have a history of more than 500 years. It was ruled by a king called Kempegowda (under a provision given by Krishnadevaraya) who built Bengaluru City. Yelahanka, covering an area of 38.71 Sq. Km, is situated on the northern periphery of the city of Bengaluru, India. It is chiefly bifurcated as Old Town & New Town. The predominant Land use of Yelahanka is agriculture, which covers 43.3% of the area. Residential use cover 11.1% and industrial use is 5%. The natural drainage system consisting of valleys running North-South between the Yelahanka and Puttenahalli lakes is mostly preserved except for an area south of the Yelahanka Kere which is encroached by residential development. Case Study : Yelahanka IMTC Proposal Source: Pre feasibility report draft for development of Yelahanka , Bangalore INTERMODAL TRANSIT HUB on PPP format at Yelahanka By, KSIIDC-IL&FS Project Development Company (KIPDC)
13
Areal view of the proposed site
Proposed Project - ITH Intermodal Transit Hubs (ITH) is proposed to be implemented on PPP basis across many locations in Bengaluru and accordingly an ITH has been planned to be developed on a site in Yelahanka. The site identified adjoins the service road Of Yelahanka bypass on the front side, a plot owned by Reliance on the left side of the plot and private farms on the other two sides. The subject Site has been identified for acquisition for the Bangalore Airport Rail Link (BARL), for construction of a High Speed Rail Link
14
Design program Area of the site = 24 acres Permitted FAR = 4 (Since Metro station is also proposed for the project) Height Restriction :The proposed facilities such as Bus Terminal, Metro and HSRL are proposed one on top of the other and require enough height separation. Setbacks (all around setbacks) When Multi Level Car Parking (MLCP) is proposed on As per applicable Zoning Regulations: a plot as independent activity, there shall not be any Above 30 mts – 11 mts limitation of FAR or height of building subject to Above 40 mts – 13 mts condition that it satisfies fire and airport authority restrictions where ever applicable. Ground Above 50 mts – 16 mts Coverage 45%
15
16
Yeshwanthpur ITH study The Concept : Intermodal Transit Hubs Background The government of Karnataka (GoK) has been very proactive and has brought in a number of new initiatives for growth and development of the State. The efforts being taken up for the city of Bengaluru is particularly commendable. Bengaluru city was originally developed as a Garden City and has now transformed into an industrial and software hub.
Most of the development has happened on the outskirts of the city and has caused an urban sprawl around, to some extent lop sided towards south and east.
However, rapid growth in the development, economic activity, and in turn population in Bengaluru, brought to the fore increasing traffic and transportation problems due to the gap between demand and supply of transport system
For Bengaluru, the modal shift in favour of mass transport system is not only poor but declining. As a result, there is tremendous increase in the use of personalized vehicles. To further aggravate the situation, the carrying capacity of the roads has not kept pace with the growth
and hence leading to congestion, increased air pollution and accidents. The use of personalized vehicles should be regulated through Low cost Transportation systems and management techniques. An Intermodal Transit system is the need of the hour for a city like Bengaluru. It is a network that links all of the city’s public transport services together. Case Study : Yeshwanthpur IMTC Proposal Source: Pre feasibility report draft for development of Yeshwanthpur , Bangalore INTERMODAL TRANSIT HUB on PPP format at Yelahanka By, KSIIDC-IL&FS Project Development Company (KIPDC)
17
Facts and strategies: As mentioned, metro alignment is coming in between the inbound flow of NH-4 and outbound flow of NH-4 near our site. And BMRCL has also acquired 10,000 sq.mt from the identified site for its Yeshwanthpur Metro Station.
Legends: 1. Green Arrows indicate the bus entry and exit. 2. Yellow Arrows indicate the location of Mechanized Foot over Bridges 3. Brown Slabs indicate the Bus bays. Networking of different modes of transport in the Proposed ITH, Yeshwanthpur Option I: Connect the inbound buses with the site through underpasses. Challenge: BMRCL would surely have critical apprehensions over the underpasses options. Since the metro alignment is passing in between the inbound flow of traffic and outbound flow of traffic on NH-4 near Railway Station, constructing underpasses under the metro line would need very sophisticated technology to implement such an option. Apart from this BMRCL would always present its apprehension over the underpasses referring about the compatibility threats posed by the underpasses to the metro line and station. Option II: Connect the inbound buses with the site via flyovers. Challenge: Seems financially and economically very expensive and complex. This option will be again needs very sophisticated road circulation planning and would definitely be highly expensive. The high cost would surely affect the viability of the proposed project.
Option III: Connection through two U-turns. Challenge: Already the entire stretch of NH4 near RS is very messy in terms of traffic, U-turn will increase the mess and traffic chaos on both sides inbound and outbound flow of traffic. After the exploration of many options the following option is proposed.
Proposed Option: Creation of few Bus-Bays in the parking area of Railway Station for inbound buses and Integrated Bus Pick-Up Station should be developed in the identified site for outbound buses. The entry/exit for passenger vehicle movement is proposed to be separate from that of Buses. The BMTC is promoting “Park & Ride� which is a concept where passengers come to nearest TTMC by their vehicles and then they park the vehicles in the parking area and take the bus to their destination. Similar concept is proposed to be adopted for ITH also 18
Function
Area (sq m)
Floor level
Allocated Function
Ground Coverage
45%
Allowable Building Foot print
3950
Groun d
Bus pick up station and related amenities
Open Area
4400
1st
Passenger utility zone
FAR
4
Commercial zone
Total Covered area
32000
2nd and 3rd
Basement
6540
Total Construction required for Bus Terminal area
3360
Use of Foot print area
3950
Bus Pick-UP Station Area (Ground floor)
3360
Passenger Utility Zone (First Floor)
3950
Area Requirements and space allocation for the various components within the ITH The following are the area details of components proposed for Intermodal Transit Hub at Yeshwanthpur.
To be provided in Bus Pick-Up Station
Units
Area in sq.m
Enquiry Offices & Ticketing counters
1
370
Security Guard Cabin
2
18
Yard Control Room & Enquiry Office
1
27
Passenger concourse area
1960
Gents Waiting hall
1
140
Ladies Waiting hall
1
110
Toilet Areas
1
70
Cloak Room
1
55
1
25
Office area
Generator Room with Electric Panel Common Areas
100
Buffer Area
460
Total Bus Terminal area
3360
Boarding bays area (Part of Open Area)
3050
Area break up Total built up Passenger amennities BMTC offices Bus terminal
Private vehicle parking 19
Particulars
Description
Site Area
14,940 sqm
Total Built up Area
43,173 sqm
Passenger Amenities
4,020 sqm
BMTC Offices
7,110 sqm
Bus Terminal
11,140 sqm
Covered private vehicle parking
20,150 sqm
Demand Assessment for Boarding Bays in Bus terminal: •
• • •
• • • • • •
• •
The number of Boarding bays for Bus Terminal has been calculated based on the total bus schedules that service on the routes in and around Yeshwanthpur region. The routes and the bus schedules have been highlighted in the previously submitted Inception report. BMTC, KSRTC, NEKSRTC, NWKSRTC, etc. BMTC have a strong network in the area runs around 360 buses from Nelamangala Road towards Tumkur Road. The assumptions considered are: The Bus Schedule growth rate assumed is 2% since the saturation point in terms of no. of buses has been reached. Already BMTC is running more than 360 buses which is a huge no. in terms of city buses. While the KSRTC, NEKRTC, NWKRTC, etc also have an equally strong and extensive network passing through the Tumkur Road The time to Board a Bus – 5 minutes The time to Alight a Bus – 3 minutes Bus Pick Up Station shall operate for approx. 18 hrs. The number of Boarding buses, a Bus Bay can handle more than 550 buses daily. The total Estimated of bus trips are 10956, From the above, the total number of Bus-Bays to be developed is 40 for the outbound buses going towards Tumkur. Out of which the 26 bus Bays will serve the BMTC buses while remaining bays will serve the KSRTC, NEKRTC, NWKRTC and Private buses. Five Bus Bays will be developed for the inbound buses near thye parking area of back gate of Yeshwanthpur railway Station. The Area required per Bus bay is a minimum 76 sq.mt. as per Urban Development Plans Formulation & Implementation (UDPFI) guidelines. Hence the Area required for 40 Bus Bays is 32710 sq.ft.. 20
Case Studies International Context
A MULTI-MODAL TERMINAL FOR THE BAY REGION AND BEYOND‌ As a truly regional facility, the new Transbay Terminal responds to modern ways of working and lifestyles that enables the Bay Area to become a unified economic and a cultural entity. The new Terminal design envisions a signature civic building that celebrates public transportation in downtown San Francisco.
This terminal was a landmark in the Bay region. Richard Rogers along with Arup and partners came up with this redevelopment scheme to rejuvenate it’s functional performance in the urban fabric Architect : Ar.Clarke Pelli and associates, Lead architect - Hines Location : San Francisco, California Site area : 10000 sq m (40 acres)
REFURBISHING THE OLD,EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE The existing terminal was an underutilized and outdated depot attempting to serve a rather fragmented, unorganized regional transportation network Located in downtown San Francisco, the new Transbay Terminal is an indispensable component of a strategy to solve these problems by providing efficiently linked and greatly expanded bus and rail capacity, more convenient access to transit, and a new celebratory building that is delightful and easy to use; an appropriate new gateway to and from San Francisco.
Case Study : Transbay Transit Centre, San Francisco,California 21
Lvl +20’ : Subterranean level that accommodates the underground downtown extension of Caltrain, and future East Bay commuter rail and other conventional rail, and high-speed intercity rail services.
Lvl +40’ : The ground floor level includes a lobby for train ticketing, waiting, and baggage handling, also providing access down to the trains and up to the buses. It houses a major hotel and a public plaza.
Lvl +20’ : Accessed by the great piazza stair, or escalators and elevators in numerous locations along its length, the Concourse Level provides a safe pedestrian environment from which bus riders can ascend to their buses on the third and fourth levels.
Lvl +40’ : The terminal’s third level accommodates the entire AC Transit commuter operation, and is sized to permit 26 articulated and four standard buses to serve arriving and departing passengers simultaneously accommodating a peak load of 25,000 passengers per hour.
Lvl +60’ : The uppermost floor is a partial level on the north side of the building, running the length of the terminal
22
City section looking North The 50m wide by 395m long facility has a structural framing system that permits unimpeded pedestrian and transit vehicle movements both horizontally and vertically. Sustainable design features include optimizing natural ventilation by harnessing the prevailing winds, designing the roof ,exterior walls to maximize natural lighting, and capturing rain water.
City section looking East
Pedestrian accessibility at different levels
Vehicular accessibility and stationing at different levels
Daylight and natural ventilation will suffuse the terminal with sunlight and air and save energy.
Sections showing levels and exterior shell structure of the built form
23
Landscaped green roof
The zonal segregation of activities as well as levels of segregation lead to the creation of Top most bus level plan artificial green mounds which are an integral part of the green terraces of the transit center
Mezzanine level plan Bus terminal
Caltrain waiting area
Large HSRL waiting area Central passenger concourse
Transition of floor plates from building to nature and it’s implications on the neighborhood and the general user groups; effects of footfall and occupancy
24
Section through Public realm Sustainable design application The Transbay Transit Center represents an integrated approach to design and an emphasis on sustainability. The use of natural daylight and natural ventilation throughout the length and levels of the structure; the use of tubular internal louvers to further assist in the reduction of solar gain and increase light penetration to the ground level; the use of high performance lighting systems; the use of trickle air ventilation systems for natural heat rejection; the reliance upon rainwater and grey water for non-potable purposes – individually and collectively these are but a few examples that reflect our commitment to the strongest sustainability principles.
Transverse section
Design elements and architectural features…
•Natural light into the core reaching up to the lowest floor •Ease of transgressing the built form, one may just use the ground level floor to pass through the space and is not just meant for transit options •Multiple stairways for every few hundred metres so as to reduce loads using one stairwell. •Main lobby or ground level area height is much more bearing in mind visual connectivity with other floors and also to give a feeling of a vast space even amidst immense crowding. •Green roof to promote viewing the context, promote urban greens and also a space to relax and pause amidst busy transit situation 25
The ground plane: As envisioned, the ground plane will be one continuous social environment. Chairs, benches, cafes, lights, trees, movement in every direction will humanize the space. Key to the success of the plaza will be the creation of a vibrant civic center in which the Transbay Transit Center sits while providing a Mission Street address for the Center
Street level: The concept was based on creating a vibrant neighborhood in a bright street-level public open space along the Transbay Transit Center’s entire length – a lively marketplace and gathering spot with cafes, market stalls and other necessities that will serve commuters, business people, visitors and residents alike. The Transbay Transit Center is so designed as to be the primary focus of activity and transport connections for San Francisco’s residents, workers and visitors.
Passengers experience: AC transit passengers arriving on Transbay buses will see the city skyline around them for orientation, and then use one of four vertical circulation banks to reach the street level. They will then distribute quickly through the porous Market Hall to their final destinations
26
BEFORE AFTER A Vibrant Neighborhood: The Transbay Transit Center and Tower will be a gathering place for the entire region. It is envisioned to be a multi-modal transportation center, floors of office space, a luxury hotel, a research institute, an art gallery, restaurants, condominiums, affordable housing and a great public realm that stretches almost beyond sight.
Environmentally responsible: The approach to the Transbay project has given an exceptional opportunity to create the most sustainable development of its kind – one that embraces an new & unconventional, forward-thinking approach to energy uses and needs. With its infusion of natural light and fresh air, the synergy of the building’s systems, and the self-generation of much of its energy and water, the Transit Center and Tower can be recognized globally as a model of environmentally and socially responsible design, aspiring to exceed carbon-neutral benchmarks by more than a decade. 033 27
London’s busiest transport hub -LUL King’s Cross is the busiest transport hub in London. Designed by Lewis Cubitt, it is a Grade I (one) listed structure , indicating a building of exceptional cultural and historic interest. Nonetheless, the original station was unable to deal with the 40M passengers that now use it each year, and equally ill-equipped to meet the modern-day needs of Network Rail The design team’s solution was to create a new 8000m2 concourse alongside the existing station building, and so here the Challenge was to create an efficient and elegant structural solution for the new roof that would sit comfortably alongside the original station. The new Western Concourse has already been acknowledged as achieving this, evoking the grand station buildings of the past while catering for all the needs of modern-day travellers.
The completed Western Concourse just prior to opening.
Case Study : The King’s Cross station Redevelopment ,London Source : The Arup Journal Issue 2/2012
28
Redesign
Historic Design
Redesign of the Western Range Study of passenger flows Legion model of individual passengers waiting in the Western Concourse prior to moving through to the platforms to board the trains during the evening peak period.
Passenger densities across King’s Cross Square; areas of congregation or congestion are indicated by the yellows and oranges.
Passengers waiting in the Western Concourse prior to boarding trains. The yellows and oranges show the areas where most people are waiting at this time; although accumulation is high, passengers are able to move freely to and from the trains and retail areas.
Key a) Main train shed b) New southern gate line in WR building c) Western Concourse d) King’s Cross Square e) Great Northern Hotel.
29
Plan layout Entry from a Public Plaza
King’s Cross Square from the East
30
31
North South cross-section.
East West cross-section.
Usak is a city in the interior part of the Aegean region of Turkey.The city has a population of 180,414 and is the capital of the Usak province. The site is situated at the 10. km of Usak-Afyon road in east-west direction.Their design was to bring in a terminal building to inter link the two cities.
The design is based on the topographic analysis of the site. Their approach also involves combining the space left from the terminus building with the recreational area.The contours on the site are made well use of in order to generate the design form and axis to the terminal. Organic steps and use of ramps seamlessly merges the topography with the organic design of the terminus
Location of services along the concourse area for vertical circulation. Clear demarcation of pedestrian and vehicular flux. Radial behaviour suited best for passenger alighting scenario.Upon drop off,one gets to experience a central court and ancillary activities suited for lounge spaces.
Case study : Usak Inter-city Bus Terminus, Usak,Turkey
32
Case Studies Other Prerequisite Research
The BRT is designed as a strategic intervention, to attract latent transit demand, improve air quality and help the city remain compact, minimising congestion on the road. The guiding principles for the selection of the network corridors are the ability to reach a larger segment of people based on the analysis of how people move or spatial patterns. The bus rapid transit system or BRTS is a concept that details out a dedicated traffic lane for the movement of public transport buses. It is a bus based high quality, high capacity rapid transit system that delivers fast, comfortable, accessible, convenient and cost effective urban mobility. In BRT system, since the vehicles travel in exclusive lanes, they avoid congestion on the road. There is a provision of segregated right-of-way infrastructure,quailty buses, rapid and frequent bus operations and easy boarding, alighting and transfers.
Case study : Ahmedabad BRTS Network Ahmedabad, India
33
The BRT bus stops have been incorporated amidst flyovers, into road systems and have distinctive feature for pedestrians and buses.
These prototypes explain the scale and proportion of the BRT station. 34
The MG Road HSRL Terminal Proposal
35 34
Statistics for the HSRL Terminal Proposal at Hebbal
36
Market City, Bangalore - a development located in the commercial area of Whitefield in Bangalore with approximately 2.81 million square foot (including 0.80 million square foot of parking) of developable area. A five-star hotel projected to be approximately 460,000 square feet with around 210 keys and 60 serviced apartments will also be developed. The special feature of this development is that it has five to seven special and general anchors, consisting of large FEC, hyper, departmental, bookstore, kids play zone, electronics, toy store. The Bangalore Market City also boasts of one of the biggest multiplexes in the city with 12 screens. Anchors: 4 Anchors area: 1, 10,000 sq. ft. Hypermarket: 1,50,000 sq. ft. Vanillas: 208 Vanillas area: 5,70,000 sq. ft. Cinema: 80,000 sq. ft. - 8 screens (Inclusive of 2 gold screens) Entertainment: 30,000 sq. ft. F&B total area: 1,97,000 sq. ft. • Food Court:30,000 sq. ft. • Fine Dining (6):60,000 sq. ft.. • Quick Service Restaurants (5):23,000 sq. ft. • F&B:84,000 sq. ft.
Source: Google, Wikipedia.
Case Study : Mall Statistics Bangalore
http://bangalore.mallsmarket.com/malls/phoenix-market-city-bangalore-mahadevapura
37
ORION MALL FEATURES Built-up Area - 1.1 Million Sft Distinguishing design features 5-storey high electronic and illuminated displays on mall façade 4-storey high atrium (28 m high) A beautiful pedestrian plaza to offer pretty lakeside views A 10 m wide Grand Staircase from ground floor to plaza level Extensive parking Two-level basement car park for approx. 1,500 cars Adjacent 9-level enclave car park for 2,200 cars, easing weekend and holiday traffic The Orion Experience National and international retail brands Leading brands such as Landmark, Star India Bazaar, Westside and PVR Cinemas have been finalised as anchors Specialty outlets—reflecting an excellent combination or international, national and local brandsacross a range of general, specialised and niche-product lines will become a further draw Retail facilities in all will include: - Anchor stores - Department and mini-anchor stores - Vanilla stores - Kiosks Fast food to fine dining -Large, multi-cuisine food court with up to 20 counters. Will feature indoor and outdoor seating for approx. 750 people -Up to 4 specialty restaurants -Lakeside cafes Multiplex, events and entertainment Amphitheatre at the plaza level. Will seat up to 1,000 people Exhibition area on 3rd floor. Could serve as an ideal place for on-site interactive marketing, where people could touch / taste / try / learn about new products or services. Children's gaming area 11-screen multiplex managed by PVR Cinemas-with around 3,000 seats Source: Google, Wikipedia.
Case Study : Orion Mall Rajajinagar, Bangalore
38
Comparative analysis
Mall
Phoenix Whitefield
Orion Rajajinagar
Hebbal Proposal
Category Total Site area
15 acres
40 acres (mixed use)
50 acres (mixed use) Earmarked phasing for hub = 25 acres
Built up Area
28,10,000 sq ft
Commercial Mall area
17,00,000 sq ft
Apartments
60,000 sq ft (174 Serviced)
Total Retail Area
Total = 87,12,000 sq ft Earmarked phasing for hub = 43,56,000 sq ft 12,20,000 sq ft
Up to 10,00,000 sq ft (considering -1 to g+4 floors {upto 15m ht}+ gifting lobby for HSRL) 130*60 m foot print (300*300m)
10,00,000 sq ft
8,80,000 sq ft
25% of earmarked area 10,89,000 sq ft (320*320m)
Commercial offices area
5,00,000 sq ft
8,80,000 sq ft (WTC tower)
45% of earmarked area 23,95,800 sq ft (470*470m)
Entertainment Area
30,000 sq ft
8,000 sq ft
Up to 25,000 sq ft (50*50m)
Food Court
30,000 sq ft
Quick Service Restaurants
23,000 sq ft (5)
F&B
84,000 sq ft
F & B Total Area
1,97,000 sq ft
Up to 60,000 sq ft (including food courts and eateries) excluding fine dining (75*75m)
Multiplex
55,000 sq ft
Upto 25,000 sq ft (50*50m)
Night Club
12,000 sq ft
??
Parking for commercial area
8,00,000 sq ft
Total Parking for all ameneties
10,70,000 sft
55,000 sq ft
Transit hub 30% of earmarked area 13,06,800 sq ft (350*350m) Source:Author
Comparative Analysis
39
Commercial area distribution
Phoenix Whitefield
Largest Anchor shop: Hypermarket
1, 50,000 sq. ft.
4 other anchor shops
1,10,000 sq.ft.
Total space allocated for anchor stores
2,60,000 sq.ft.
Orion Rajajinagar
Hebbal Proposal 1,50,000 sq ft – Big Bazaar/Spar 50,000 sq ft –Landmark/Crossword
50,000 sft(landmark)
4-5 Big brands – 1,00,000 sq ft*4
Other smaller stores
2,50,000 sq ft Gifting lounge and eateries for HSRL
1,00,000 sq ft 2 mini anchors
42,000 sq.ft
Gourmet food market
30,000 sq ft Total area to informal kiosks & stalls
20,000 sq ft 200 small stores
5,70,000 sq. ft
Mall and retail area total 10,89,000 sq ft
8 screen multiplex
80,000 sq.ft
25,000 sq ft 4 screen multiplex
25,000 sq ft bowling and arcade
Entertainment area 50,000 sq ft
total
HSRL BMTC/KSRTC Railway
BRT
METRO Nagawara
The area allocation is based on best practices and projected footfalls for the respective functions be it the Mall or the Terminals for interchange.
Source:Author
Comparative Analysis
40
Site Surroundings Aite analysis
Historic imagery
HEBBAL LAKE
NAGAVARA LAKE
The two rivers were one entity connected by a small stream and the highlighted land was a wetland Surrounding land was considered farmland and the road network was of a primary order.
2000
HEBBAL LAKE
NAGAVARA The rivers gave in to LAKE siltation and the link began diminishing. The road laying and other urbanization activities led to downfall of agricultural activities on site.
2002
HEBBAL LAKE
NAGAVARA LAKE
The stream completely dried up and the primary land use began to shift to the industrial phase
2004
The road network began to take shape and further siltation reduced cultivation on site. 41
HEBBAL LAKE
NAGAVARA The Nagavara lake LAKE was proved to be toxic and contaminated. The slums and 2005 illegal settlements grew exponentially beside the nallah on the north
HEBBAL LAKE
NAGAVARA The surrounding area was densified with residential LAKE developments.
These residential 2008 developments’ sewerage was let into these lakes further deteriorating their condition.
HEBBAL LAKE
NAGAVARA The Outer Ring Road proved to be a portal to LAKE the north ever since BIAL became functional.
2009 The BMTC setup a TTMC and this encouraged local public 42 transportation.
The
HEBBAL LAKE
The
factories
situated
NAGAVARA North of the site saw LAKE demolition and apartment buildings came up
2011
Upon survey and research of Hebbal lake toxicity levels showed to have shot up above the safe 40%
HEBBAL LAKE
NAGAVARA LAKE
The green around the TTMC building on site slowly disappeared
Agricultural activities 2012 were completely stopped although the institute of agro sciences and the pisciculture continued to thrive The present scenario shows that the existing road network is constantly being upgraded with widening or engulfing public property due to lack of space to accommodate the increasing vehicular traffic, particularly the BIAL traffic.
HEBBAL LAKE
2013 The TTMC is under demolition and the NAGAVARA public transport network is LAKE being reinvented and being upgraded as per Govt proposals in agreement with the respective Agencies and PPP Works. 43
Army Land
Park and Nursery c/o Lake Authorities Land to be acquired
Columbia Asia Esteem Mall
BMTC Bus Depot
Site surroundings
Site and Site Analysis: Location and surroundings
44
Sparse built fabric(cultivation)
Moderate built fabric (Proposed ) Dense built fabric
Greenery
Greenery
Nursery Lake Lake
Dense residential
STP Cultivation
Lake Nallah
Lake
Siltation Flyovers Railway
Roadway
45
Existing physical features
Figure ground
Massing
Salient features
46
FAR projection
Traffic and Transit corridors
FAR 4.0
Commerce/Retail
FAR 3.25
Purely Residential Developments 47
Hebbal is a portal to the North of Bangalore and is an inevitable milestone in the traverse to BIAL
The flux of HSRL passengers will add thrust to the footfall quotient and hence needs to be zoned and designed to the appropriate extent
48
The site can be viewed from all the flyovers and vice versa. The building has no faรงade of sorts and will have to respond in 360 degrees.
49
The site has many options for breaking entries into with respect to vehicular access. There may be ambiguity based on the directionality of the traffic.
Entries; breaking into the site
50
1
DEFINITIVE SURROUNDINGS AND SCOPE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF LAND INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD HUB.
Site surroundings 1
The nursery is an undisturbed sanctuary of many varieties of flora and fauna
1.This location within the Lake Site has an exceptional view and an ancient Kalyani tank of sorts. This area could be developed to form a popular neighborhood node and an extension of the lake park but only more public and social in it’s essence
51
Design Program
52
Source : eproc.gov.kar.in BMTC
53
54
55
56
•Public plaza : No. of passenger using public plaza during peak hour = 10,000 : LOS C- avg. ped. Space = 0.9-1.4 sq m/p Area of public plaza = (10,000x 0.9) sq m = 9,000 sq m : no. of sitting = every 4000 people 100 sitting = for 10,000 = 250 : Area for sitting = (.45x.45) sq m x 250 = 50.6 sq m
STATION BUILDING Unpaid area •Ticketing : No. of passenger during peak hour = 10,000 Every 5 people 1 goes for ticketing = 2000 Hence, capacity of ticket area = 2000 once at a time : Width of entrance gate/ exit gate of ticket area: LOS- C: flow per unit width = 23p/m/min : For 2000 person in 4 min = 22 m : 20 ticket counter – reserved ticket counter = 4 - Unreserved ticket counter= 7 - Platform ticket counter = 3
- Luggage booking counter = 2 - Commuter ticket counter= 4 : Area of ticket booth - ticket counter area = 1.95 sq m x 20 = 39 sq m CBS room = Returns ROPD room = Stock room = (3x4) sq m =12 sq m Lunch / staff room = (6x4) sq m = 24 sq m Cash room = (3x3) sq m = 9 sq m Communication-cum-UPS backup room = Drinking water facility = 3 no. Toilet facility = gents (1 wc+2 urinals+3 wb)/ ladies (1 wc + 1wb) : Area for queue – (2.2x1) sq m/4 person = 2.2 sq m/4 person For 100 people = 55 m length For 4 counter = (55/4) m = 13.75 m = 14 m length of each queue (for 25 p) Area of each queue line = (14x1) sq m = 14 sq m + 14 sq m for each exit way Area of each booking counter = 28 sq m : Total queue area = (28x20) sq m = 560 sq m (capacity of 1019 passenger)
Ticket for other intermodal transit facilities : BMTC ticket counter = 1 : KSRTC ticket counter = 2 : Taxi ticket counter = 2 Area of ticket booth – ticket counter area = 1.95 sq m x 7 = 13.65 sq m Stock-cum-communication room = CBS room= Toilet facilities = combined with rail ticket counter Staff room = (4x3) sq m= 12 sq m Drinking facilities = combined with rail ticket office : Total area = Area for queue – 28 sq m for each queue (entry +exit) = total queue area = 196 sq m 57
•Reserved waiting area (AC)
Reserved waiting lounge
Reserved waiting lounge (AC)
: Area of commuter waiting lounge : Area of reserved waiting area – Level Of Service- B: 2.25sq m/p – Level Of Service – A: 2.61sq m/p For 200 passenger = 450 sq m For 500 passenger = 1305 sq m : Toilets – for gents: 3 urinals + 2 wc + 3 wb : Toilets – for gents: 6 urinals + 3 wc + 4 wb 1 urinal + 1 wc + 1 wb (for ADA) 1 urinal + 1 wc + 1 wb (for ADA) - For ladies: 3 wc + 3 wb - For ladies: 4 wc + 4 wb 1 wc + 1 wb (for ADA) 1 wc + 1 wb (for ADA) : Drinking water: for ladies: 1 +1 (ADA) : Drinking water: for ladies: 2 +1 (ADA) For gents: 1 + 1 (ADA) For gents: 2 + 1 (ADA) : Coffee shop: 1 no. : Coffee shop: 2 no. Area = (2x2) sq m = 4 sq m Area = (2x2) sq m = 4 sq m : Food/drink vending machine = 3 no. : Food stalls: 5 no. Area = (1x1) sq m Each stall of (6x4) sq m = 24 sq m Total area for food stalls = 120 sq m : Retail shops: 4 no. Each stalls of (5x4) sq m = 20 sq m A Total area = 80 sq m
B C D E
F
LOS A is ideal scenario B for Terminus C for Mall D E F
Avg. ped. space M2/p >1.9
Flow per unit width p/m/min <16
1.4-1.9
16-23
0.9-1.4
23-33
0.7-0.9 0.4-0.7 <0.4
33-43 45-56 variable 58 57
59
Design Rationales
Design Rationales
40 35
30
No. of25agencies 20
15 10 5
Buses
0
Rail
Land use
Distribution of land uses of Joint Develepment Projects among Surveyed Transit agencies U.S.A
Design Rationales 60
62
63
64
Blue zone
To link the two lakes and revive the ecology, a blue zone is assigned. This water body not only adds a visual impact but also is functional in the sense that it is used for grey water treatment and also to cleanse and slowly engulf the nallah
Green zone To create nodes and pathways and to give the pedestrian a clear picture of the ecology and built mass and seamlessy blend the contrast.
HSRL Terminal The elevated terminal is to be located at a level of +15m
TTMC & Building mass
Other major built forms -TTMC -Mall
Site development; achieving FAR
Phasing and site potential
Design development
65 65
Sketch Schemes
Experiment with forms and punctures
Ideating on a mass amidst the flyovers ,the portion overhanging above the flyover acts as a link to the site and has vertical and horizontal connectivity to the building on site.
Experiment with masses
Conceptual section â&#x20AC;&#x201C; visualizing the typology
Sketch Schemes
66 66
Site entries HSRL : High flux,high density Monorail:Moderate flux,high density
BMTC:High flux,high density KSRTC:Low flux,low density Site entries
BRT:Low flux,moderate density
Zoning
Site entries
Grids
Massing and Typical typology
Mass Experiment
67
Bus Terminus Designing.Underpass and secondary site entries
Conceptual ground floor plans of mall
Conceptual floor plans and section based on connectivity and functional heights of built forms 68
Pedestrian nodes of connectivity
Plaza needs skylights to light up underground terminus
Varying shapes and sizes to cater to the function below and the amount of ventilation and light required
69
Skylights atop the R.O.W or Right Of Way for buses undergroung need to be wider and let in more light
Vertical transport from underground terminal to plaza above
70
Technical papers
Technical paper 1 Reviving dead spaces caused by infrastructure projects The modal system transgresses public forums and often has a shortcoming of extensive dead spaces overhead or beneath them; the elevated Metro station-case in point or highways and other elevated infrastructure, multilevel car parks are other examples of dead spaces which do not receive sunlight or are always shaded. Such spaces can be revitalized and transformed to fit the fabric better. Another seemingly overlooked problem involves medians or â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;barriersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; built in lieu of protecting Metro piers on all major Metro sites, post construction. This insertion causes confusion not only for a pedestrian trying to cross the road but also other modes such of non motorized vehicles because they are not designed keeping in mind such over-crossings. They are definitely not handicap friendly either. The proposal involves making them barrier friendly as well as accessible to pedestrians and NMVs. It further implies incorporating landscape and leisure elements.
The portions underneath flyovers need to be well lit to avoid anti social elements and can be dotted with street furniture or other utilitarian elements
The turning radius of the flyovers causes misuse or underutilization of the land allocated to it. The effects are loss of land at a landmark intersection, which could have had better use than just be pedestrian friendly cross walks.
The barren/undeveloped land trapped between or flyovers needs to be made greener. Advertisements kept to a bare minimum to avoid chaos for a driver 71
Technical paper 2 Reorganising Hebbal ; proposal of green corridors to connect the upcoming hub to the existing ecology Transit Oriented Development (TOD) is the functional integration of land use and transportation planning aimed at achieving an efficient, more sustainable pattern of development that looks to support public transit and reduce sprawl tendencies (auto-centric/ dependent development); thereby minimizing environmental, social and economic costs. Transit-oriented developments are also a means of creating vibrant, livable communities supporting a mix of functions/ activities, social and economic diversity and a range of housing and transportation choices. A TOD neighborhood typically incorporates features that promote increased use of public transit by generating and attracting ridership. They comprise of relatively compact, moderate to higher density mixed-use development, centered around a transit station (rail or bus-based MRT/LRT/BRT) and within easy walking distance from it. The distance a person is willing to walk to take transit defines the primary area within which TODs should occur. This is equivalent to roughly a 5-10 minute walk, or about 400-800 meters. At these radii around a station, there is potentially 125 to 250 acres of land for transit oriented development. Higher density development is concentrated nearer to the station to take advantage of transit proximity and make it convenient for more people to use, with progressively lower densities moving outwards. Mixed use residential, commercial, or institutional areas-including housing, offices/ workplaces, shops/markets, recreation/leisure facilities, institutions and other public amenities-are encouraged; not only with view to making the neighborhood more accessible and convenient, but more people to use transit services for a variety of trip purposes throughout the day. Transit-oriented developments are also designed to maximize access to public transit, primarily favoring non-motorized modes, but without excluding the auto-rickshaw. This entails pedestrian and cycle-friendly environments with high quality urban design. San Francisco: Example of a transit corridor and it’s response to the surrounding context. TOD projects can range in size from new infill development or redevelopment of one or more buildings in the area, to larger mixed-use centers.
Example : San Francisco TOD Excerpts from ’Transit Oriented Development-Best practices’ handbook and Urban Design thesis report – Radha Chanchani,CiSTUP,IISC
72
The idea was to identify nodes within the site and itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s surroundings for the potential green network or the green path which can have trees of the same variety or have a uniformity which renders these â&#x20AC;&#x153;green corridorsâ&#x20AC;? unique from the surrounding greenery.
Also it could act as a means of drawing people into the plaza or the informal commerce which takes place in the open and semi open spaces within the site! These corridors are aimed to please the pedestrian and also add a visual element to the commuters who zip by Hebbal.
This path can be also mapped as the most frequently used pedestrian stretch since an existing problem in the current scenario is the lack of shade or shading devices in and around the site
73
Reference Maps and images List if Maps Chapter 1 1.1 Bangalore City Map 1.2 Map showing the regional connectivity of Bangalore Chapter 2 2.1 Bangalore city map showing the existing urban structure 2.2 Existing and proposed road network
Chapter 1.1
Chapter 1.2
Chapter 2.1
Chapter 2.2
Vestian Survey
Abbreviations BMTC Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation BMRCL Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited TTMC Traffic and transit management centers BRTS Bus Rapid Transit System HSRL High Speed Rail Link BIAL Bangalore International Airport Limited BMLTA Bangalore Metropolitan Land Transport Authority
Glossary Modal latin modalis –Of or relating to modality. Although here,it refers to and roots from ‘modes’ of transport ; modality being the quantifying measure of movement using a particular mode of transport. Intermodal– being or involving transportation by more than one form of carrier during a single journey. Further relation to the term interchange which is a place or space where one has the opportunity to change their mode of transport. Multimodal– having or involving several modes of transportation, modalities.
Bibliography Govt. publications RCDP-2015, Bangalore city Institute of Town planners, India, UDPFI guidelines, 1996
Books, articles from Journals and Publications Big Ideas | Ahmedabad | EMBARQ 4. The Proposed Traffic And Transportation Plan Hebbal to be revived as interchange hub - Times Of India Designing Built Environments for Better Accessibility | EMBARQ India A Success Story Of Ahmedabad City - YouTube
Website resources www.google.com www.praja.in www.kar.nic.in
Reference Maps Google earth (Accessed on 23-02-2013) Wikimapia (Accessed on 23-02-2013) Maps of India (Accessed on 23-02-2013) GoK-BDA, BMP, BMRDA, RCDP-2015 Survey of India Maps