raleigh multi-modal mobility hub

Ross | 1

Mobilizing Raleigh’s Downtown

Establishing a Multi-Modal approach for the future needs of Raleigh’s growing downtown.

Raleigh Multi-Modal Mobility Hub

Graduate Architecture Thesis by Alex RossProfessor Fernando Munilla | August 2014

Fig. 0.1

Fig. 0.2

2 Ross | 3


A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Architecture Department in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of

Architectureat

Savannah College of Art and Design

Alexander Bradley Ross

Savannah, Georgia

©August 2014

Professor Fernando MunillaProfessor David Gobel

Professor Thomas Hoffman

4 Ross | 5


Alexander Bradley Ross

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Architecture Department in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of

Architectureat

Savannah College of Art and Design

©August 2014

The author hereby grants SCAD permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic thesis copies of document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter created.

Alexander Bradley RossAuthor Signature date

Fernando MunillaCommittee Chair Signature date

David GobelCommittee Signature date

Thomas HoffmanCommittee Signature date

6 Ross | 7

Thesis Abstract

List of Illustrations

Chapter 1: The Evolution of Transportation and The Creation of the Mobility Hub

Chapter 2: A New Architectural Typlogy; The Tranist Facility

Chapter 3: The Site; Raleigh NC

Chapter 4: The Program

Chapter 5: Raleigh Multi-Modal Mobility Hub

page... 9

page... 10

page... 18

page... 36

page... 54

page... 96

page... 110

Table of Contents

8 Ross | 9

Thesis Abstract

-The intent of this thesis is to bring the Transportation Infrastructure of the down-town urban center of Raleigh, NC to the 21st century with the design of a multi-modal transportation hub which also hosts various types of public services

and amenities all in one facility. The hub will act as an urban tool to bring together recreation, transportation, and public parks to engage the surrounding

area. The intent is for this central hub to act as a connector and for it to support and help to create the opportunity for social improvement, both physically and

mentally. This thesis will introduce a series of public spaces and public amenities that people from around the surrounding community to utilize and enjoy as they

commute through the city and to their destinations. By creating an enjoyable and easy to use route for people to utilize for their daily commutes, this design

will help improve the social, physical, and emotional health of the area, and help to give Raleigh’s quickly growing urban center a Transit Infrastructure advanced

enough to keep up with the growing demands being put on them.

-Raleigh, North Carolina is a quickly growing city with a dense urban core surrounded by suburban sprawl creating a very tight and unfriendly environment for automobile movement. Raleigh has several types of Public Transportation,

however they are dispersed throughout the city with little or no connectivity between them. This creates an inefficient transportation network with major

transit mobility issues. The introduction of a functional downtown transportation hub will aid in creating a truly inspiring and worthwhile downtown, that is

accessible to more people and inspire them to take a second from their daily lives to enjoy themselves and engage with the landscape of the downtown which is also the economic center of the area. The intent is for this hub to activate the

downtown area and create a more social downtown that can act as a cultural, social, and economic node for growth in the area.

Mobilizing Raleigh’s Downtown | Establishing a Multi-Modal approach for Raleigh

10 Ross | 11

List of FiguresList of FiguresFig. 0.1: AuthorFig. 0.2: AuthorFig. 1.1: httpwww.johnnymoneyseed.comwp-contentuploads201304Highway- Rush-Hour-Traffic-Jam.jpgFig. 1.2: AuthorFig. 1.3: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qk0lqp2ToXY/TjwpmTZIqYI/ AAAAAAAABHU/HNIeDPIQKcE/s320/draisine.gifFig. 1.4: http://let-op.nl/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/fahrrad-alt.jpgFig. 1.5: http://www.makingthemodernworld.org.uk/icons_of_invention/img/ IM.1130_el.jpgFig. 1.6: AuthorFig. 1.7: AuthorFig. 1.8: AuthorFig. 1.9: AuthorFig. 1.10: AuthorFig. 1.11: http://www.otak.com/images/project/84/TacomaLRTransit5.jpgFig. 1.12: http-//thesource.metro.net/2011/02/03/why-you-ride-or-dont- thursdayroundup-2-2/Fig. 2.1: http://www.otak.com/images/project/84/TacomaLRTransit5.jpgFig. 2.2: http://trainweb.org/crocon/goodenow/GNR_Kings2.jpgFig. 2.3: http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/mobilityhubs/ MobilityHubspage-StratfordStation.JPGFig, 2.4: http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL1280/6024289/11795091/3679 14935.jpgFig, 2.5: http://www.parsons.com/SiteCollectionImages/content/09-12-wtc- path-stationFig, 2.6: http://blog.mipimworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/ iStock_000015917947Medium-490x326.jpgFig, 2.7: http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/california-high-speed- rail.jpgFig, 2.8: http://www.borrowedculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/ Guangzhou-South-railway-station-Platform-high-speed.jpgFig, 2.9: http://www.borrowedculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/ Guangzhou-South-railway-station-Platform-high-speed.jpgFig, 2.10: http://decollins1969.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/grand_central_ station_main_concourse_jan_2006.jpgFig. 2.11: http://raleighpublicrecord.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/files/2010/08/ train_ride-1.jpgFig. 2.12: AuthorFIg. 2.13: http://www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/CLC/cnr2141.jpgFig. 2.14: http://nomadistas.hipertextual.com/files/2013/02/Centro- comercial-2-800x456.jpgFig. 2.15: http://www.maglev.net/media/articles/e0/the%20shanghai%20 transrapid%20maglev%20train%20by%20lars.jpg

Fig. 2.16: http://www.mishanghai.org/Sites/files/640*512/file_118.jpgFig. 2.17: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Technology/Pix/ pictures/2007/10/10/PRT_system.400.276Fig. 2.18: http://mphasisdesign.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/liege_ guillemins_station_tf161010Fig. 2.19: http://staycay.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Grand-Central- Station.jpgFig. 2.20: http://www.discovery.org/cascadia/centralPugetSound/ midTownHub-JCT-Web.jpgFig. 3.1: AuthorFig. 3.2: AuthorFig. 3.3: AuthorFig. 3.4: AuthorFig. 3.5: AuthorFig. 3.6: http://www.legeros.com/ralwake/photos/weblog/images/2010-09- 24-us1.jpgFig. 3.7: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ UnionStation/Union_Station-MTC_Final_Report.pdfFig. 3.8: AuthorFig. 3.9: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ UnionStation/Union_Station-MTC_Final_Report.pdfFig. 3.10: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ UnionStation/Union_Station-MTC_Final_Report.pdfFig. 3.11: fireworks_jul_4_2013_raleighskyline.com_07Fig. 3.12: AuthorFig. 3.13: AuthorFig. 3.14: AuthorFig. 3.15: http://www.tricc.org/docs/TCCJan182008.pdf.Fig. 3.16: http://s129.photobucket.com/user/mikeandmelmorris/media/blog/ Triangle.png.htmlFig. 3.17: http://afalconride.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/RDU- Airport-Taxi.jpgFig. 3.18: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/130606160229-airport- raleigh-durham-restricted-use2-horizontal-large-gallery.jpgFig. 3.19: http://www.nerdygaga.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/RDU- Intnl-002-300x199.jpgFig. 3.20: http://www.escapistexpo.com/sites/escapistexpo.com/files/ nodephoto/rdu_term2.jpgFig. 3.21: AuthorFig. 3.22: http://www.hensellaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/tar-heels. jpgFig. 3.23: http://sph.unc.edu/files/2013/08/slide_franklin_street.jpgFig. 3.24: http://www.chapelhillmemories.com/uploads/Image/UNC%20 Chapel%20Hill%20Old%20Well%20South%20Building%20 1916%20Medium%20Web%20view.jpg

12 Ross | 13

List of FiguresList of FiguresFig. 3.25: http://tours.tourfactory.com/tours/media/scene/ big2/00/25/76/86/25768673.jpgFig. 3.26: http://www.freelogovectors.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/ Duke_University_Seal_Crest.jpgFig. 3.27: http://www.ubts.vt.edu/wp-content/uploads/Duke-by-Thenus.jpgFig. 3.28: http://metroscenes.com/durham/images/durham_nc_metroscenes. com_01.jpgFig. 3.29: http://modernrichmondtour.com/storage/durham_station.jpg?__ SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1330405582999Fig. 3.30: http://www.venablecenter.com/photoGallery/downtown/large/ venable_downtown_panoramic.jpgFig. 3.31: http://www.sports-logos-screensavers.com/user/ NorthCarolinaStateWolfpack3.jpgFig. 3.32: http://www.indeed.com/cmp/_s/photos/9894bfee2d84e5e9-t- 18avaj8745n8gcotFig. 3.33: http://universalwebsites.theknot.com.s3.amazonaws.com/Universal Websites/PageMainImage/4356969723722942/2368792/ 34118600/med/p801625108-3.jpgFig. 3.34: http://southeastrebusiness.com/newsletter/images/2013/ March/0314/DPP.jpgFig. 3.35: http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/b8/69/de/ b869de3825cb2650634bca1cc4ef80a2.jpgFig. 3.36: AuthorFig. 3.37: http://ewh.ieee.org/r6/scv/emc/archive/2013/ January/012013Sam_Connor.pdf Fig. 3.38: http://raleighskyline.com/images/02.21.08/feb_08_raleighskyline. com_21.jpg Fig. 3.39: AuthorFig. 3.40: http://www.city-data.com/city/Raleigh-North-Carolina.htmlFig. 3.41: http://www.city-data.com/city/Raleigh-North-Carolina.htmlFig. 3.42: http://www.city-data.com/city/Raleigh-North-Carolina.htmlFig. 3.43: http://www.city-data.com/city/Raleigh-North-Carolina.htmlFig. 3.44: http://www.city-data.com/city/Raleigh-North-Carolina.htmlFig. 3.45: http://www.city-data.com/city/Raleigh-North-Carolina.htmlFig. 3.46: http://www.city-data.com/city/Raleigh-North-Carolina.htmlFig. 3.47: http://www.city-data.com/city/Raleigh-North-Carolina.htmlFig. 3.48: http://svcdn.simpleviewinc.com/v3/cache/raleigh/FFB233A073A8 B758A3084E4D5918827D.jpgFig. 3.49: Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan, http://www.raleighnc.gov/ business/content/PlanDev/Articles/ LongRange/2030ComprehensivePlan.htmlFig. 3.50: http://www2.acs.ncsu.edu/trans/transportation/CAT%20logo.JPGFig. 3.51: http://strategictire.homestead.com/222.JPGFig. 3.52: Author

Fig. 3.53: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ PublicRealm/PRSreportFinal.pdf.Fig. 3.54: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ PublicRealm/PRSreportFinal.pdf.Fig. 3.55: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ PublicRealm/PRSreportFinal.pdf.Fig. 3.56: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ PublicRealm/PRSreportFinal.pdf.Fig. 3.57: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ PublicRealm/PRSreportFinal.pdf.Fig. 3.58: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ PublicRealm/PRSreportFinal.pdf.Fig. 3.59: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ PublicRealm/PRSreportFinal.pdf.Fig. 3.60: Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan, http://www.raleighnc.gov/ business/content/PlanDev/Articles/ LongRange/2030ComprehensivePlan.htmlFig. 3.61: AuthorFig. 3.62: Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan, http://www.raleighnc.gov/ business/content/PlanDev/Articles/ LongRange/2030ComprehensivePlan.htmlFig. 3.63: Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan, http://www.raleighnc.gov/ business/content/PlanDev/Articles/ LongRange/2030ComprehensivePlan.htmlFig. 3.64: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ UnionStation/Union_Station-MTC_Final_Report.pdfFig. 3.65: http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Documents/ UnionStation/Union_Station-MTC_Final_Report.pdfFig. 3.66: http://www.penc.org/getdoc/4f4f62fb-66ab-4238-8de7- da2c49513c75/Planning-for-Raleigh-s-Union-Station.aspx.Fig. 3.67: AuthorFig. 3.68: http://metrodchomes.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c5cb453ef011571 086ce2970c-800wiFig. 3.69: http://www.penc.org/getdoc/4f4f62fb-66ab-4238-8de7- da2c49513c75/Planning-for-Raleigh-s-Union-Station.aspxFig. 3.70: Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan, http://www.raleighnc.gov/ business/content/PlanDev/Articles/ LongRange/2030ComprehensivePlan.htmlFig. 3.71: http://www.raleighnc.gov/parks/content/PRecDesignDevelop/ Articles/CapitalAreaGreenwayTrailSystem.htmlFig. 3.72: http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/wunc/files/styles/medium/ public/201404/boardwalk.jpgFig. 3.73: http://blog.jasonbgraves.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/28/ iles/2013/06/Greenway-2-300x224.jpg

14 Ross | 15

List of FiguresList of FiguresFig. 3.98: AuthorFig. 3.99: AuthorFig. 3.100: Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan, http://www.raleighnc.gov /business/content/PlanDev/Articles/ LongRange/2030ComprehensivePlan.htmlFig. 3.101: AuthorFig. 3.102: AuthorFig. 3.103: AuthorFig. 3.104: AuthorFig. 3.105: Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan, http://www.raleighnc.gov/ business/content/PlanDev/Articles/ LongRange/2030ComprehensivePlan.htmlFig. 3.106: AuthorFig. 3.107: AuthorFig. 3.108: AuthorFig. 3.109: http://myfijourney.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ NorfolkSouthern.jpgFig. 3.110: http://www.lex18.com/images/ thumbnails/76BABBE4B2AC3777DD04A8BD6AD060 A5_787_442.jpgFig. 3.111: http://www.carolana.com/NC/Transportation/railroads/images/ NCRR_Logo.gifFig. 3.112: http://fleetpromd.com/newsletter/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/ Amtrak.pngFig. 3.113: http://yourctsolutions.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/ ncdot.262141344_std.jpgFig. 3.114:Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan, http://www.raleighnc.gov/ business/content/PlanDev/Articles/ LongRange/2030ComprehensivePlan.htmlFig. 3.115: AuthorFig. 3.116: AuthorFig. 4.1: AuthorFig. 4.2: AuthorFig. 4.3: AuthorFig. 4.4: AuthorFig. 4.5: AuthorFig. 4.6: AuthorFig. 4.7: AuthorFig. 4.8: AuthorFig. 4.9: AuthorFig. 4.10: AuthorFig. 4.11: AuthorFig. 4.12: AuthorFig. 4.13: Author

Fig. 3.74: http://photos3.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/3/b/f/d/ event_15135357.jpegFig. 3.75: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ko4O6oCEeo8/TNd1h9Phu6I/ AAAAAAAAAiw/hMlKeCPyOBk/s1600/1.jpgFig. 3.76: http://raleighpublicrecord.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/files/2013/02/ neuse2.jpgFig. 3.77: http://raleighnaturalist.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/west-end-of- greenway-deck-at-capital_1_1.jpg?w=533&h=400Fig. 3.78: Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan, http://www.raleighnc.gov/ business/content/PlanDev/Articles/ LongRange/2030ComprehensivePlan.htmlFig. 3.79: http://boylanheights.org/Fig. 3.80: http://boylanheights.org/Fig. 3.81: http://boylanheights.org/Fig. 3.82: Google EarthFig. 3.83: Google EarthFig. 3.84: Google EarthFig. 3.85: http://www.mybhhs.com/PCL_PUBLIC/MLSPhotos/ TRGRES/1898107_1.jpgFig. 3.86: http://f7c5d73b07fa6f45bfc6-326bc18e5feaa700a01a6602e 906a291.r29.cf1.rackcdn.com/site_data/raleighitb/neighborhood _pics/pic_271426.650.jpgFig. 3.87: http://glenwoodbrooklyn.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/611_ Wills_Forest.jpgFig. 3.88: http://www.historicoakwood.org/gallery/2005Tour/index.phpFig. 3.89: http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/entertainment/out_and_abo ut/2012/11/02/11729823/1351782678-32608-220x170.jpgFig. 3.90: http://www.historicoakwood.org/gallery/2005Tour/index.phpFig. 3.91: http://tightlinesdesigns.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/large/ images/house/bloodworth-4.jpgFig. 3.92: http://images.apartmentfinder.com/phototmp/Thumbnails/ ExtraLarge/88275/7CD4BA39-3C37-4F86-A77F-13564F69FB8B. jpgFig. 3.93: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/18/ Leonard_Hall_Shaw_Univ.JPG/300px-Leonard_Hall_Shaw_Univ. JPGFig. 3.94: http4.bp.blogspot.com-C8K6hJ4UXWsUEhClYL1SzIAAAAAAAA A1kAPTvfolcyHEs1600201315_13ba5f1a894ab75ca3706957dfc13 66b_large.jpgFig. 3.95: AuthorFig. 3.96: Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan, http://www.raleighnc.gov/ business/content/PlanDev/Articles/ LongRange/2030ComprehensivePlan.htmlFig. 3.97: Author

16 Ross | 17

Fig. 5.34: AuthorFig. 5.35: AuthorFig. 5.36: AuthorFig. 5.37: AuthorFig. 5.38: AuthorFig. 5.39: AuthorFig. 5.40: Author

Fig. 4.14: AuthorFig. 4.15: AuthorFig. 4.16: AuthorFig. 4.17: AuthorFig. 4.18: AuthorFig. 4.19: AuthorFig. 4.20: AuthorFig. 4.21: AuthorFig. 4.22: AuthorFig. 4.23: AuthorFig. 4.24: AuthorFig. 5.1: AuthorFig. 5.2: AuthorFig. 5.3: AuthorFig. 5.4: AuthorFig. 5.5: Author Fig. 5.6: Author Fig. 5.7: Author Fig. 5.8: AuthorFig. 5.9: AuthorFig. 5.10: AuthorFig. 5.11: AuthorFig. 5.12: AuthorFig. 5.13: AuthorFig. 5.14: AuthorFig. 5.15: AuthorFig. 5.16: AuthorFig. 5.17: AuthorFig. 5.18: AuthorFig. 5.19: AuthorFig. 5.20: AuthorFig. 5.21: AuthorFig. 5.22: AuthorFig. 5.23: AuthorFig. 5.24: AuthorFig. 5.25: AuthorFig. 5.26: AuthorFig. 5.27: AuthorFig. 5.28: AuthorFig. 5.29: AuthorFig. 5.30: AuthorFig. 5.31: AuthorFig. 5.32: AuthorFig. 5.33: Author

List of FiguresList of Figures

18 Ross | 19

-This chapter explains the evolution of transportation modes; from walking, as the earliest known, to wheeled modes of transporting people and goods, such as horse pulled carriages. This chapter

also talks about the invention of the automobile, one of the largest developments in the evolution of different modes of transportation; however this development has come with many disadvantages in or around large city centers, many of which have begun to outweigh

the advantages. Finally, this has created a need for improved public transportation, which will provide alternative modes of

transit in attempts to alleviate the pressures caused by the steadily growing populations around cities and our growing dependence on automobiles. An evolution in public transit facilities has now lead

to an all-inclusive structure that houses and serves all modes of transportation equally, called a “Mobility Hub”.

Abstract

The Creation of the Mobility HubThe Evolution of Transport &Chapter 1

Early Transportation Methods

Early methods of transportation relied on foot or draft animals such as oxen and horses, which in turn pulled wheeled carts, wagons, or chariots. Throughout history, for thousands of years, early humans walked for transportation, as they had no other options. This went on until the invention of the wheel which quickly lead to various wheeled modes of transportation, such as the use of oxen and horses as draft animals used to pull wheeled carts, such as a horse and buggy. These wheeled modes of transportation were used to transport people and goods in and out of cities. Transportation modes eventually evolved from such primitive methods to more modern types such as the modern day bicycle which revolutionized the transportation industry, and is still today the most efficient modes of transportation available. The invention of the automobile at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century was a major development in the available modes of transportation and quickly grew to be the most widely used around the world.

Fig. 1.2Fig. 1.1

20 Ross | 21

CH

AP

TE

R 1

The Creation of a Transportation Problem

Today the list of available modes of transportation has grown (and continues to grow) to include the car, bicycle, skateboard, moped, motorcycle, bus, streetcar, and light rail, to name a few. Although the list of available modes of transportation is long, the dominate transportation type in the US has emerged as the automobile. The landscapes around cities all around the world are changing, and are filling up with roads and highways meant to give drivers of automobiles the freedom to travel anywhere, at any time. This heavy reliance on automobiles for transportation has created a vast number of problems in many cities all over the world, such as traffic congestion, negative environmental impacts such as air pollution and the contribution to the diminishing oil reserves, as well as the ruination and movement away from other modes of transportation . There have been several developments in these modes of transportation that can help alleviate or displace our reliance on the automobile. There are many modes of transportation that can help alleviate the problem such as light rail systems and public transportation networks designed on a Regional scale. Research shows that the best way to activate a city and alleviate its transportation issues, such as congestion and gridlock in city centers, is to establish an efficient and effective public transportation system that includes a light rail system coupled with accessible walking, cycling public infrastructure.

“Public transportation is an essential part of a balanced transportation system that includes walkways, bicycle paths, air service and roads. Each day, the option to ride public transportation allows Americans to make transportation choices that improve their quality of life by shortening commute time, avoiding stressful driving situations, and increasing the amount of time they spend with family and friends.”

“Increasing access to public transportation is clearly the best route to a stable, healthy and strong America, and residents in urban, suburban and rural areas alike need expanded and enhanced services. In the last decade the public transportation industry made great strides in serving more Americans, but there inevitably will be changes ahead.”

Transportation Networks

The design of a transportation system that is equitable to everyone, integrates and connects with all modes of transportation, employs thoughtful and aesthetically pleasing design of the various elements that go into a public transportation network, can create a possible solution to our over-reliance on automobiles.

These more affluent people can afford to drive daily and park their vehicles in inner cities where as lower class people don’t have the resources to enjoy this freedom of movement so they tend to rely more on public transportation, and with this comes various stigmas. Driving can be more pleasant, flexible, fulfilling, and conditioned for the individual as its primary function is to take care of just your personal transportation needs. Public transportation systems run on a set schedule and cater, not only to the individual, but also the rest of the community.

The desire for immediate, independent modes of transportation has created cities for which the automobile was never designed for, and has greatly contributed to congestion and gridlock in and around the city center. It has also assisted in the creation of many various social problems such as an inability of lower classes, less likely to use a personal automobile, to move freely throughout the city. The limited number of transportation choices available to people have, over time, created a breakdown in the organization of social class status through associations with various modes of transport. The impact of our over dependence on automobiles, exclusively, helps to explain why some modes of transport are more popular than others. The more affluent a person, the more expensive and luxurious the modes of transportation they can choose, and these tend to be more catered to the individual to give them the best commuting experience.

1

2

3

3

22 Ross | 23

CH

AP

TE

R 1

Over the years it has become apparent in most large cities that it is not possible for everyone to have their own personal mode of transportation in the form of an automobile; the infrastructure of cities, such as the roads, interstate systems, highways, and parking lots, which cannot handle the loads that this would put on them. This means that instead of relying on automobiles for our daily commute, communities need to have a large number of reliable, efficient, and enjoyable modes of transportation readily available to a larger number of people in the community, especially lower classes who don’t have access to them. This also means cities need to provide more high occupancy vehicles, such as bus and trolley transit options, to be available to help serve more people using less.

Walking Walking as a mode of transportation has quickly eroded to become an option that people only reserve for a last resort. Typically people only walk a small distance at the beginning and end of their trip. This is usually only to get to and from their car and to their final destination. The act of walking as a mode of transportation has not always been people’s last choice, as it is today. For thousands of years, before the invention of the automobile, walking as a mode of transportation was the only available option and therefore cities were designed, or developed naturally, through organic growth, at a walkable-scale for the human to be accessed by foot. This meant that the various elements of a city were designed in a way that catered to the pedestrian, such as the design of skinner roads where only pedestrians were allowed to walk. Cities such as Rome and London were designed this way with the pedestrian in mind. Wheeled modes of transportation, however, began to grow in popularity quickly and were made possible by the domestication of animals such as the horse and oxen that pulled buggies and carts to transport people and goods. These wheeled modes of transportation via animals became more popular than walking because they were faster, more efficient, and could carry more goods a further distance. This shift from walking to using other modes of transportation began creating congestion issues inside cities because the streets were not designed for these other, wider modes. Eventually these wheeled modes of transport overpowered the alternatives and as time passed, the pedestrian was considered of less and less in the design of various city transportation networks.

The percentage of people who walk to work has dropped dramatically in the years since the rise of the automobile from 9.9% of people walking to work in 1960 to 3.1% of people in 1999. In Western Europe the people of the community see walking and cycling as “efficient, healthful, and natural” and rather than driving they choose these modes of transportation during their daily commutes. Bicycles

The bicycle, as a mode of transportation, was invented in 1816 in the form of a two-wheeled pedestrian hobby horse. The development of this mode, however, didn’t hit its zenith until the end of the 19th century when the development of the safety bicycle, which replaced the more dangerous high-wheeler bicycle, eventually evolved into the form of modern bicycles that are seen and used today. The development of the high wheeler was one of the first forms of the bicycle, but the difference in wheel size between the front and the back wheel made it a very dangerous mode of transportation and was quickly replaced with a safer version. High-wheeler bicycles lead to the development of the safety bike, a bicycle closer to the form of modern bicycle used today. The modern bicycle uses two equally sized wheels which is safer and more efficient. The bicycle has become one of the most efficient and affordable devices for transporting people and goods over longer distances with minimal amount of expended energy. The bicycle is a mode of transportation that translates physical energy into a mechanical output of energy. This is done through a series of mechanisms that act to propel the device forward or backward. Bicycling is the most efficient, economically and environmentally friendly, of any of the non-automotive modes of transportation. Transportation by bike does not produce pollution, it uses fewer materials than most other modes, saves space, is relatively safe, as well as promotes a healthy lifestyle. There are countries in Western Europe such as Belgium, where the majority of people transport themselves to and from work every day by bicycle. The infrastructure used for these purposes is independent of automobiles and the road systems that they use. There are also several places in the US such as Palto Alto, California where people have chosen to use the bicycle as their main mode of transportation instead of the automobile.

2 Wheel Hobby Horse

High Wheeler

Safety Bicycle

Fig. 1.3

Fig. 1.4

Fig. 1.5

Fig. 1.6

2

2

2

24 Ross | 25

CH

AP

TE

R 1

The bicycle has recently seen a bump in popularity as congestion in and around cities get worse, and more and more commuters are having to take longer commutes. This bump in popularity and usage is the main reason for the development of paved roads and pathways to accommodate them, such as greenways and bike paths, as they roll better on these surfaces. Places, such as these, are prime examples of where the city functions properly with bicycles and walking as the dominant modes of transportation. The Automobile

The development of the automobile started with the steam powered vehicle, which was developed as early as 1769 by a French engineer named Nicholas Joseph Cugnot. This vehicle lead to the development of trains for logging and the transportation of goods, and gradually became the dominant mode of transport. This mode is powered by various means other than physical exertion and continues to develop through the years until 1885, when a German engineer named Karl Benz developed a practical automobile similar to the ones used today. This lead to the development of the Model T by Henry Ford in 1908, which completely revolutionized the transportation industry and made it possible for automobiles to be widely used around the country. This development quickly influenced the way that cities were designed and constructed and changed the way people use cities. Cars created the ability for people to travel longer distances and take trips to other areas they couldn’t go before. However, the growth of the automobile, in addition to the increase in the global population, has created congestion in city centers and along many routes, which were not initially designed for the automobile’s growth in both popularity and usage. The ability to produce cars at a large scale added onto this growth in usage, and in-turn, the congestion that it creates.

Problems With The Automobile

The growing popularity of the automobile created many changes that made this mode of transportation a more pleasant and accessible way to travel as opposed to other options. However, this mode of transportation has also proven to create many additional problems that often outweigh its advantages. The first of the problems created by the over-saturation of automobiles in our major cities around the country is the degradation to other modes of transportation that it creates through limiting the accessibility of their use, making many alternative modes unsafe. An example of this is the way that the automobile almost completely eliminates the option of walking or cycling as a mode of transportation around cities. Typically, the only area designated for the pedestrian in urban areas are paved sidewalks, sometimes on one side or both sides of the road. In suburban and rural areas these areas for pedestrian use are even more limited. These types of areas are not truly designed with people who walk for transportation in mind, but rather with the automobile in mind, and with the afterthought being the pedestrian. This over-dependence on the automobile for transportation has created an over-saturation of the environment by a single mode of transportation, which has degraded other modes of transportation, making places like sidewalks an unsafe and unattractive option. Pedestrians have to deal with dangerous and busy road crossings, dangerous sidewalks along high speed roads. All of this creates an overall unattractive experience, one which most people want to avoid. Also, most accidents on the road happen at intersections because of the unsafe nature of the automobile, which helps add to this negative experience. Driving automobiles isolates and encapsulates the user from the natural environment and from the community they are a part of. The journey for people who drive to work is one that goes from being inside a house, into an attached garage, into a car, into a parking garage, and into work, back to the parking garage, into the car, and back to the car garage at their home to do the same thing the next day. Throughout this experience there is no interaction with the outdoors or people which creates even further isolation of individuals in thir communities. As all of these things come together in a city, it creates greater segregation and isolation of the people and places that occupy it.

4

4

26 Ross | 27

CH

AP

TE

R 1

HOME

GARAGE

PARKING GARAGE

WORK

Fig. 1.7

Average Daily Commute

Fig. 1.8

Wealth and Mobility Options

Less Infrastructure More Infrastructure

28 Ross | 29

CH

AP

TE

R 1

Public Transportation Infrastructure

The overcrowding and congestion formed by the current model of transportation design is creating a problem that is in need of a solution. One way to fix this type of transportation issue is to bring in an extensive public transportation network to link the various areas of the community together while providing a selection of multiple modes of transportation from which to choose from. Many cities in America have realized the extent of the transportation problems arising around the country from the over dependence on automobile and truck transportation and have taken steps to integrate other modes into their ublic transportation network to assist in fixing the problem.

The Mobility Hub

The “Mobility Hub” is one of the solutions that has emerged from an evolving need for a transportation system solution that can fix these current problems. Transporting ones self by car offers a type of ease of mobility and convenience, and the mobility hub was designed to provide similar benefits to people. If that level of individual service were to be applied to the current public transportation systems, then we may might be able to reverse the negative image attached to public transportation and increase daily ridership. Incorporating other services and amenities that are needed by communities into the design of the various modes of transportation will create a situation that will promote increased usage.

“The purpose of the hub is to persuade suburbanites who drive to work to use public transit instead by building stations that are convenient, helpful (offering such services as grocery shopping and dry cleaning) and, above all, attractive.”

Fig. 1.9

“America’s public transportation systems are experiencing record high levels of customers. Since 1995, public transportation ridership has grown 21%, which is faster than the growth rate of the population of the United States as a whole. Today, over 14 million Americans board public transportation each day, taking 9.4 billion trips annually. Since 1980, the number of light rail systems in the country has increased from 7 to 31 with 640 miles of track.”

SCOOTERS

WALKING

BICYCLES

AUTOMOBILES MOTORCYCLES

TRAI

N LINES

LIGH

T RA

IL

SKATEBOARDS

Fig. 1.10

3

5

30 Ross | 31

CH

AP

TE

R 1

Aesthetics in Transportation Design

This type of multi-modal “Mobility Hub” encourages more than just the use of multiple modes of transportation, it encourage economic and social prosperity. It does this by increasing commuters and foot traffic into areas of the city such as commercial areas, creating economic growth. Together all of the elements of the multi-modal mobility hub have to come together and blend functionally and aesthetically to create a functional ‘sense of place’ and give a community a sense of identity. The largest reason for the unappealing nature of public transportation in many cities is the value engineering type of design that does nothing to appeal aesthetically to people, and is there for purely functional reasons. For example, in New York the subway system was developed as part of a mass public transportation network, however the design of these stations have become dark and dreary and often dangerous which reduces ridership dramatically. Designers and engineers want the most efficient use of resources and money so they put most of the money for construction projects into the elements of the design necessary to make it safe and meet building codes. Extra money for aesthetic details can be seen as frivolous spending. Neglecting this element of aesthetic design, by transportation engineers like the ones in New York, have created public transportation centers that can be truly depressing and uninspiring spaces that most people will avoid using if they can. If this type of multi-modal transportation hub can be designed to be aesthetically appealing to its users, it may encourage use and eventually change the preconceptions associated with public transportation.

“New businesses and developers are drawn to transit stations where solid customer bases and consumer demands create an environment ripe for success.”

For example, the Tacoma Light Rail system connects major destinations

considerations and want to use their funds as efficiently as possible. Extra expenditures are usually seen as unnecessary to the overall function of the design, and is therefore cut out of the design.

is redefining itself with new museums, activity centers, and places to work and live in a fantastic setting. The light rail system is currently experiencing above projected ridership and is considered highly successful. The public art and architecture of the stations have set the bar high for outstanding urban design in an expanding community. Many engineers and city officials prioritize economy over aesthetic

Light Rail systems

Light rail transit systems, or LRTs, have begun to emerge as one of the best modes of transportation to efficiently serve a large percentage of the community. The Light rail has the ability to transport a large number of people efficiently with the most satisfying personal experience. The mechanical efficiency of an LRT system is unmatched by any of the other mode of transportation today and can transport more people more efficiently to their destination. This is because these are electric vehicles which can carry more weight while decreasing pollution emissions, fuel usage, and are much more efficient than automobile transportation. All of these factors combined have given LRT systems a more positive public image and thus LRT systems are being adopted by more and more cities today and usage has continued to grown dramatically.

Tacoma LTR

“As our urban landscape grows more inhospitable and less attractive, however, the public is demanding more than just utility and economy in engineering projects.”

Fig. 1.11

5

6

32 Ross | 33

CH

AP

TE

R 1

In Conclusion

Together, through the usage of all of these various modes of transportation, cities such as the Raleigh, North Carolina will be able to cater to all of its users equally. If a community can commit to the use of different public transportation methods other than driving their automobiles to their destination, then they will see the benefits of a lightened load on the Transit Infrastucture of a city, giving them more space to enjoy, more time outdoors, and more time to themselves Studies and surveys have shown that when people who are not regular users of public transportation are asked, “How do you feel about bus and rail”. Results of this survey showed an astonishing need for a light rail mode of public transportation as 97% said that they would use the rail if it were available to them instead of driving to their destination daily. There will, however, always be a certain amount of people who will want to use their automobiles and not use public transportation. The cost of using public transportation averages from around $50-$100 a month. The majority of public transportation users say they enjoy it because of its quick transport times and overall enjoyable and worry-free experience, where-in they may read a book or listen to music while they commute, having the ease of not having to worry about parking when they commute to their destinations. The daily automobile commuter however averages around $300-$500 a month of expenses. All of these various users send a strong message that there is a real need for a mass public transportation system. They voice a message that says that our efforts should be steered away from the current fixation, on our never ending upgrade of the road networks (because they may never be able to keep up with its growth in usage), and onto the creation of more, easily accessible modes of public transportation.

Survey Results

Fig. 1.12

The increasing popularity of various modes of transportation sends a strong message to city planners that there is a real desire and a strong need for mass public transportation. These voices send a strong message to city planners to stay away from an over dependence on automobiles for transportation and design for the increasing need to use multi-modal means of transportation. In conclusion, the future success of our cities is dependent on the amount of investment that is put into the development of an efficient and equitable public transportation network that includes all the various modes of transport into one large system to service the people. If it is done correctly, it will be a tremendous benefit to the future of many cities and will help improve surrounding businesses and communities in overall standard of living.

“Every segment of American Society - individuals, families, communities, businesses and industries - benefits from public transportation. It enhances personal opportunities by getting people where they need to go, whether its work, school or play. Public transportation helps all community members stay active and provides access to events and activities, creating strong personal bonds and community identity. It fosters communities where people can drive less and walk more, meeting the needs of all citizens.”

7 3

34 Ross | 35

CH

AP

TE

R 1

End Notes

1. Stone, Tabor. Beyond the Automobile: Reshaping the Transportation Environment, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice Hall, Inc, 1971. Print.2. Grava, Sigurd. Urban Transportation Systems: Choices for communities, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print.3. Wortman, Marc. Public Transportation: On the Move..., Washington DC: The American Public Transportation Association, 2005. Print.4. Schilperoord, Paul. Future Tech: Innovations in Transportation, London: Black Dog Publishing, 2006. Print.5. Wortman, Marc. Public Transportation: Leading the Way..., Washington, DC: The American Public Transportation Association, 2008. Print.6. Magie, Dian. On the Road Again... Creative Transportation Design, North Carolina: The Center for Craft, Creativity, and Design, 2005. Print.

CH

AP

TE

R 2

36 Ross | 37

Abstract-This chapter explains the creation of the transit facility and the evolution of its Architectural Typology. British transportation

facilities have helped influence this typology greatly. The evolution of various railed modes of transportation such as the steam and electric

locomotives and the Maglev train have added to the typological growth that this type of Architecture has experienced.

The Transit Facility

Chapter 2A New Architectural Typology;

Tacoma LTR

Kings Cross Station

Transportation Architecture:

Transportation Facilities today have come a long way since they were first developed. One of the first major Transit Facilities was London’s first train station in England, the Kings Cross Station. This facility was a development which came about because of the invention of the train which revolutionized the way in which people were able to travel. Passenger trains could carry a larger number of people and goods a longer distance, while using less energy and resources than any other mode of transportation around this time (mid-19th century). Places like Kings Cross Station became major gateways to enter through into the city, or a gateway to travel outside the city.

Fig. 2.1

Fig. 2.2

CH

AP

TE

R 2

38 Ross | 39

Evolution in Typology:

Out of this evolution of the transit facility; emerged the idea of the mobility hub; a Mobility Hub is a facility that includes public transportation infrastructure, such as walking and bike paths, automobile and bus systems, light-rail and streetcar systems, along that provide essential public amenities such as public parks, green spaces, and public recreation areas with public facilities. The hub also typically includes public amenities; such as shopping and retail areas, and mixed use spaces. These elements of a mobility hub must all come together, and most importantly these elements must create an attractive, holistic design in order to give the facility an overall identity. When all of these elements of the mobility hub combine, they form a network of entities that must all work together synergistically in order to effectively service the needs of it surrounding communities.

This building typology began to grow very quickly in Europe after these developments and quickly saw a rise in popularity all over the world. The availability and easy accessibility of these facilities helped to increase ridership, which in-turn, created the opportunity for these facilities to include many extra opportunities or amenities that could also service its users. These stations began to include things such as links to other modes of transportation, for example bicycles and pedestrians, and areas for other types of public transportation, such as buses and cabs, into the network of design to give users greater freedom of movement. They also began including shopping and recreational opportunities to bring in more people and to service the surrounding community.

Mulit-Modal Mobility Hub Fig. 2.3

British Transportation Architecture:

British transportation architecture emerged during the late 19th century as the first to tackle this new building typology. Transit facilities began to take on their own form of architecture, having little or nothing to draw from in terms of precedents in this type of design. Transportation facilities began to be designed for other purposes, aside from just rail transit, such as airports and motorist facilities. These various facilities began to merge and from which a hybrid facility emerged, “the ‘interchange’ where passengers move between rail, bus, air, car, and sometimes sea, in a single multi-leveled building”. This evolution of transport facilities creates a complex network of systems that work to serve the people of the community and its visitors. Over the years the typology of the transport facility has developed, such as the use of complex barrel vaulted structures, and long linear spaces. The typology has developed so much that it has been engrained into the fabric of the communities that they serve. These facilities grew to be much more than just a place for transportation, they have become a gateway into a place as well as a gateway towards travel.

“the ‘interchange’ where passengers

move between rail, bus, air, car, and sometimes sea, in a single multi-leveled

building”

“The volume of the building acts as a container for memories as well as providing the functional means of access to cities or trains. This is perhaps why the building type has evolved into an interior of height, volume and light. As such it is a spacious container whose dimensions go beyond that which can be justified by function and utility alone.”

1

1

CH

AP

TE

R 2

40 Ross | 41

Elements of Transport Architecture:

The characteristics of transit architecture have developed the form of its particular building typology. One of these characteristics is a plan that reflects its function. These spaces for waiting began to include such amenities as pedestrian malls with shops and cafes to aid in the positive travel experience of its users. facilities expanded to the point where railway station and the filling station became a corner shop for local residents.

The introduction of these various elements into the transportation facility to create a network of functions has become common place and over the years has become almost necessary for a facility of this type to be successful. When all of these elements come together for a transit facility, it creates a unique architectural and structural challenge. These challenges can provide an opportunity for a creative solution that, through thoughtful design, can create a new identity for an area.

Fig. 2.4 Fig. 2.5 Fig. 2.6

Fig. 2.9Fig. 2.8Fig. 2.7

“The key element of the type, common to all transport buildings, is a gathering space where tickets and information are obtained, and a separate space where boarding occurs. The first space is enclosed, lofty, often round

and architecturally contained; the second is open and linear. The geometry of space

mirrors the pattern of activity involved in moving from a public to a semi-public

realm, and in negotiating a change in speed facilitated by joining a train, plane or bus.”

Fig. 2.10 Fig. 2.11

1

CH

AP

TE

R 2

42 Ross | 43

Evolution of Railed Modes of Transportation:

The transit facility, as it developed as an archetype over the years, became the model of modernity and provided the ability to be able to view a city by train and to enter a place through this type of gateway was, “to enjoy the thrill and anticipation of modernity itself ”. As the facility developed, so did the types of railed transit that were used in it. The first railed modes of transport were steam powered trains that could transport people and goods along a railed pathway. These steam powered modes were eventually able to travel at speeds up to around 126 mph by 1938. This speed was set by a steam powered train from London and North Eastern Railway (LNER) and it established its practical limits. Years later the electric powered train was invented in 1903 by a German company named Siemens and Halske. The electric powered locomotive that was first invented was able to reach speeds up to 130 mph while still being more efficient than the steam powered locomotive. “Electric locomotives offer far better performance and cause less pollution than steam locomotives. They are also much more efficient and require less maintenance than their steam counterparts.”

Steam Powered Train

“This agglomeration of functions exists usually

with a single all-embracing roof whose span requires a bold structural solution. As

a consequence structural elements such as the

column, truss and beam provide a major part of the architectural expression of

British transport buildings of the twentieth century.”

Fig. 2.12

Fig. 2.13

“Although transport buildings are primarily concerned with the efficient movement of

people and goods, the best examples seek to provide dignity and hospitality for travelers.

Dignity is reflected in the large volumes which constitute the booking halls and the reception points; hospitality is the many

shops and cafes which are constructed within transport buildings. In fact, as the twentieth century unfolded, retail facilities expanded to the point where railway station and the

filling station became a corner shop for local residents.”

Fig. 2.14

1

1

1

CH

AP

TE

R 2

44 Ross | 45

“Magnetic Levitation is a system that works with a linear motor, which pushes the vehicle forward by magnetic excitation of the support magnets. Braking is possible by reversing the direction of the magnetic traveling field. This turns the motor into a generator, which brakes the train and generates electricity that can be re-used and fed back into the electrical network.”

Fig. 2.15

The Maglev Train:

The idea for a new type of railed transit arrived in 1934 when engineer Herman Kemper came up with the idea for a ‘flying’ train that could float over rails through the use of magnetic levitation. This idea was, however, ahead of its time and was not actually developed into a working concept for a train until 2003 when Shanghai installed the first Maglev locomotive. There are many advantages to using Maglev trains over the other trains such as frictionless travel because there is no contact between the train and the rails it’s riding on. Magnetic levitation eliminates the mechanical friction that would regularly be present and because of this there are no mechanical components that will wear out. This means that the maglev train requires much less maintenance than other trains. The elimination of rolling friction also helps to eliminate the noise produced by it. The Central Japan Railway set the maximum speed for all locomotives in 2003 when their MLX01 Bullet train reached speeds of up to 361 mph. Together all of these factors come together to form one of the best railed modes of transportation. The evolution of the locomotive happened very quickly and through the years the list of different railed modes of transit has grown long. A few of these modes are, for example; the TransRapid, a high speed maglev train, SkyTrain, a form of personal rapid transit, and ULTra, a form of urban light-transport.

Maglev Train

“The total weight of the trains is much lower, and is distributed better than the pin-point loads of conventional train wheels. This allows for a much lighter track infrastructure.”

Fig. 2.16

2

2

CH

AP

TE

R 2

46 Ross | 47

The Transrapid was developed by a German company named Transrapid International. This mode of railed transit was first installed in 2003 in Shanghai and is capable of speeds up to 310 mph with its operating speed at around 280 mph. The Transrapid is capable of carrying up to 210 passengers per train with the maximum capacity of a single segment of the train around 92 occupants. The ULTra, Urban Light Transport system is an electrically powered, low occupancy transportation vehicle similar to a car on tracks. ULTra was developed in 2005 by a British Company named Advanced Transport Systems, or ATS, as a highly personalized and on demand ‘personal transport’. This system is so efficient that it is estimated that wait times for this system averaged around only 10 seconds for each customer. The addition of modes of transportation, like these previous two examples, into a city’s or community’s existing public transportation infrastructure results in a situation similar to the

‘interchange’, but with much more individually tailored options for its user. This idea of a well-designed, integrated network of transportation facilities and services, existing and working together to serve the public has been incorporated by many cities and communities around the world. Airports have also begun to incorporate these multi-modal transportation options. A

great majority of people have begun to demand this type of all-inclusive design in all city transportation projects.

ULTra LTR System “This system operates with a fleet of driverless

electric vehicles, running on a network of elevated or ground

level guide way routes.”

“The non-stop travel of these lightweight vehicles is substantially more energy efficient than conventional public transport or cars. The low floor and easy

access make the vehicles suitable for any passenger,

including the disabled. The vehicles have a seating capacity of four with some additional standing room,

or space for a wheelchair.”

Fig. 2.17

Tackling the Design Challenge:

This typology of transit facility architecture developed into one of the most complex design challenges for designers. This type of project involves a great amount of planning and thoughtful design to tackle the complexity in design, engineering, and urban planning. Over the years many designers and engineers have sought to design the most efficient transportation networks and facilities such as the very successful Grand Central Station in New York, NY and the breathtaking Liege-Guillemins Station in Liege, Belgium. These are both examples of stations that have attempted to cater to the surrounding community by incorporating multi-modal design, planning, and steady consideration into these transport facilities, and have done so with great success.

Liege-Guillemins Station:

The Liege- Guillemins Station was designed by Santiago Calatrava and constructed in 2006 for the community of Liege, Belgium. The site for the project was located in the eastern part of Belgium and was meant to “connect two very different parts of the city: Colline de Cointe, a quiet residential hillside area, and Guillemins, a busy district including retail services.” The station was deigned to be located near the site of the old station and to include nine different rail lines. The facility also has room for up to 800 cars and a vehicular bridge to allow access by automobiles in order to cater to the idea of the ‘interchange’. Also included in the facility are other services such as car-rental services, travelers’ services, rooms for staff and management, and observation areas that provide panoramic views of the surrounding mountainous area.

Liege-Guillemins Station

Fig. 2.18

2

2

3

2

CH

AP

TE

R 2

48 Ross | 49

Atocha Station:

Another example of a transit facility that developed during this evolution, the Atocha Station in Madrid, Spain designed by Architect Rafael Moneo and constructed in 1992. This facility incorporates the existing station from 1892 with new construction to create a complex of restaurants, various services, as well as an indoor tropical garden. The facility also includes a significant amount of public spaces that act to serve the users of the facility, and involves 15 different rail lines on 8 different platforms. Transbay Terminal:

The Transbay Terminal is a multi-modal transit facility in San Francisco, California designed by SNWM and Richard Rogers Partnership and was completed around the year 2008. This transit facility was developed to help with the increasing travel loads in the San Francisco bay region as well as for the west coast as a whole. The facility is made up of a very complex arrangement of programmatic elements and various modes of transport such as bus and railed transit systems that work together with the state wide network of transit systems. The facility also incorporates high rise developments, mixed use housing, offices, a hotel, educational facilities, as well as retail and

Grand Central Station

“The new facility, in addition to providing suburban, long-distance, and high-speed rail services, also connects to a subway station, taxi and bus stops, as well as new parking facilities (which can hold up to 670 cars).”

“The leading planning team has stated that the building should be designed to encourage and accommodate new transit ridership while also being a memorable public structure – a celebratory building that is an appropriate gateway to and from San Francisco.”

Fig. 2.19

shopping areas. This plan creates a situation similar to the ‘interchange’ where you may use several different modes of transport to get to a final destination while passing through spaces that provide essential services and amenities to its users. Together all of these things come together in a five level facility that is able to engage the area on various levels and provide a seamless transition of transportation services and public amenities.

Grand Central Station:

Grand Central Station is a transit facility located in downtown New York, NY. This facility was designed and built over many years and with the assistance of many architects and engineers in several stages of construction. The facility was home to 67 different underground subway tracks that are capable of accommodating up to 110,000 passengers daily. Also incorporated into this large facility are various shops and retail opportunities that give the station an array of services and amenities that act to bring in even more guests. The mechanical systems of this facility are very advanced and were designed to tackle some rather difficult environmental challenges. The station uses an underground system of electric trains that are able to serve a large amount of New York. The facility also employs several systems to assist in passenger movement such as elevators, escalators to move people, as well as ‘pneumatic tubes’ that assisted in transporting things such as baggage and tickets. Over the years this facility has sparked a great amount of economic growth and as more and more people moved into the city the

value of the area quickly grew. Many shops and retail stores began to pop up around the area, as well as a number of high rise multi-use buildings which added to the potential growth of the area and to the number of commuters that use this transport facility.

Historian Carroll Meeks stated, “No better station of its size has ever been built”, in regards to the design of this facility. “Indeed, the city of New York has firmly embraced this beautiful terminal.”

“The Grand Central Terminal can thus, with justice, be described as the generator of a vast concentration of new urban development.”

3

3

4

5

4

CH

AP

TE

R 2

50 Ross | 51

Fig. 2.20

In Conclusion:

The development of a highly integrated transportation facility into major urban city centers can create positive economic growth. The facility goes much further than this, however, and can become the catalyst for an overall happy and productive community of people while provide essential services and amenities that create a much more positive and worthwile, personal commuting experience. When people are free to travel where they want and can do so using any mode of transportation they want, they are more likely to enjoy themselves and are more likely to engage in positive activities that are also able help the area economically. These facilities are major generators of urban energy that can change the way downtown areas are perceived. These facilities become gateways into and out of a city while also acting as a container for the memories of its users.

CH

AP

TE

R 2

52 Ross | 53

End Notes

1. Holder, Julian and Steven Parissien. The Architecture of British Transport in the Twentieth Century, Great Britain: Yale University Press, 2004. Print.2. Schilperoord, Paul. Future Tech: Innovations in Transportation, London: Black Dog Publishing, 2006. Print.3. Thorne, Martha. Modern Trains and Splendid Stations: Architecture, Design, and Rail Travel for the Twenty-first Century, London: Merrell Publishers Limited, 2001. Print.4. Brown, Christopher. Still Standing: A Century of Urban Transportation Design, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 2005. Print.5. Fitch, James and Diana Waite. Grand Central Terminal and Rockefeller Center: A Historic-critical Estimate of Their Significance, New York: New York State Parks and Recreation, 1974. Print

CH

AP

TE

R 3

54 Ross | 55

Raleigh, NC

Introduction Raleigh North Carolina is a quickly growing city in the center of the state. Raleigh is the capital city of North Carolina and is quickly becoming the site for the next Metropolis city on the east coast. There are many factors contributing to the growth in the area, such as the Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill areas, also known as the Triangle.

Early on in Raleigh’s history, the downtown developed quickly into an economic and industrial center for the region. With a network of roads, bike lanes, and trolley lines, Raleigh’s downtown was the thriving center of transportation in the south. However with the growth of the city and the attempts by the city to fully integrate automobile infrastructure into it, the city has come to a transit crossroads, how to keep the transit infrastructure up to the growth of the city.

Chapter 3The Site:

Raleigh, NC

Fig. 3.1

Fig. 3.2

CH

AP

TE

R 3

56 Ross | 57

Site History

Raleigh, NC

The Capital of the state of North Carolina is the city of Raleigh, which was founded in 1792. Raleigh, being the capital of the state, is an extremely fast growing city, so much so that it is expected to grow to almost 600,000 people by the year 2030, which is a 72% increase since 1989. This population growth seen in the region is quite alarming to many residents around the Raleigh, Durham, Chapel-Hill Triangle Area, and has brought up questions concerning whether or not it will be feasible to keep the areas Transportation Infrastructure in a place where it can handle the increased load that this growth will put onto it. There are many factors creating this spike in growth for the area, these include the many Colleges and Universities, Museums and Art Galleries, RDU International Airport, the RTP (Research Triangle Park), as well as the biggest factor of growth, the Triangle Area (Raleigh, Durham, Chapel-Hill). Because of this quickly growing problem facing Raleigh, the city has begun and implemented many sustainability initiatives and Transportation improvements to make sure Raleigh can handle its future.

Fig. 3.3

2%28%

70%

RACE %

HOUSING TYPES

LAND USE

FAMILY TYPES

POPULATION

WORK COMMUTER TYPES

1%2%

10%48%

39%

34%20%11%8%5%4%4%3%3%3%2%1%1%

27%36%

19%12%

5%

50%16%

14%13%

7%

50%40%

6%1%

1%1%1%

WORKERS 16+ |

SINGLE W/ KIDS |

RURAL WAKE |CARY |

WESTERN WAKE |EASTERN WAKE |

RALEIGH |

MARRIED W/ KIDS |OTHER |

FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS |NON-FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS |

DROVE ALONE |

PUBLIC TRANS / TAXI |BIKE / WALK |

MOTORCYCLE / OTHER |WORK AT HOME |

ASIAN / OTHER |AFRICAN AMERICAN |

WHITE |

| MOBILE HOME | DUPLEX

| TOWNHOUSE

| MULTIFAMILY

| SINGLE FAMILY | VACANT | PARKS, GREENWAYS, OPEN SPACE

| INSTITUTIONAL | APARTMENT, CONDO | RETAIL | INDUSTRIAL | TOWNHOUSE, MULTIPLEX | OFFICE | UNKNOWN | AGRICULTURE | MIXED USE| OTHER

| SINGLE-FAMILY | DETACHED

CARPOOLED |

Raleigh, Durham, & Chapel Hill

“The Triangle Area”

Fig. 3.4

Fig. 3.5

1

CH

AP

TE

R 3

58 Ross | 59

Historic Union Station The area located around the Boylan Wye was once host to a major train station which offered commuters the option of rail services within the heart of downtown Raleigh. The station was named the Raleigh Union Station and was built in 1891 near Nash Square. With this addition to Raleigh’s already well-established transit infrastructure, Raleigh quickly became “the thriving center of transportation in the South.”

Fig. 3.6

Fig. 3.7

Fig. 3.8

Fig. 3.9

Fig. 3.10

1

CH

AP

TE

R 3

60 Ross | 61

Raleigh Growth

Population Growth

Raleigh’s Population grew the area from just a small town in 1900 with less than 14,000 people to what it is today, a growing metropolis with more than 270,000 people. The most prevalent type of residence owned by the people of Raleigh is the single-family home, accounting for 48% of homes. The original bounds of the city were inside of what is now called the Beltline in the 1960’s and was considered to be the place to live for work. Early land use patterns show the city was split between Industrial buildings and residential neighborhoods, with the commercial centers just outside of downtown. The beltline was seen as a great attribute to the city early on, as the population was still growing. This changed, however, as the population began to grow and the area known as downtown pushed against its boundaries, those created by the beltline.

Fig. 3.11

WALKEDDROVE ALONECARPOOLEDMOTORCYCLEBICYCLEPUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

WORKED AT HOME

Outside the bounds of the beltline, land usage became more suburban with the growth of residential neighborhoods of connected cul-de-sacs. This type of unsustainable growth around a city center has created major issues for all the various modes of transportation that use the city’s transit infrastructure. Because of this the city has begun to implement various transportation studies and design solutions that can better integrate more multi-modal infrastructure into the existing fabric of the city in attempts to help alleviate the problem as well as plan for its future growth. Raleigh has already started to implement more public transportation options into the city. For example, Raleigh has begun working on a more complete and effective city bus system that can better serve more people with less. The Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) and the Capital Area Transit Authority have both expanded their services to help alleviate some of the traffic created by people commuting to work in the mornings and evenings.

SAFETY BIKEWALKING MODERN BIKE

HORSE & CARRIAGE AUTOMOBILEMOTORCYCLE

TIME

Fig. 3.12

Fig. 3.13

Fig. 3.14 Fig. 3.15

2

2

CH

AP

TE

R 3

62 Ross | 63

Growth Contributors

Raleigh International Airport

Raleigh’s local airport is RDU International Airport. This Airport is a large modern structure constructed of curved wooden structural members. RDU is a beautiful example of transit architecture that is able to impress any user that comes through it. RDU is located near the center of the Raleigh, Durham, Chapell Hill, “Triangle Area,” which makes it the local airport for a large population in the area. Future plans are being thought up of the future of RDU, which is intended to be linked up by a Light Rail which will help ease some of the congestion caused by the location between these three quickly growing cities.

Fig. 3.16

Fig. 3.18Fig. 3.17Fig. 3.19 Fig. 3.20

Fig. 3.21

“The Triangle”

The area known as “The Trianlge” is the arrangement of the cities of Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill which are all three quickly growing cities, each in their own right. The largest of the three cities is by far Raleigh, with Durham coming in second, and Chapel Hill third. One of the most important factors creating this growth in population and size is the three major Universities located in each city in “The Triangle”. The city of Chapel Hill is home to the University of North Carolina, or UNC, Tarheels. The city of Durham is home to Duke University, also known as the Duke, BlueDevils. Lastly, Raleigh is home to North Carolina State University, or the NC State, Wolf Pack. These three Universities each have basketball teams in the Atlantic Coast Conference, or ACC. These schools draw a large amount of visitors and residents to the area.

UNC

DUKE

NC STATE

Fig. 3.22

Fig. 3.26

Fig. 3.23

Fig. 3.27

Fig. 3.32 Fig. 3.33 Fig. 3.34 Fig. 3.35

Fig. 3.24

Fig. 3.28

Fig. 3.25

Fig. 3.29 Fig. 3.30

2005

2035

65%

2035

2005

Raleigh

1,000,000

500,000

0

Wake County

Jobs

60%

Fig. 3.36

Fig. 3.31

Fig. 3.37

CH

AP

TE

R 3

64 Ross | 65

Fig. 3.38

“By 2035, around 32% of the roadway network will operate under congested conditions during the PM peak period,

which indicates a 20% increase in congested roads over 2005 conditions”

94%

Raleigh Popluation relying on higway based

Fig. 3.39

CH

AP

TE

R 3

66 Ross | 67

Housing Density

Occupied Housing Units

Population Density

Vacant Housing Units

Fig. 3.40

Fig. 3.42

Fig. 3.41

Fig. 3.43

Drive Time to Work Drive Alone

Public Transportation UsageCarpooled

Fig. 3.44

Fig. 3.46

Fig. 3.45

Fig. 3.47

CH

AP

TE

R 3

68 Ross | 69

Public Transportation

The Capital Area Greenway System has been created to connect the city in a way that gives pedestrians an option to ride or walk along to get to their destinations within the city. These facilities for public transportation and for the pedestrian have helped slightly with alleviating the load on Raleigh’s transit infrastructure, however, the lack of planning between modes of transit have created a lack of connectivity between designs. One of the complaints from residents of Raleigh has been this lack of connectivity. The solution to this would be to create a facility that could incorporate infrastructure for all these modes of transportation, such as a multi-modal transit facility. Raleigh is already currently seeing congestion along its major corridors, even after having recently finished projects to widen a majority of I-40 & I-440. “Vehicle miles traveled and vehicle hours traveled are both projected to increase from 2005 levels by over 50% - travel along freeways and other major streets will be most affected.”

“Better coordination is needed among transportation planning partners such as: NCDOT CAMPO, TTA, CAT, and the surrounding counties and cities.”

Public TransportationFig. 3.48

- 52 miles of expressway / freeway (I-40, I-440, I-540)

- 130 miles of arterial / thourouhfare facil-ities

- 1,631 miles of collecters and local streets

TTA - 12 bus routes -

CAT - 18 bus routes and 14 park & ride lots -

Fig. 3.49

Fig. 3.50

Fig. 3.51

Existing Public Transit Routes

22

CH

AP

TE

R 3

70 Ross | 71

In attempts to battle the transit infrastructure problem in Raleigh, the city has decided to implement a Complete Streets project which aims to create streets that enable more modes of transportation, safely.

“Complete Streets are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users. Pedestrian, bicyclists, motorists, and bus riders of all ages and abilities are able to safely move along and across a complete street.”

- Proposed TTA Government Station

- Existing Greyhound Station

- Existing Moore Square CAT Transit Station

- Existing Amtrak Station

1/4

MIL

E R

AD

IUS

1/2

MIL

E R

AD

IUS

Fig. 3.52

Fig. 3.53

Existing Public Transit Disconnect

Public Realm Study: Raleigh, North Carolina - 46 -

Figure 4.04 Map of Projected Non-Traveling Pedestrian Behaviors

PEACE ST

LANE STLANE ST

NORTH STNORTH ST

POLK ST

BOUNDARY ST

PACE ST

FRANKLIN ST

TUCKER ST

JOHNSON ST

JONES ST

EDENTON ST

MORGAN ST

NEW BERN AVE

HARGETT ST

MARTIN ST

DAVIE ST

HILLSBOROUGH ST

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BLVD

CABARRUS ST CABARRUS ST

LENOIR ST

SOUTH ST

MCD

OW

ELL

ST

DAW

SON

ST

WES

T ST

GLE

NW

OO

D A

VE

BOYL

AN

AVE

ST M

ARY

’S S

T

HA

RRIN

GTO

N S

T

SALI

SBU

RY S

T

FAYE

TTEV

ILLE

ST

CAPI

TAL

BLVD

HA

LIFA

X ST

WIL

MIN

GTO

N S

T

BLO

UN

T ST

PERS

ON

ST

BLO

OD

WO

RTH

ST


Figure 3.11 Map of Vehicular Tra�c Patterns

PEACE ST

LANE STLANE ST

NORTH STNORTH ST

POLK ST

BOUNDARY ST

PACE ST

FRANKLIN ST

TUCKER ST

JOHNSON ST

JONES ST

EDENTON ST

MORGAN ST

NEW BERN AVE

HARGETT ST

MARTIN ST

DAVIE ST

HILLSBOROUGH ST



LENOIR ST

SOUTH ST

MCD

OW

ELL

ST

DAW

SON

ST

WES

T ST

GLE

NW

OO

D A

VE

BOYL

AN

AVE

ST M

ARY

’S S

T

HA

RRIN

GTO

N S

T

SALI

SBU

RY S

T

FAYE

TTEV

ILLE

ST

CAPI

TAL

BLVD

HA

LIFA

X ST

WIL

MIN

GTO

N S

T

BLO

UN

T ST

PERS

ON

ST

BLO

OD

WO

RTH

ST


Figure 2.08 Map of Existing Traveling Pedestrian Volumes

PEACE ST

LANE STLANE ST

NORTH STNORTH ST

POLK ST

BOUNDARY ST

PACE ST

FRANKLIN ST

TUCKER ST

JOHNSON ST

JONES ST

EDENTON ST

MORGAN ST

NEW BERN AVE

HARGETT ST

MARTIN ST

DAVIE ST

HILLSBOROUGH ST



LENOIR ST

SOUTH ST

MCD

OW

ELL

ST

DAW

SON

ST

WES

T ST

GLE

NW

OO

D A

VE

BOYL

AN

AVE

ST M

ARY

’S S

T

HA

RRIN

GTO

N S

T

SALI

SBU

RY S

T

FAYE

TTEV

ILLE

ST

CAPI

TAL

BLVD

HA

LIFA

X ST

WIL

MIN

GTO

N S

T

BLO

UN

T ST

PERS

ON

ST

BLO

OD

WO

RTH

ST


Figure 2.20 Map of Projected Traveling Pedestrian Volumes

PEACE ST

LANE STLANE ST

NORTH STNORTH ST

POLK ST

BOUNDARY ST

PACE ST

FRANKLIN ST

TUCKER ST

JOHNSON ST

JONES ST

EDENTON ST

MORGAN ST

NEW BERN AVE

HARGETT ST

MARTIN ST

DAVIE ST

HILLSBOROUGH ST



LENOIR ST

SOUTH ST

MCD

OW

ELL

ST

DAW

SON

ST

WES

T ST

GLE

NW

OO

D A

VE

BOYL

AN

AVE

ST M

ARY

’S S

T

HA

RRIN

GTO

N S

T

SALI

SBU

RY S

T

FAYE

TTEV

ILLE

ST

CAPI

TAL

BLVD

HA

LIFA

X ST

WIL

MIN

GTO

N S

T

BLO

UN

T ST

PERS

ON

ST

BLO

OD

WO

RTH

ST


Figure 2.14 Map of Areas of Insu�cient Pedestrian Clearance

PEACE ST

LANE STLANE ST

NORTH STNORTH ST

POLK ST

BOUNDARY ST

PACE ST

FRANKLIN ST

TUCKER ST

JOHNSON ST

JONES ST

EDENTON ST

MORGAN ST

NEW BERN AVE

HARGETT ST

MARTIN ST

DAVIE ST

HILLSBOROUGH ST



LENOIR ST

SOUTH ST

MCD

OW

ELL

ST

DAW

SON

ST

WES

T ST

GLE

NW

OO

D A

VE

BOYL

AN

AVE

ST M

ARY

’S S

T

HA

RRIN

GTO

N S

T

SALI

SBU

RY S

T

FAYE

TTEV

ILLE

ST

CAPI

TAL

BLVD

HA

LIFA

X ST

WIL

MIN

GTO

N S

T

BLO

UN

T ST

PERS

ON

ST

BLO

OD

WO

RTH

ST

Pedestrian Clearance


Figure 3.03 Map of Existing Sidewalk Corridor Compositions

PEACE ST

LANE STLANE ST

NORTH STNORTH ST

POLK ST

BOUNDARY ST

PACE ST

FRANKLIN ST

TUCKER ST

JOHNSON ST

JONES ST

EDENTON ST

MORGAN ST

NEW BERN AVE

HARGETT ST

MARTIN ST

DAVIE ST

HILLSBOROUGH ST



LENOIR ST

SOUTH ST

MCD

OW

ELL

ST

DAW

SON

ST

WES

T ST

GLE

NW

OO

D A

VE

BOYL

AN

AVE

ST M

ARY

’S S

T

HA

RRIN

GTO

N S

T

SALI

SBU

RY S

T

FAYE

TTEV

ILLE

ST

CAPI

TAL

BLVD

HA

LIFA

X ST

WIL

MIN

GTO

N S

T

BLO

UN

T ST

PERS

ON

ST

BLO

OD

WO

RTH

ST

Fig. 3.54

Areas of Insufficient Pedestrian Clearance

Existing Sidewalk Corridor Composition

Existing TravelingPedestrian Volume

Projected Traveling Pedestrian Volumes

Projected Non-Traveling Pedestrian Behaviors

Vehicular Traffic Patterns

Fig. 3.57

Fig. 3.55

Fig. 3.58

Fig. 3.56

Fig. 3.59

2

CH

AP

TE

R 3

72 Ross | 73

40,000

20,000

0

200 SQ MI

100 SQ MI

01980

2013

1980

2013

PopulationLand Area

Fig. 3.60

Fig. 3.62Fig. 3.61

T R Y O NR D

POOLE RD

LY N N R D

SIX

FO

RK

SR

D

D U R A N TR D

FA

LL

SO

FN

EU

S E

RD

B U F F A L O E R D

RO

C K

QU

AR

RY

RD

S T R ICK

L A N D R D

AT

LA

NT

ICA

V

E

FO

RE

ST

VI L

LE

RD

NN

EW

HO

PE

RD

GO

RM

AN

ST

W A D E A V E

S P R IN G F O R E S T R D

E B EN

EZ

ER

CH

UR

CH

RD

GA

RN

ER

RD

E M IL L B R O O K R D

LIT

CH

FO

RD

RD

W E S T E R N B L V D N E W B E R NA

VE

EDWARDS M

ILL R

D

GLENWOOD AVE

HILLSBOROUGH ST

CR

EE

DM

OO

R R

D

CAPI

TAL

BLVD

§̈¦40

§̈¦40

§̈¦440

§̈¦440

§̈¦440

Io

Io

Io

IÆ

I¤

I§

I§

?l

?o

?»

§̈¦540

§̈¦540

MAP LU-1

RESIDENTIAL - SINGLE FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL - TOWNHOUSE, MULTIPLEX

RESIDENTIAL - APARTMENT, CONDOMINIUM

RESIDENTIAL - OTHER

RETAIL

OFFICE

INSTITUTIONAL

PARKS, GREENWAYS, OPEN SPACE, GOLF COURSES

AGRICULTURE

INDUSTRIAL

INFRASTRUCTURE & TRANSPORTATION

MIXED USE - OFFICE & RETAIL

MIXED USE - OFFICE, RESIDENTIAL & RETAIL

MIXED USE - OTHER

MIXED USE - RESIDENTIAL & OFFICE

MIXED USE - RESIDENTIAL & RETAIL

MIXED USE - RESIDENTIAL, OFFICE, & RETAIL

UNKNOWN; VACANT K 0 1 20.5Miles

Map created 10/7/2009 by the City of RaleighDepartment of City Planning & GIS Division

Highway

Major Streets

ETJ

Fig. 3.63

CH

AP

TE

R 3

74 Ross | 75

Historic Street Car System 1891-1912

Fig. 3.64

Fig. 3.65

CH

AP

TE

R 3

76 Ross | 77

Freight Routes

Fig. 3.66

Fig. 3.67

Fig. 3.68

Existing Rail Conditions

The existing rail line network that runs through the state of North Carolina and through Raleigh, NC create one of the most complex rail interchanges in the south east of the US. Currently the Site is home to Amtrak lines and Frieght lines only. A future plan has been talked about and developed into what will be called the South Eastern High Speed Rail, a high speed rail line that will provide the East coast of the US with a new, more efficient method of transportation for long distance commutes. In addition to extending the existing rail lines and adding new lines, North and South, down the East coast, the rail lines will be improved running east to west along the state of North Carolina.

Fig. 3.69

Fig. 3.70

CH

AP

TE

R 3

78 Ross | 79

“Raleigh has nearly 100 miles of bikable greenway trails and bikeways, and 22 miles of bicycle facilities”

Fig. 3.71

Capital Area Greenway SystemFig. 3.72

Fig. 3.74

Fig. 3.76

Fig. 3.73

Fig. 3.75

Fig. 3.77

CH

AP

TE

R 3

80 Ross | 81

Fig. 3.78

B. Boylan Heights

C. Cameron Park

J. Gleenwood - Brooklyn

Q. Oakwood

H. East Raleigh- South Park

Fig. 3.82

Fig. 3.79

Fig. 3.85

Fig. 3.88

Fig. 3.91

Fig. 3.83

Fig. 3.80

Fig. 3.86

Fig. 3.89

Fig. 3.92

Fig. 3.84

Fig. 3.81

Fig. 3.87

Fig. 3.90

Fig. 3.93

CH

AP

TE

R 3

82 Ross | 83

“Elevated demand coupled with the inability to widen roadways will render downtown the most

transit dependent area within the region.”

Fig. 3.95

Fig. 3.94

Fig. 3.96

CH

AP

TE

R 3

84 Ross | 85

Traffic STudy

Fig. 3.97 Fig. 3.98

CH

AP

TE

R 3

86 Ross | 87

Raleigh DowntownDowntown Raleigh

Raleigh’s Downtown has become the “Historic, Functional, and symbolic heart of,” the region. It is expected to become the largest metropolis in the south by the year 2030. The area known as downtown Raleigh today, consists of 754 acres, or 1.18 square miles, which is less than 1% of Raleigh’s area.

“Like many cities, Raleigh is experiencing extensive low

density suburban growth that has had a negative

impact on the areas transportation

system, projects exclusively designed to

address automobile congestion are not

feasible”

Fig. 3.99 Fig. 3.100

Fig. 3.101

Fig. 3.102

Fig. 3.103 Fig. 3.104

N

N

2

2

CH

AP

TE

R 3

90 Ross | 91

Boylan Wye

Boylan Wye

The Boylan Wye is the name given to the area formed by the major intersection of rail lines which run through Raleigh’s downtown. The area of the wye is about 17 acres wide and was once the site used by several Industrial facilities for many years. “From the 1830’s through the 1850’s the Raleigh & Gaston Railroad and the North Carolina Railroad intersection created the ‘Boylan Wye’.” Over the years the intersection that created the original Boylan Wye has grown more complex, with more and more lines running through it. It quickly became the most intricate and complex set of railroad crossings within the state of North Carolina. The site became the host, over the years, to a freight and passenger lines and facilities. These new rail facilities, “include CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern freight and the existing Amtrak Station serving the Silver Star, Carolinian, and Piedmont trains. Future services and facilities include Triangle Transit regional rail, Southeast High Speed Rail, and commuter rail in the NCRR corridor.”

Fig. 3.108

Fig. 3.109

Fig. 3.110

Fig. 3.111

Fig. 3.112

Fig. 3.113 Fig. 3.114

Site Rail Conditions

1

CH

AP

TE

R 3

92 Ross | 93

Existing Site Rail Conditions

“Within the historical gird are more than ten million quare feet of built space that contain a mix of uses from government offices to

single-family homes.”

“Over the next 20 years consumer preferences will shift towards public transit as the baby boom generation retires, the uncertainty

of oil production intensifies, fuel prices continue to rise, traffic congestion worsens, and health and environmental concerns increase and traditional land use and transportation patterns

change.”

Fig. 3.115

Fig. 3.116

CH

AP

TE

R 3

94 Ross | 95

End Notes

1. City of Raleigh. Union Station: Raleigh’s Multi-Modal Transit Center. Rep. City of Raleigh / NCDOT Rail Division, 7 Sept. 2010. Web.2. City of Raleigh. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Raleigh. Rep. City of Raleigh, n.d. Web

CH

AP

TE

R 4

96 Ross | 97

The Program:Chapter 4

AMTRAK Rail LineULTra Rail Line

CAT Bus LinesSEHSR Lines

Shopping / RetailConcourse / Lobby

TicketingService Areas

RestroomsParking Facilities

Waiting AreasRecreation Areas

Public Green SpacesSkate Plaza

Bicycle FacilitiesFig. 4.2

The Program for a Multi-modal facility is a complex network of various elements such as public services and amenities, as well as various transportation options.

SCOOTERS

WALKING

BICYCLES

AUTOMOBILES MOTORCYCLES

TRAI

N

LINES

LIGH

T

RAIL

SKATEBOARDS

Fig. 4.1

Fig. 4.3

Fig. 4.4 Fig. 4.5

The Multi-modal City

CH

AP

TE

R 4

98 Ross | 99

TRANSIT CORRIDOR

PROGRAM ADJACENCYMAIN SPACES

PROGRAM

TRANSIT SF

Fig. 4.6

Positives: 1. Platform for loading and unloading of passengers must be near the office that relates to that

platform. 2. Transportation platform area for loading and unloading of passengers should be located

near other modes of transport so that they can easily move to where they need be for their next mode of transportation.

3. The bicycle shop should be located near the other areas of retail to encourage users to move into the space further.

4. Lobby should give the option for the user to take a second and engage in the shopping/retail options available within the program.

5. Platforms for loading and unloading of passengers should be located near ticketing options so that they are encouraged to buy more tickets or to use the other modes of transportation available.

6. The entrance to the facility should bring people into a space that presents them with various options to buy tickets for any mode of transportation they wish.

7. Service areas should be located near the various platforms that they will be servicing to ensure the easiest route to bring a mode of transport into be serviced.

8. As passengers get ready to enter a mode of transport or they are just exiting one, they should be able to access facilities such as restrooms with ease and with little searching.

9. Bicycle riders should have access to public facilities such as restrooms when they come into the bicycle shop area to encourage more people from around the community to engage with the space.

10. Shoppers engaging in the retail area should have easy access to facilities such as restrooms to encourage people to stay longer.

11. Passengers who are waiting for their ride should be near a space where they can spend that time engaging in the retail experience.

12. The waiting area should have ticketing options located nearby so that if any passengers wish to buy more tickets or needs to change their transportation route.

13. While passengers are waiting for their rides they should have access to restrooms nearby so that they do not have to walk far from their loading platform or miss their rides.

14. The bicycle shop should be located near a public space to encourage new users and everyday users of the space to engage in this mode of transportation and in the retail experience of the center.

15. The retail and shopping areas should be easy to access and located in such a way that the adjacent public spaces can encourage more people to come into the structure and engage in what it has to offer.

16. The public space should have public facilities such as public restrooms to assist in creating an area where people feel welcome and comfortable and don't feel obligated to engage in consumerism if they don't wish to.

17. The Recreational areas need to be located near the bicycle shop to encourage more people to engage and learn more about various bicycle transportation and recreation opportunities.

18. Recreational areas should have access to public facilities such as restrooms to ensure that its users feel welcome and comfortable using the space and feel encouraged to enjoy themselves and not feel obligated to engage in retail.

19. Skaters and users of this public space should be near the retail so as to encourage new and younger consumers to feel comfortable engaging with the facility.

20. Skaters and users of this public space need public facilities such as restrooms so they do not interfere with the functionality of the facility.

Negatives: 1. Offices for this mode of transport should not interact with the traffic of the retail area. 2. The shoppers of the facility should not be able to see the behind the scenes of the servicing

of the various modes of transportation. 3. Service areas should be located away from the main spaces so that users do not have to

see that part of the facility. 4. Platforms for the unloading and loading of passengers should not be located near the areas

with skaters and the louder and more chaotic users of the skate plaza area so they feel comfortable and safe as they exit.

5. The Skate plaza should not interfere with the entrance to the facility and the essence of the concourse lobby area of the building.

CH

AP

TE

R 4

100 Ross | 101

Fig. 4.7

Fig. 4.8

Fig. 4.9 Fig. 4.10

Fig. 4.11 Fig. 4.12

Fig. 4.13 Fig. 4.14

CH

AP

TE

R 4

102 Ross | 103

Fig. 4.15

Historic Boylan HeightsGreenspace / Parks

Key:Major One-Way Road

NeighborhoodsMinor Roads

Central Prison Rail-linesWest End ULTra-linesWarehouse District

Capitol District

Bicycle Facilities

Glenwood SouthSaint Mary’s Girls SchoolWest MorganImportant Buildings

Fayetteville Street DistrictMajor 5-Lane Ave.

Downtown Usage

Greenspace / ParksKey:

Existing Greenway PathsProposed Greenway ExtensionsRail-lines

NeighborhoodsBoylan Wye

Neighborhood Connections

Fig. 4.16

Regional Greenway Extensions

CH

AP

TE

R 4

104 Ross | 105

Fig. 4.17

Fig. 4.18

Paid Entry Circulation

Concourse Configuration

Fig. 4.19

Fig. 4.19 Fig. 4.18

Overall Circulation

CH

AP

TE

R 4

106 Ross | 107

Fig. 4.21

CH

AP

TE

R 4

108 Ross | 109

Fig. 4.21

Site Transportation Lines

Fig. 4.22

Fig. 4.24

Concourse Placement

Site Geometry

Building Geometry

110 Ross | 111

Raleigh Multi-Modal Transportation Center

Chapter 5

Fig. 5.1

CH

AP

TE

R 4112 Ross | 113

ULTra

PedestrianPath

Fig. 5.2

Fig. 5.3

Amtrak

SEHSR

Freight

Fig. 5.4

Fig. 5.5

Fig. 5.6

CH

AP

TE

R 4114 Ross | 115

1. Quick Drop-Off Area2. Concourse Area3. Green Roof4. Tennis Courts5. Basketball Courts6. CAT Bus Stop7. Parking Area8. Skateboarding Plaza9. Union Station Historic Monument10.Public Restroom

Key:

Site Plan

1

1

2

2

2

3

4 4

5

5

6

6

7

7

8

910

10

10

Fig. 5.7

CH

AP

TE

R 4116 Ross | 117

Structural Development

Fig. 5.8

Shading System

Glass Paneled Roof

Steel Roof Structure

Primary Steel Structure

Secondary Steel Structure

Concourse Exploded Axonometric

Fig. 5.9

CH

AP

TE

R 4118 Ross | 119

Pedestrian & ULTra Light Rail Planning

ULTra Light Rail

Pedestrian Path

Rail-lines

Key:

Fig. 5.10

1

2

Street Sections

Fig. 5.11Fig. 5.12

CH

AP

TE

R 4120 Ross | 121

Site Plan Fig. 5.13

CH

AP

TE

R 4122 Ross | 123

Ground Floor

D

B

C

B

C

D

A

A

Fig. 5.14

CH

AP

TE

R 4124 Ross | 125

1. Waiting Area2. Ticketing 3. Security4. Restrooms5. Retail6. Seating Area7. Cafe / Food8. Loading Platforms9. Help Desk

Key:

Transit ConcourseFig. 5.15

6

1 2

8

8

8

8

8

8

87

7 5

5

5

5

9

5

5

4

4

3

7

7

Fig. 5.16

CH

AP

TE

R 4126 Ross | 127

1. Waiting Area2. Ticketing 3. Security4. Restrooms5. Retail6. Seating Area7. Cafe / Food8. Loading Platforms9. Help Desk10.Green-Roof

Key:

Central Building AreaFig. 5.17

9

5

5

5

5

5 5

Fig. 5.18

CH

AP

TE

R 4128 Ross | 129

A-A

Fig. 5.19

Fig. 5.20

Fig. 5.21

Fig. 5.22

Fig. 5.23

Public Space / SW Entry

Public Space / Bike Drop-Off Area

SW Parking Area / Drop-Off Area

Outdoor Seating Area / North Entry / Drop-Off Area

CH

AP

TE

R 4130 Ross | 131

B-B

Fig. 5.24

Fig. 5.25

Fig. 5.26

Fig. 5.27

Fig. 5.28

Central Retail Area Amtrak / SEHSR Waiting Area

Amtrak / SEHSR PlatformTicketing

CH

AP

TE

R 4132 Ross | 133

Second Floor Fig. 5.29

CH

AP

TE

R 4134 Ross | 135

C-C

Fig. 5.30

Fig. 5.32

Fig. 5.31

D-D

Fig. 5.33

Fig. 5.34

Fig. 5.35

Concourse Second Floor ULTra Light Rail Platform

Pedestrian PathElevated Pedestrian Pathway

CH

AP

TE

R 4136 Ross | 137

Building Axonometric

N

Fig. 5.36North Elevation

East Elevation

South Elevation

West Elevation

Building Axonometric

N

Fig. 5.36

Fig. 5.37

Fig. 5.38

Fig. 5.39

138

Fig

. 5.4

0

raleigh multi-modal mobility hub

Art & Photos

social downtown

types of public transportation

town urban center of

graduate architecture

multimodal approach

modal transportation

evolution of transportation

worthwhile downtown