Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 Transit-oriented Development (TOD) is an applicable urban regeneration-planning model to promote sustainable urbanism. + 929 word(s) 929 2020-09-25 05:30:48 |
2 Adding text to the Definition. + 8 word(s) 937 2020-10-10 14:15:54 | |
3 Format correct Meta information modification 937 2020-10-23 11:29:18 | |
4 Format correct Meta information modification 937 2020-10-26 10:10:36 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?


Are you sure to Delete?
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Furlan, R.; Al-Mohannadi, A. Transit-Oriented Development. Encyclopedia. Available online: (accessed on 17 April 2024).
Furlan R, Al-Mohannadi A. Transit-Oriented Development. Encyclopedia. Available at: Accessed April 17, 2024.
Furlan, Raffaello, Asmaa Al-Mohannadi. "Transit-Oriented Development" Encyclopedia, (accessed April 17, 2024).
Furlan, R., & Al-Mohannadi, A. (2020, October 10). Transit-Oriented Development. In Encyclopedia.
Furlan, Raffaello and Asmaa Al-Mohannadi. "Transit-Oriented Development." Encyclopedia. Web. 10 October, 2020.
Transit-Oriented Development

Transit-oriented Development (TOD) is an urban design model that aims at integrating land use and multimodal transport systems around compact, mixed-use transit villages located around transit stations. TOD is envisioned as a sustainable development model in response to the updated environmental and ecological debate on the contemporary global challenge of climate change in response to city planning and urban design.

transit-oriented development (TOD) Sustainable Urbanism Sustainable City Urbanism Urban Planning Urban Design Transportation Green Urbanism

1. Introduction

In the 21st century, the practice of urban regeneration occupies an increasingly significant role as a mechanism for leading and managing “environmentally sustainable developments”, requiring urban planners and architects to confront the metropolitan growth that occurred in the past century without effective consideration of the threats, constraints, and pressures of rapid population growth, urbanization and intensification, resource consumption, and climate change. Despite urban regeneration being a widely experienced phenomenon, there is no single theoretical explanation or physical model that can be adopted to address all urban problems and/or provide effective solutions. Therefore, effective and lasting urban regeneration intervention must comprehensively consider local circumstances.

Furthermore, since greenfield housing development continues to be the low-density dominant mode of urban expansion, a consistent challenge for urban planners and architects is the containment of urban sprawl, which is considered a major problem. Therefore, practitioners are targeting “infill” housing development—houses built on previously developed land—in an attempt to redirect population and housing investments inwards to avoid urban sprawl from occurring on greenfield sites in the outer suburbs.

At the same time, urban regeneration projects extend beyond an individual or a group of buildings. They also incorporate the re-creation or regeneration of precincts and/or activity centers, comprising parcels of properties and the associated public realm and urban infrastructure. Activity centers are associated with concentrations of residential, retail, commercial, and leisure activities at levels ranging from the central business district (CBD) scale to peripheral villages. This spatial configuration responds to the need to minimize the travel times of the resident population within the central activity node (the poly-centered city–city of cities—the “20 min city”) to diminish the use of private vehicles. The focus is on intensified mixed-use development, integrated with multimodal transport systems such as trains, buses, taxis, walking, cycling, and others. This model is what defines transit-oriented development or TOD as an activity center: a clustered mixture of land uses and housing at a higher density alongside public spaces around high-quality public transport services configured as the core of the enlarged community. TOD is envisioned as a sustainable development model in response to the updated environmental  and ecological debate on the contemporary global challenge of climate change in response to city planning and design [1][2][3].

2. Applications of TOD

A TOD is a compact pedestrian-friendly settlement serving a set of compact mixed uses that can be conveniently traversable on foot while also being served by public transport. Calthorpe (2011) defined three key criteria known by their initials as the “three Ds”: (i) density, (ii) diversity of land use, and (iii) design of urban spaces [2]. The three Ds are critical for successful metropolitan developments around transit stations. In addition, Ewing and Cervero (2010) among other researchers identified additional “three Ds,” which are (iv) distance to transit, (v) destination accessibility, and (vi) demand management [4][5][6][7]. The TOD model has increasingly been adopted for the regeneration of urban communities, promoting higher standards of urban living and representing a tool for reducing uncontrolled urban sprawl, traffic congestion, and urban fragmentation. Moreover, the TOD model creates compact and mixed-use eco-communities that are both walkable and well-served by public transportation.

Significantly, TOD leads to the resilient, adaptive creation of communities based on flexibility for targeting ever-changing demographic, environmental, and socio-economical challenges [8]. Adaptive communities ensure that both individual and community development can be pursued, following the “place” methodology that advocates proactive planning and an interdisciplinary approach based on community consensus [9][10]. Enriching existing land use plans and evaluation methods by incorporating a transit accessibility measure is a popular tool in the process of place making [11][12][13]. The concept of adaptive communities is intertwined with TOD, defined as settlements of a central rail or bus hub bordered by high-density and mixed-use development [14]. TOD settlements prioritize connectivity, walkability, street attractiveness, parking management, adequate facilities, and socio-economic capital, integrated in a comprehensive urban design scheme [15].

Historically, the TOD model has evolved by responding to low-density and sprawling development, which still facilitates its contribution as a workable tool in the process of the smart growth and sustainable urbanism of cities in the 21st century. When a comprehensive land-use planning scheme is provided, TOD can significantly contribute to the (i) sustainable adaptation of declining neighborhoods, (ii) a reduction in automobile use (emission of gas, fuel consumption, and traffic congestion), (iii) the formation of compact districts, and (iv) the enhancement of pedestrian satisfaction and standards of urban living [16][17][18].

Globally, cities like Stockholm, Singapore, and Tokyo showcase the successful implementation of TOD strategies, where the introduction of rail systems has positively influenced standards of urban living. Such cities are referred to in the literature as adaptive cities, which have “created a compact, mixed-use, walking-friendly built form that has enabled high-quality, high-capacity public transit services to thrive” [19]. In the city-state of Singapore, for instance, a national Constellation Plan is guiding its urban development through implementing a sustainable transit system. According to Cervero, this plan consists of “constellation of satellite ‘planets’, or new towns, that orbit the central core, interspersed by protective greenbelts and interlaced by high-capacity, high performance rail transit” [20]. Light rail transit (LRT) systems were recently developed as part of the Constellation Plan, with secondary transport facilities such as bus and park and ride (P&R) networks.


  1. Sachs, J. The Age of Sustainable Development; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2015; pp. 1-544.
  2. Calthorpe, P. Urbanism in the Age of Climate Change; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2011; pp. 1-176.
  3. Gehl, J; Svarre, B. How to Study Public Life; Island Press: Washigton, DC, USA, 2013; pp. 1-200.
  4. Ewing, R., and R. Cervero. Travel and the Built Environment: A Synthesis. Transportation Research Record, 1780: 87-114. 2001.
  5. Knowles, R.D; Ferbrache, F. Transit-Oriented Development and Sustainable Cities. Economics, Communities and Methods; Knowles, R.D; Ferbrache, F, Eds.; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2019; pp. 1-256.
  6. Renne, J.L. I; . Measuring the success of transit oriented development; Curtis, C; Renne, J; Bertolini, L; , Eds.; Ashgate Publishing Limited: Bodmin, Cornwall, UK, 2009; pp. 241–255.
  7. Ogra, A.; Ndebele, R. The Role of 6Ds: Density, Diversity, Design, Destination, Distance, and DemandManagement in Transit Oriented Development (TOD). In Proceedings of the NICHE-2014 Neo-InternationalConference on Habitable Environments, Jalandhar, India, 31 October–2 November 2014; pp. 539–546.
  8. Mazzeo, L.; James, N.; Young, G.; Farrell, B. Sustainable Places: Delivering Adaptive Communities.In Building Sustaianble Citities of the Future; Bishop, J., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland,2017; pp. 163–193.
  9. Mumford, L. La Cultura delle Citta; Edizioni di Comunita: Milano, Italy, 1954.
  10. Furlan, R.; AL-Harami, A. Qatar National Museum-Transit Oriented Development: The Masterplan for theUrban Regeneration of a ‘Green TOD’. J. Urban Manag. 2020, 9, 115–136.
  11. Xu,W.; Linchuan, Y. Evaluating the urban land use plan with transit accessibility. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019,45, 474–485.
  12. Furlan, R.; Petruccioli, A.; Jamaleddin, M. The authenticity of place-making: Space and character of theregenerated historic district in Msheireb, Downtown Doha (State of Qatar). Archnet IJAR Int. J. Archit. Res.2019, 13, 151–168.
  13. AL-Mohannadi, A.; Furlan, R. Socio-cultural patterns embedded into the built form of Qatari houses:Regenerating architectural identity in Qatar. J. Urban Regen. Renew. 2019, 12, 336–358.
  14. Ehsani, M.;Wang, F.-Y.; Brosch, G.L. Transportation Technologies for Sustainability; Springer: New York, NY,USA, 2012.
  15. Watson, D.; Plattus, A.J.; Shibley, R.G. Time-Saver Standards for Urban Design; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY,USA, 2003.
  16. Rapoport, A. The Mutual Interaction of People and their Built Environment; Aldine Publishing Company:Chicago, IL, USA, 1976.
  17. De Oliveira, F.L. Green Wedge Urbanism-History, Theory and Contemporary Practice; Bloomsbury Publishing:London, UK, 2017.
  18. Zaina, S.; Zaina, S.; Furlan, R. Urban Planning in Qatar: Strategies and Vision for the Development of TransitVillages in Doha. Aust. Plan. 2016, 53, 286–301.
  19. Suzuki, H.; Cervero, R.; Iuchi, K. Transforming Cities with Transit. Transit and Land-Use Integration for SustainableUrban Development; The World Bank: Washigton, DC, USA, 2013.
  20. Cervero, R. Public Transport and Sustainable Urbanism: Global Lessons. In Transit Oriented Development:Making it Happen; Renne, J.L., Curtis, C., Bertolini, L., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 23–35.ISBN 9780754673156.
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to : ,
View Times: 1.7K
Revisions: 4 times (View History)
Update Date: 26 Oct 2020