Workshop proceedings Workshop on: Delhi’s Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Policy Interpretation

Since the 1980s, TOD has been globally identified as an effective urban planning tool that integrates

landuse planning and transit operations. It has the potential to create synergies that eventually lead to

sustainable cities with higher densities, increased economic activity and better public spaces. In the

quest for building sustainable and liveable cities and working towards a low carbon economy, WRI has

focussed on easily adoptable ideas for cities, and in 2014 identified Transit Oriented Development as

one of the means to get there.

The Transit Oriented Development (TOD) policy of Delhi was added into the Master Plan of Delhi 2021

as an amendment in 2015, with an aim to address the growing problems of pollution, congestion and

shortage of homes for the poor and middle class in the state. Subsequently, WRI India prepared a

Manual explaining in detail the provisions of the policy. A workshop was conducted in this regard with

Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) in order to strengthen the understanding on the policy as well as

learn from their practical experiences.

WRI India takes this opportunity to thank DMRC for facilitating this workshop and making it a success

with their presence and enthusiastic participation.

Workshop details:

Date: 23rd September 2016 – New Delhi, India

Session duration: 3:00 PM to 5:30 PM

Venue: DMRC Office, 25, Ashoka Road

The Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Policy

Interpretation workshop was jointly organized by Delhi

Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) and World Resources

Institute India (WRII) in an attempt to impart the

learnings of both organisations, the former through

ground level experience in implementing projects based

on the TOD policy and the latter through a study of the

TOD policy. Mr.Surya Prakash (Executive Director,PD,

DMRC), Ms. Papiya Sarkar (Chief Architect, DMRC), Ms.

Namrita Kalsi (Dy. Chief Architect (JGM),PD, DMRC) and

other Deputy Architects and Engineers joining the

discussion played an important part in comparison of the TOD policy interpretation to implementation

practices. It provided the opportunity for the employees in the architecture and planning divisions of the

DMRC to come together and discuss the TOD policy of Delhi and clarify doubts which they experience

while dealing with TOD projects. While WRI India had identified and studied those documents relevant

to the policy that were in the public domain, DMRC had practical experience due to ongoing TOD

projects.. The workshop set out to enable the DMRC team to develop a clear understanding of the policy

and regulations for implementation and identify policy gaps if any.

In order to take full advantage of the wide range of perspectives and design experiences, Ms. Kalsi

presented DMRC’s experience thus far with respect to TOD. Following this, WRII’s understanding of the

policy was presented by WRII representatives Ms. Prerna V Mehta, Manager – sustainable cities, Ms.

Neha Mungekar, Sr. Project associate- sustainable cities and Ms. Merlyn Mathew, Consultant – WRII.

Both the presentations were met with questions on the part of the participants who were vary of the

policy due to the limitations for DMRC with respect to the land it owns, its location,how best to optimize

the use of the land and how the policy impact projects.

Following the explanation of the provisions of the policy, a Design Charrette was organized around a

pre-determined site (behind the Jasola Apollo Metro station of approximately 1.6 Hectare area)

identified by the DMRC as a TOD project. A briefing was given to the participants on the features and

surrounding activities in the site and a checklist on what should be kept in mind before designing. The

design charrette was used to understand the implications of a few critical Development Control Norms

of the TOD policy that directly impact a project. The Draft copy of the Manual was provided to the

groups in order to identify applicable byelaws that would aid the design. The participants were divided

into four groups and each group was asked to develop a Conceptual Spatial Strategy for the site with a

focus on achieving a robust street network, open space structure and indicative built form. The

deliverables included:

1. Vision Statement – “What do we want the place to become?”

2. Street Network Plan

3. Open Space Network Plan

4. Built Form Plan/ conceptual sketches

Based on the ZDP provisions of Zone F, the site was under Manufacturing, Service and Repair industry

use. Based on this the groups were asked to strictly adhere to a 30% FAR as Residential, 5% FAR as

Commercial, 10% FAR as Community facilities and the remaining 55% FAR as per the land use category

designated in the Zonal Plan. Road Networks were to be planned with a vehicular route network of

approximately 250m c/c and pedestrian network of approximately 100m c/c. Additional thoroughfares

should be provided as required. 20% of the site area was to be designated as green Public Open Space

which shall be remain un-gated and open for general public at all times. In addition to the above, at least

10% of plot area shall be in the form of Green / Recreational area for exclusive use, including circulation

and common areas. Since the area of the given site was above 10000 square meters, the front setback

or all edges facing a public ROW of 18 meter or above was supposed to be 0. All other sides required

that a setback of 12 meters be provided.

Few key hinderances identified was that the site was

adjacent to an elevated metro station and any

construction adjacent to the station required a buffer of

at least 5.5 meters. Also, the entrance to the site was

located below the metro viaduct. This meant that the site

had limited frontage. Accordingly the groups worked on

conceptual schemes keeping in mind the industrial zone

character.

Overall, the workshop and design exercise was much

appreciated by all as it gave them an overview into the

new TOD Policy as well as enabled them to excercise the policy implementation to a real project site.

Presentations by Groups

Group 1 presentation

The group strictly adhered to the area statement.They also focused on providing smaller blocks that

were more spread out on the site rather than grouping similar uses into a single block. Each of the

blocks was interspersed with green spaces that was easily accessible. . Commercial units were placed

adjacent to the metro station in order to attract metro users. Industries were placed adjacent to the

railway line at the bottom of the site in order to create a buffer. Seamless vehicle circulation was

provided but pedestrian linakages were absent. Besides the group did not frame any vision statement

for the site

Group 2 presentation

One positive aspect was that the portion of the front of the site facing the 60m wide Mathura road was

provided with continuous commercial establishments catering to TOD principles advocating

placemaking and ensuring safety through eyes on road. Vision statement for the site was absent in this

group as well. The land uses to be provided were placed as stand alone blocks. While internal

circulation within the site was established, there were no linkages to the outside of the site and the

design did not harmozie with the uses in the neighbourhood.

Group 3 presentation

Group 3set out the scheme with a vision to provide equitable open spaces to all. While the open spaces

take centre stage on the site with the land uses surrounding them, they also stuck to grouping similar

uses together and refrained from exploring a mixed use approach. The dedicated ciculation for service

of the industries, NMV and pedestrians, and vehicles was established. Dedicated green space was

provided for the residential towers also. The ground floor of these residences had commercial

establishment to be accessed from the road leading to the clover flyover instead of from under the

Metro.

Group 4 presentation

Group 4 strictly adhered to all the provisions of the TOD Policy including calculating the area statement

and number of floors of each block. While the presence of the Metro Station on the site was seen as a

reason to not provide establishments with zero setback, they did provide commercial units after giving a

buffer of 5.5 meters, which is the standard. Dedicated circulation of NMV, pedestrians and vehicles were

catered to. The public green spaces was provided adjacent to the industrial units and away from the

residences to maintain privacy and access for the same was provided through the service road along the

boundary of the site. This group also ensured that a setback of 12m was provided along the boundary of

the site which was also dedicated towards public accessible green space. This also served the purpose of

buffering the site from the neighbouring railway line and industries. There were no linkages with

adjacent sites.