DEFINING LOCAL CONCEPT OF URBAN RAIL STATION AREA DEVELOPMENT THROUGH BEST PRACTICES APPROACH OF RAIL-TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

Civil Engineering and Urban Planning: An International Journal (CiVEJ) Vol.3, No.3, September 2016
DOI:10.5121/civej.2016.3301 1
DEFINING LOCAL CONCEPT OF URBAN RAIL
STATION AREA DEVELOPMENT THROUGH
BEST PRACTICES APPROACH OF RAIL-TRANSIT
ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT
Dyah Titisari Widyastuti1
, Ikaputra2
, Danang Parikesit3
, Bambang Hari Wibisono4
1
PhD Candidate, Department of Architecture and Planning, Universitas Gadjah Mada,
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
2
Associate Professor, Department of Architecture and Planning, Universitas Gadjah
Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
3
Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universitas Gadjah
Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
4
Professor, Department of Architecture and Planning, Universitas Gadjah Mada,
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
ABSTRACT
Basically, Rail-transit Oriented Development (ROD) is an integrated high density mixed use rail station
transit area development for improving accessibility to public transport, enhancing pedestrian friendly
environment as well as increasing urban mobility. Many developed countries have applied the concept of
ROD for generating the compact development of rail station area.
Best practices approach is a selective observation towards several cases with various contexts in order to
get generalization of related theories or concept on practices. In this approach, the study is oriented to
some reasons that make cases being successful. There are two basic components of best practices
approach, i.e. source site and target site. This research elaborated some cases in Japan rail station area
development as source sites for best practices. The finding from elaboration of source sites was brought as
a tool for analyzing the target sites, Jabodetabek rail station area.
The result shows different physical and cultural context between Japan and Indonesia cause the developed
countries concept of ROD cannot be fully applied as it is. It needs some adaptation to be applied in
Indonesia.
KEYWORDS
best practices, rail station area, Rail-Transit Oriented Development, urban development
1. BACKGROUND
The sustainable urban public transport system seems like a challenge for Asian developing
countries that are generally dominated by road transport. Urban rail transit system is also mostly
less developed in Asian developing countries [1]. The impacts that occur todays are road traffic
overload as well as more time and energy consuming. Nowadays, carbon emission from transport
in Indonesia reaches around 70 million tons [2]. That amount represents 3% from national total
amount of carbon emission (2,250 million tons). Here, train is the most ecological mode of
transportation (only 1% from total transport emission carbon) compare to other modes of

2
transportation. On the other hand, train is also the most efficient mode of transportation after ship
since the energy consumption is only 0.002 liters/km/person. Although train is the most efficient
and ecological mode of transportation, in the context of Indonesia urban mobility, people prefer
use road transport (bus, private car and motorcycle) rather than rail transport (7.32%).
The main problem of rail station area in Indonesia is segregated development between rail
transport system and rail station area. So far, government policy has only a little concern on
integration between rail track service development and rail station area development as an
important part of urban development.
2. BEST PRACTICES APPROACH
Best practices approach is a selective observation towards several cases with various contexts in
order to get generalization of related theories or concept on practices. In this approach, orientation
of the study is directed to some reasons why cases are succeeded. Best practices are also
described as ‘what works’, that means something can work (successfully done) in certain context
or environment. The same practice on different context or environment can give different result.
There are two basic components of best practices approach, i.e. source site and target site [3].
Source site is a case that used for reference to make transformation of a target site. As a source
site, cases in best practice approach should have capacity to be compared to target sites. In this
term, theoretical basis are principally needed [4].
Best practices approach in the process of analysis could emphasize one or more aspects, i.e.
function-oriented, process-oriented or innovation and transformability-oriented. There are stages
of best practices approach, i.e.
1) Observation of target sites that is directed for finding the specific character of target sites;
2) Selection of source sites that referable for target sites;
3) Analysis of source sites that is directed for finding the techniques to achieve good result
(explanation);
4) Conversion of finding from source sites into target sites (extrapolation).
3. RAIL-TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT
3.1. Definition
Urban form character of formal and informal settlement in developing countries has significant
differences [5]. Urban form character of formal settlement is well-developed in line with urban
planning while urban form character of informal settlement is irregularly developed. A part of
urban area that is dominated by informal settlements in developing countries is along rail tracks
or dilapidated land around underutilized rail station.
An ideal sustainable urban form is characterized by compactness and high density, mixed land
use and connected street network that supported by well-connected public transportation
(sustainable transportation) [6]. The future urban development should be oriented toward
sustainable urban form [7] [8]. Principally, the concept of Transit-Oriented Development
represents the concept of compact city that comprises the idea of sustainable urban form [9].
Rail-transit Oriented Development (ROD) is basically defined as TOD (Transit Oriented
Development) concept with rail station as main transit node [10]. The idea of this concept is
integration of urban form and urban transport in encouraging and easing urban mobility.

3
Principally, the delineation of ROD/TOD area is walking distance, 2,000 ft. (± 600 m) or 10-15
minutes, from rail station [11]. In this concept, commercial and public facilities should be placed
in the short distance from transit node for enhancing community accessibility. Furthermore,
location of ROD area should be or next to trunk line (main transit route) or feeder line (secondary
route).
The spirit of ROD is creating node and place [12]. As a node, ROD area has a role as node of
activity that enhance strong connectivity between living place and working, shopping, or other
daily activity place through integrated urban form and transit system. Meanwhile as a place, ROD
area should has a role as place making for comfortable, safely, securely, pleasingly living,
working, shopping and other daily activities.
Figure 1. The Original Concept of Transit Oriented Development
3.2. Principles
The principles of ROD concept are basically contributed to compact and walkable urban form
that is connected to high quality transit system. It enhances daily mobility inside neighborhood on
foot as well as daily mobility outside neighborhood by public transportation modes. Generally,
the concept of ROD has several principles toward pedestrian friendly community [13], i.e.
1) Density (high density concentration of buildings and dwelling units in the center of ROD area
for the easiness on walking distance as well as generating potential user of public transport);
2) Diversity (suitable proportion and dispersal or concentration of mixed land use in the short
distance that encourage walking for daily mobility inside ROD area);
3) Design for walkability (the presence of built environment form and space that promote
comfort, safety and security for walking activity);
4) Distance to transit (walking distance from dwelling units or nodes of daily activity into transit
nodes that promote transit ridership);
5) Destination accessibility (the need of good quality pedestrian connectivity for people walking
and good intermodal system in facilitating people moving to destination).
Nevertheless, some previous researches showed different finding on different context. Several
factors and circumstances, such as government regulations, development opportunities, market
factors, as well as available public transportation service, have affected the proper TOD
approaches [14]. The adaptation of TOD concept transformation into established communities is
commonly take place in an incremental process. Hence, the proper balance between delivering
sufficient development and preserving the local values could be realized. Each location has
significant context while the basic principles of TOD are still kept [15].

4
Research with the case of low density area found transformation of TOD concept is focused more
on intermodal quality as well as park and ride facilities. This research found commercial land use
around rail station was not being main requirement [16]. On the other hand, research on high
density area found the model of TOD was not concerned on density improvement. However it
should be focused on public transit service, land use, street network and urban design [17].
Regarding the typology of linear urban form, there is not essential to concentrate the density in
the core area because population and compactness are distributed equally in the city. The
development should be focused more on enhancing quality of environment since the dense of
main corridor that is susceptible to air and noise pollution [18].
4. TARGET SITES: JABODETABEK RAIL STATION AREA
DEVELOPMENT
The commuter rail service in Jakarta urban area (Jabodetabek) was started in 2008. It was
operated by PT KCJ (Kereta Api Commuter Jabodetabek), a subsidiary of PT KAI (Kereta Api
Indonesia), Indonesian national railway company. The infrastructures are owned by PT KAI with
some of the stations and lines are used concurrently with regular intercity trains. The service
covered the area of the capital city of Jakarta and the surrounding urban area (Bogor, Depok,
Tangerang, Bekasi).
The ridership of commuter line today (6 routes, 78 rail stations) is around 850,000 passengers per
day with the highest ridership on the routes of Jakarta – Bogor/Depok and Jakarta – Bekasi.
However it still less than 3.5% of all Jabodetabek commuters. Nowadays, the effort from local
government and PT KAI to develop rail station area shows significant progress. It still needs
proper concept to optimize rail station area development. There are 4 (four) target sites for this
research, i.e. Bogor rail station area (terminus station, urban core), Sudirman rail station area
(through station, urban center), Duren Kalibata rail station area (through station, general urban)
and Depok Baru rail station area (interchange station, suburban).
Looking at various physical character of train station area in target sites and the distance of rail
station area from the urban core activities, there are some considerations for selecting the source
sites:
1) Rail station area with physical character of urban core, urban center, general urban and
suburban located in urban and urban rural fringe area;
2) Rail station with commuter line services.
Some cases on Japan rail station area development area suitable as source site because this
country was placed as the world best rail infrastructure in the year of 2015, as well as the world
best four of the usage of rail as public transport mode (244.24 billion passengers per km). Rail
track infrastructure in Japan is around 27,268 km that accommodate intercity rapid train as well
as urban commuter train [19]. Moreover, Japan rail station areas have the complete physical
character that represents urban core, urban center, general urban and suburban located in urban
and urban rural fringe area.
5. SOURCE SITES: JAPAN RAIL STATION AREA DEVELOPMENT
5.1. General Concept
In the early 1900s, an integrated development between rail track service and rail station area in
Japan was stimulated by rail transport private operators that not only developed the rail track but
also developed the area surrounding rail station as lifestyle supporters [20]. In this term, rail

5
transport private operators were enabled to get chance from government to generate public
transport system that encourages people mobility by train as main public transport in Japan.
Besides, they also got chance to develop public amenities in rail station area to facilitate
passenger’s needs.
Gradually, rail transport private operators also developed housing districts along the rail track and
created new attractors for leisure activities in many rail station areas in order to activate the rail
track on weekend or holidays (place making). They also opened some new tracks that connected
to potential destinations such as shrines and temples (place connecting) [21].
Figure 2. The Concept of Japan Land Development for Supporting Rail Transport
On the other hand, the concept of Rail-transit Oriented Development in Japan is well-known as
RIC (Rail Integrated Community) [22]. Basically, RIC seems like ROD concept, concerns on
high density mixed use rail station area development towards pedestrian friendly district. The
significant difference is RIC does not focus only on physical form of rail station area but also the
importance of government policy for supporting rail service operator contributes to rail station
area development. In this concept, the high percentage of commuters who walked to rail station is
encouraged to make the smaller number of parking area around rail station. Overall, there are 3
(three) stages of Japan rail station area development process, i.e.
1) First stage: land acquisition for rail station area development investment;
2) Second stage: infrastructure development;
3) Third stage: property (real estate) development that consist of dwelling units, commercial and
leisure activities.
5.2. Elaboration of Source Sites
There are 6 (six) target sites to be elaborated, i.e. Namba rail station area (terminus station, urban
core), Kuzuha and Takarazuka rail station area (interchange station, urban center), Kadomashi
and Hirakata-koen rail station area (through station, general urban) and Fushimi-inari rail station
area (through station, suburban). The analysis are based on 4 (four) principles of the concept of
ROD urban form, i.e. density, diversity, distance to transit, and destination accessibility.
Meanwhile design for walkability in this research is excluded based on the assumption that design
for walkability essentially was formed through integrated implementation of the four other
principles.
Regarding the principles of density and diversity, elaboration of source sites indicated some
findings, i.e.
1) The stronger urban character of the area, the higher building density and land intensity (urban
core BCR 80% FAR 6; urban center with weekdays attractor BCR 70% FAR 2; urban center
with weekend attractor BCR 50% FAR 1; general urban with weekdays attractor BCR 60%
FAR 2; general urban with weekend attractor BCR 40% FAR 1; suburban BCR 40% FAR 1);
2) There is the same land intensity in the core and peripheral zone of rail station area without
significant attractor (1:1) and also rail station area with development limitation of historical
zone;

6
3) The stronger urban character of the area, the bigger the land intensity difference between
core and peripheral zone (urban center 4:1; general urban 3:1; suburban 2:1);
4) The stronger urban character of the area, the smaller housing percentage (urban core 30%,
urban center 40%, general urban and suburban 60%).
Table 1. Elaboration of Source Sites
Regarding the principles of distance to transit and destination accessibility, elaboration of source
sites indicated some findings below:
1) The average distance from housing or daily place activity to transit nodes in the whole rail
station area is less than 200 m;
2) There are various modes of transport with various routes in urban core and urban centre rail
station area;

7
3) The main attractor is generally located on core zone of rail station area. The main attractor
that is located on peripheral zone is generally facilitated with good quality of pedestrian
access. The main attractor that is located more than walking distance from rail station is
facilitated by intermodal connector.
Transit can enhance greater ridership and cost-effectiveness by serving high density area with
other complementary components, such as mixed uses and pedestrian connectivity. The
transformation of ROD concept on source sites of rail station area development brought high
ridership with balance number of daily passengers get in and get off at rail station (50:50).
In rail station area with high density, residents prefer to use transit because origins and
destinations are located within walking distance to transit nodes. On the other hand, the size and
density of attractors (employment centers) on connected rail-station area could be important
aspect that increases transit ridership from rail station area with high percentage on housing.
Urban core and urban center rail station area in source sites commonly accommodate high density
of employment centers, that is shown at the high land intensity difference between core and
peripheral zone, while general urban and suburban commonly dominated by high density of
housing. Therefore, jobs-housing balance is an important character of rail station area correlate
with transit usage. This condition generates large ridership on daily round-trip route. In terms of
diversity of land uses within rail station area, specifically diversity on local scale of daily service,
it can increase daily local mobility on foot.
On the other hand, the good system of transit on source sites on both of service and accessibility,
enhancing people to use transit rather than private car. Good system of service means the quality
of vehicle, frequency of service, schedule accuracy, as well as number of covered destination.
Besides the good quality of transit, the transit nodes on source sites are easily reached in walking
distance (less than 200 m). The availability of intermodal system connected to rail station gives
an added value of transit service.
6. ANALYSIS
6.1. Elaboration of Target Sites
On the same point of view, the target sites were also elaborated based on 4 (four) principles of the
concept of ROD. In this part, the analysis also looked at the possible adaptation of finding from
source sites into target sites with the consideration of local context.
Regarding the principles of density and diversity, elaboration of target sites indicated some
findings, i.e.
1) There is no significant pattern of density and diversity in relation to physical form of the rail
station area although there are similar building coverage ratios (60%);
2) Land intensity is commonly higher on urban centre with high proportion of
commercial/mixed/employment use; however the pattern of zone and land intensity is not
clearly identified.
Furthermore, regarding the principles of distance to transit and destination accessibility,
elaboration of target sites showed:
1) Fair access to public transit with various kind of IPT (Intermediate Public Transport) since
they can be reached in the whole rail-station area without fixed transit stop, such as ojek
(motorcycle taxi), becak (Non-Motorized Transport tricycle), bajaj (three-wheeled motorized
taxi) as well as minibus. Bus Rapid Transit system can only be found at urban core and urban
center area;

8
2) The main attractor is generally located on peripheral zone of rail station area. Nevertheless,
the main attractor that is located on peripheral zone is not commonly facilitated with good
quality of pedestrian access. However IPT non-motorized could be an alternative to reach the
destination from rail station. Basically, IPT non-motorized has significant role in intermodal
system.
Table 2. Elaboration of Target Sites
Rail Station
Area
Character of
Density
Character of
Diversity
Character of
Distance to
Transit
Character of
Destination
Accessibility
BOGOR
Urban Core
BCR 60% FAR 1.2
Core > Peripheral 2:1
P : C/E : H
10 : 40 : 50
± 140 m to transit
node
Peripheral Attractor
SUDIRMAN
Urban Centre
BCR 60% FAR 7
Core < Peripheral 1:2
P : C/E : H
10 : 60 : 30
± 160 m to transit
node
Core and Peripheral
Attractor
DUREN
KALIBATA
General Urban
BCR 60% FAR 3.5
Core > Peripheral 3:2
P : C/E : H
10 : 30 : 60 ± 190 m to transit
node
Core and Peripheral
Attractor
DEPOK
BARU
General Urban BCR 60% FAR 6
Core = Peripheral 1:1
P : C/E : H
10 : 30 : 60 ± 160 m to transit
node
Peripheral Attractor
There are different physical context between source and target sites. The tropical climate and the
lower quality of infrastructure surrounding rail station, make the concept of ROD cannot
automatically implemented. In addition, the emergence of informal sectors and activities on the
cases of target sites, such as informal commercial activities, encroachment of traditional market
activities into street space, informal parking, as well as the dominance of intermediate public
transport and private vehicle (car and motorcycle) for daily mobility, principally are important
living cultures that have to be considered in implementation of ROD concept.
6.2. Discussion
Learning from source sites, high density of housing in the rail station area is needed to generate
large number of transit passengers. Meanwhile, the concentration of employment center on
connected rail station area, specifically on core zone, is needed to attract high number of train
commuters. Hence, jobs-housing balances among the connected rail station areas correlate with
transit usage. In terms of diversity within rail station area, the proportion and distribution of local
scale commercial and public facilities can encourage mobility on foot.

9
Concerning the need of high intensity of employment center or high density of housing in rail
station area as required in ROD concept, almost all of the cases on target sites are possibly
established. The exception is only the limitation of development due to historical area policy such
as the limitation of building height in Bogor rail station area.
On target sites, the potential area of generator and potential area of attractor for transit ridership
of commuter rail transport is clearly identified. Sudirman rail station has significantly showed as
transit usage attractor that can be seen on proportion of 30:70 between commuter line passengers
get in and get off. Bogor and Depok Baru rail station has significantly showed as transit usage
generator. Bogor and Depok Baru rail station indicated the same proportion of 70:30 (70% daily
passengers get in commuter line and 30% daily passengers get off from commuter line). Different
from the case of Depok Baru rail station area, the physical form and proportion on mixed land use
on Bogor rail station area does not indicate the potential area as generator of transit usage. It is
physically identified has urban core character, that commonly has large scale of attractor as
learned from source sites. The reason may direct to Bogor rail station scale of service since it
covers not only the rail station area in the radius of walking distance but also covers the whole
city of Bogor. Hence, Bogor rail station generates large number of transit usage. The other issue
is insufficient employment center or suitable jobs in the city of Bogor that encourages local
people commute for working in Jakarta urban center. Moreover, the main attractor next to Bogor
rail station (Bogor botanical garden) is not a daily destination so it is not significantly identified
as an attractor for daily transit usage.
Regarding the diversity within rail station area, the availability of local scale commercial and
public facilities is distributed evenly in the whole area of rail station except in the case urban
center rail station area i.e. Sudirman rail station area. Sudirman rail station area is dominated by
large scale employment center. There is almost no local scale of commercial and public facilities.
On the other hand the existence of informal traditional market that tend grow in the core zone of
rail station area in suburban and general urban is worthy to be kept as a local scale commercial
service as well as small scale employment for trader from outside rail station area. However, it
needs re-arrangement in order to prevent disturbance on another daily regular activities.
Learning from source sites, the short distance to transit node would encourage people to walk and
use transit. In the case of target sites, the distance to public transport (IPT) as short as on source
sites, however there are two reasons for people prefer to ride their own car or motorcycle, i.e.
pedestrian sidewalk is not walkable as well as the unsatisfactory service of IPT. Those reasons
sometimes are also exacerbated by the high rate of motorcycle ownerships. For the future, the
good service and system of public transport and IPT as well as good quality of sidewalk has to be
considered to support the concept of ROD.
CONCLUSION
The concept of Rail-transit Oriented Development should be adapted wisely with the
thoughtfulness on physical and cultural context of Indonesia rail station area. The focus of
development is proper balance between delivering sufficient development and preserving the
local values based on the basic principles of ROD.
1) The principles of high density and diversity should concern more on physical and
demographic context. The balancing of jobs and housing that generate or attract transit usage
will determine the density of housing and land intensity of employment centres for each type
of urban form.
2) The approach for development of densely rail station area should be carefully executed
towards land consolidation or infill development in order to renew or revitalize the district.

10
Meanwhile for the rail station area with potential vacant and open lands can be arranged for
newly construction of high housing density or high-intensity land development.
3) The principles of distance to transit and destination accessibility should also consider the
cultural context. Beside the improvement of public transport service and transit system,
the existence of non-motorized IPT can contribute as alternative feeders for people who
have disability in walking specifically on suburban area.
4) The government policy on improvement of public transport service and limitation on
private motorized vehicles (car and motorcycle) ownership is urgently needed to support
and establish the local concept of ROD.
REFERENCES
[1] Y. Hayashi, K. Doi, M. Yagishita, M. Kuwata, (2004) “Urban Transport Sustainability: Asian Trends,
Problems and Policy Practices,” in European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 4,
no.1, pp. 27-45.
[2] Directorate General of Railways, Ministry of Transportation Republic of Indonesia (2011) “Grand
Strategies for National Railways 2030,” presentation on National Seminar conducted by Department
of Transportation Republic of Indonesia.
[3] A. Vesely, (2011) “Theory and Methodology of Best Practice Research: A Critical Review of the
Current State,” Central European Journal of Public Policy, Vol. 5, No. 2, December 2011.
[4] S. Bretschneider, F. J. Marc-Aurele, Jr., J. Wu, (2005) “Best Practices Research: A Methodological
Guide for the Perplexed,” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 15 pp. 307-
323.
[5] P. Bawole, (2012) “Creativities of Marginalized People in Developing Specific Urban Form in
Indonesian Cities,” 4th International Network for Tropical Architecture Conference, National
University of Singapore, 12-14 December 2012.
[6] K. Williams, E. Burton. M.Jenks, (2000) “Achieving Sustainable Urban Form,” Routledge, London.
[7] Y.R. Jabareen, (2006) “Sustainable Urban Forms: Their Typologies, Models, and Concepts,” Journal
of Planning Education and Research, pp. 26- 38.
[8] Cattopadhyay, Basudha, (2007) “Sustainable Urban Development in India: Some Issues,” in “Urban
India,” Journal of the National Institute of Urban Affairs India Habitat Centre, New Delhi, Vol.
XXVII No. 1, January–June 2007, pp. 112-136.
[9] T. Tucker, J. Wilhelm, C. Wingate, J. Winters, L. Wilkinson, (2008) “Smart Growth and Transit
Oriented Development: Does it Exist in Georgia?,” Growth Management Law, April 21, 2008.
[10] L. W. Pace, W. R. Fischer, A. J. Nichol, “Adams County Transit Oriented Development and Rail
Station Area Planning Guidelines,” Adams County Planning and Development Department,
Colorado, 2007 and A. Heilemann, H. Kemming, “Rail Oriented Development on Urban and
Regional Levels, Potentials and Impacts, Policy Measures and Processes,” Journal of European
Regional Science Association, 2002 in D. T. Widyastuti, (2014) “Study on Best Practices for
Developing Model of Rail-transit Oriented Development in Indonesia,” paper for National Seminar of
Architecture and Planning Research, Universitas Gadjah Mada, 22-23 August 2014.
[11] P. Calthorpe, (1993) “The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community and the American
Dreams,” Princeton Architectural Press, New York.
[12] L. Bertolini, T. Spit, (1998) “Cities on Rails, the Redevelopment of Railway Station Areas,” E & FN
Spon, London.
[13] H. Dittmar, G. Ohland, “The New Transit Town, Best Practices in Transit-Oriented Development,”
Island Press, London, 2004; R. Ewing, R. Cervero, “Travel and the Built Environment: a Meta-
Analysis,” Journal of the American Planning Association, 76:3, 2010, pp. 265-294; and X. Chen,
“Prospect of the Transit Oriented Development in China,” Management Research and Practice, Vol.
2, Issue 1, March 2010 in D.T. Widyastuti, B. H. Wibisono, D. Parikesit, Ikaputra, (2014)

11
“Encouraging Walkability around Rail Station Area,” paper for Great Asian Streets Symposium,
National University of Singapore, 11-12 December 2014.
[14] J. Goodwill, S.J. Hendricks, (2002) “Building Transit Oriented Development in Established
Communities,” Report, National Center for Transit Research, Center for Urban Transportation
Research, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, November 2012.
[15] R. Falconer, E. Richardson, (2010) “Rethinking Urban Land Use and Transport Planning -
Opportunities for Transit Oriented Development in Australian Cities Case Study Perth,” Journal of
Australian Planner, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 1-13, March 2010, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
[16] C. Curtis, (2008) “Evolution of the Transit-oriented Development Model for Low-density Cities: A
Case Study of Perth's New Railway Corridor,” Journal of Planning Practice and Research, Vol. 23
No. 3, pp. 285-302, August 2008, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
[17] H. Sung, J. T. Oh, (2011) “Transit-Oriented Development in a High-Density City: Identifying its
Association with Transit Ridership in Seoul, Korea,” Journal of Cities 28, 2011, pp. 70–82.
[18] M. Hedayatifard, M. Hosseinian, (2012) “Application of the Concept Transit-Oriented Development
in Linear Urban Spatial Structures: Fereidunkenar as the Case Study,” Paper, 6th
International
Symposium on Advances in Science and Technology, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 24-25 March 2012.
[19] K. Schwab, (2015)“The Global Competitiveness Report 2015-2016,” World Economic Forum,
Insight Report, 2015.
[20] P. Chorus, L. Bertolini, (2011) “An Application of the Node Place Model to Explore the Spatial
Development Dynamics of Station Areas in Tokyo,” The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Vol. 4
No 1, Spring 2011, p. 45-48.
[21] K. Narumi, (2012) “Rail Area Development in Japan,” lecture note on International Exchange and
Workshop Program on Urban Design between Department of Architecture and Planning, Universitas
Gadjah Mada and Department of Architecture and Urban Design, Kansai University, Osaka, 17-23
September 2012.
[22] J. Calimente, (2012) “Rail Integrated Communities in Tokyo,” the Journal of Transport and Land
Use, Vol. 5, No. 1, Spring 2012, pp. 19-32
Authors
Dyah Titisari Widyastuti is a PhD Candidate at the Department of Architecture and
Planning, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. Fields: Architecture, Urban Design and
Mobility
Ikaputra is a Associate Professor at the Department of Architecture and Planning
Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia . Fields: Architecture, Urban Design and Rail-
transit Oriented Development
Danang Parikesit is a Professor at the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. Fields: Urban Transport Planning,
Urban Mobility
Bambang Hari Wibisono is a Professor at the Department of Architecture and Planning,
Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. Fields: Urban and Regional Planning

DEFINING LOCAL CONCEPT OF URBAN RAIL STATION AREA DEVELOPMENT THROUGH BEST PRACTICES APPROACH OF RAIL-TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

More Related Content

What's hot (19)

Viewers also liked (18)

Similar to DEFINING LOCAL CONCEPT OF URBAN RAIL STATION AREA DEVELOPMENT THROUGH BEST PRACTICES APPROACH OF RAIL-TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

DEFINING LOCAL CONCEPT OF URBAN RAIL STATION AREA DEVELOPMENT THROUGH BEST PRACTICES APPROACH OF RAIL-TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT