Urban Transport in the OIC Megacities
16
reverse the unsustainable mobility patterns of the past. The new mobility paradigm suggests that
land-use development, including planning and regulations, needs to be integrated, so that physical
restraint measures and development patterns are used to support shorter travel distances. Improved
levels of proximity are considered to reduce distance travelled, and to contribute to trip reduction and
modal split changes (Cervero, 2013; Banister, 2008).
More specifically, experience in urban planning has shown that successful measures include minimum
density standards, mixed use regulation and a density bonus for developers. Such measures support
compact city development with a hierarchy of higher density and mixed use clusters around public
transport nodes. A further key priority for compact city policy is reforming inappropriate building
density limitations. Similarly, shifting from minimum to maximum parking requirements for urban
development facilitates compaction and lower levels of car use. District level interventions, combined
with the redistribution of road space away from private vehicles, have been proven successful in
promoting modal shift and sustainable mobility. Furthermore, human scale urban design
considerations require a shift away from road capacity oriented street planning to a focus on finer
urban fabric, including smaller block sizes, higher building densities and mixed use to facilitate micro
accessibility, last mile connectivity, walkability and social interaction (Rode et al, 2014).
Transit Oriented Development (TOD) is a term that describes “the process of focusing the development
of housing, employment, activity sites and public services around existing or new railway stations and
transit interchange nodes served by frequent, high quality and efficient intra-urban services” (Knowles,
2012, pg. 251). TOD has been an important part of broader smart growth strategies applied in the
United States and some large Asian cities, including Hong Kong, Singapore and Tokyo. The benefits of
TOD involve variety of mobility choices, increased public safety, increased transit ridership, reduction
of private vehicle miles travelled, increased savings for households, reduction of air pollution and
energy consumption rates, conservation of land resources and open space, reduction of infrastructure
costs, contribution to an increase in provision of affordable housing and contribution to economic
development. Research has also specifically focused on the relationship between transit and
commercial land and housing values. In general, such it is suggested that although singular measures,
such as transit based housing or transit adjacent employment centres, are not influential enough in
isolation, TOD can be more effective when it includes a mixture of uses and is supported by
coordinated policy measures (Knowles, 2012; Hess and Lombardi, 2004).
Nonetheless, despite the fact that the economic, social and climate change case for limiting car
dependency and urban sprawl is strong, there are potential negative trade-offs related to industry
sectors that are traditionally highly dependent on the BAU urbanization model. More specifically,
business models and key business actors in the automotive, construction and real estate sectors have
proven resistant to change to date. In addition, strong consumer preferences relating to car ownership
and suburban lifestyles remain. Switching urban patterns in many existing cities are high, particularly
in urban areas that have already developed low density and car oriented housing. Finally, a range of
institutional and process barriers also exist. Policy integration across urban planning, design and
transport planning is often compromised by inflexible governance structures (Rode et al, 2014).
3.3.2.3. Land use and urban form of megacities in developing countries
The megacities of the developed and the developing world mainly differ in terms of primacy, levels of
monocentricity, population densities, roadway designs, and geographic locations of the poor.
Although it is considered that the concept of single centred cities is becoming less relevant with the
growth of megacities, as they are rapidly developing as polycentric urban agglomerations, often
absorbing other smaller cities in the process, lack of planning and separation of activities significant
deteriorate accessibility and quality levels (Banister, 2011; Cervero, 2013).
Megacities of the developing world tend to have more primacy with big cities having disproportionally
higher numbers of inhabitants as well as high paying jobs. The concentration of national wealth in
capital cities such as Jakarta, Lagos or Dakar also means concentration of private vehicles and
transport infrastructure. In addition, megacities serve as a gateway for international linkages and are
the often the prime receivers of funding for infrastructure improvements. In a self-reinforcing circle,