Frontiers of Architectural Research (2020) 9, 606e622

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

journal homepage: www.keaipublishing.com/foar

Research Article

Determining transit nodes for potential

transit-oriented development: Along the LRT
corridor in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Eden Atsbeha Teklemariam*, Zhongwei Shen

School of Architecture and Design, Southwest Jiaotong Univeristy, Chengdu, China

Received 9 September 2019; received in revised form 21 February 2020; accepted 10 March 2020

KEYWORDS Abstract The aim of transit-oriented development (TOD) is to create a livable urban environ-
Accessibility; ment by improving the integration between land-use and transportation systems. The capital
LRT; city of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, aims to promote a sustainable transportation system by launch-
Transit; ing its first light rail transit (LRT) network to control the current pattern of increased conges-
TOD; tion and the need for mass transport. Planning for TOD around existing transit stations helps
TOD index; achieve improved transit choice and encourages local economic development. Therefore, this
Addis Ababa article proposes a methodology to quantitatively measure the existing TOD in terms of a TOD
index within the walkable distance of transit nodes by measuring the criteria that define TOD
levels. The TOD index is calculated for areas of 22 stations on the East-West LRT line of Addis
Ababa. Depending on the value of the TOD index, certain stations are identified to have a po-
tential TOD but poor transit accessibility. With these results, the recommendation to improve
TOD planning can become accurate for each station, depending on its relevant factors. Such
results also help identify each station’s potential for TOD planning and its improvements to-
ward future local developments.
ª 2020 Higher Education Press Limited Company. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on
behalf of KeAi. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction (LRT), sparks transit-oriented development (TOD). TOD

promotes a livable and accessible urban environment
A renewed interest in public transportation that integrates around transit nodes. The definition of TOD focuses on the
transport and land use, particularly in light rail transit goal of creating a walkable environment and encourages

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ediats@yahoo.com (E.A. Teklemariam).
Peer review under responsibility of Southeast University.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2020.03.005
2095-2635/ª 2020 Higher Education Press Limited Company. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi. This is an open access
article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
LRT corridor in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
the use of cycling, walking, and public transport, both of
which can be achieved by developing high-density mixed
land use around transit nodes (Cervero, 2004; Dittmar and
Poticha, 2004; Parker et al., 2002; Schlossberg and Brown,
2004). The benefits of TOD include increased access to
public transportation and hence to additional opportu-
nities, walkable environment utilization, increased transit
ridership, low air pollution and greenhouse gas emission,
improved access to jobs, and healthy lifestyles. TOD has
direct and indirect benefits. The primary benefits are those
that can accrue to transit agency, such as increased rider-
ship and revenue, neighborhood revitalization, economic
gain through joint development (D), and transit (T). The
indirect benefits of TOD are congestion relief, land con-
servation, reduced road expenditure, and improved safety
for pedestrians and cyclists (Cervero, 2004).
Most investments in infrastructure within Addis Ababa
are often made without understanding its existing condi-
tions. This situation clearly emphasizes that planning for
TOD should be preceded by a quantitative understanding of
the current circumstance, which, in turn, requires
measuring the current TOD level. Therefore, measuring the
potentials for TOD reveals the importance of conceptual-
izing accessibility and improving transit nodes. The evalu-
ation of a successful TOD must express the existing TOD of
an area in terms of the TOD index (Evans et al., 2007).
Evaluations of transit nodes can benefit from lessons
learned from previous projects, as such evaluations have
been successfully implemented in the USA, Europe,
Singapore, and Hong Kong. However, regarding various
evaluation studies and experiences, the establishment of a
successful TOD depends on the involvement of public and
private sectors.
Moreover, essential local elements must also be consid-
ered because one cannot merely copy experiences as to
how politics, economic conditions, and regional cultures
differ from places where TOD is successfully established.
The implementation of TOD around the major transit sta-
tions in Addis Ababa has failed due to specific reasons.
Therefore, this paper presents an approach to measure the
TOD level of areas and to identify the reasons for high or
low scores. GIS and spatial multiple criteria analysis (SMCA)
are used to measure TOD levels.
Section 2 reviews past studies on TOD assessment around
transit stations. Section 3 presents a study area analysis and
the data collection method. Section 4 introduces the spe-
cific techniques for measuring TOD. Section 5 elaborates
the results on the basis of a case study on Addis Ababa.
Section 6 provides the summary of the findings and rec-
ommendations made for improvements. Finally, Section 7
concludes.
2. Literature review
Various definitions of TOD have surfaced over the years
based on different viewpoints and perspectives. Different
case studies have presented how TOD is planned at
regional, urban, and local scales. Others have focused on
planning and financial issues (Cervero et al., 2002), TOD
and employment (Belzer et al., 2011), TOD and property
value (Park et al., 2016), TOD and affordability (Bostic
607
et al., 2018), and density and mixed use and TOD
(Cascetta and Pagliara, 2008). However, measurements to
identify the existing TOD level of areas are not found. Thus,
Atkinson-Palombo and Kuby (2011) attempted to assess the
existing condition of TOD and understand the heterogeneity
of the built environment before implementation becomes
essential to enhance the success of transit nodes. Renne
(2009) emphasized the measurement of an existing built
environment according to its density and transit ridership.
The author also suggested that an increase in property
value improves a TOD project.
In the current study, the working definition focuses on
measuring the existing built environment of the surrounding
transit node. Bernick and Cervero (1997) focused on
measuring the built environment and highlighted the role of
density, diversity, and design in the success of TOD. Later
interests emerge to include destination accessibility, dis-
tance to transit, and demand management (Ewing and
Cervero, 2010). Similarly, Schlossberg and Brown (2004)
paid attention to the physical characteristics of a transit
station and TOD as an integrated approach to trans-
portation and land-use planning. Despite all the advantages
and attractiveness of TOD, its concept suffers from the lack
of spatially explicit measurement tools that directly deliver
spatial analyses and visual capabilities, which quantify the
TOD level index. Therefore, different defined measure-
ments employed by different authors can lead to various
comparable outcomes.
Moreover, the measurements of TOD levels around
transit nodes need a proper framework when public in-
vestments are made in infrastructure. Renne and Wells
(2005) highlighted that plans for TOD without measuring
the existing TOD levels of areas fail in achieving sustainable
transit nodes and lack coordination between land use.
Similarly, Cervero (2004) stated that most studies evaluate
transit nodes on the basis of the ridership and effect of land
values while neglecting other aspects. Researchers have
made discussions beyond the integration of land use,
transportation, and built environment. Thomas and
Bertolini (2014, 2015) identified critical factors to suc-
cessfully implement the TOD policy. However, they focused
on the measurements of existing transit stations to identify
the critical needs that are effective for TOD plans. Although
many studies have measured TOD around transit stations,
one of the most recurring approaches is to develop a station
TOD index, where all study area (East-West [E-W] line in
Addis Ababa) stations are grouped into ranks depending on
the characteristics of a place. Evans and Pratt (2007) pro-
posed the TOD index that is a quantified expression of the
TOD level of an area. Renne and Wells (2005) elaborated
the most important factors for successful TOD. They
investigated 56 existing indicators under five categories of
travel behavior, economy, environmental built, and social
diversity. These factors surveyed transport and other pro-
fessionals and came up with 10 indicators for evaluating
TOD. These indicators are transit ridership, density, quality
of streetscape, quantity of mixed-use structure, pedestrian
safety, increase in property value, increase in tax revenue,
public perception, number of mode connections at transit
stations, and parking.
Evans et al. (2007) suggested developing a TOD index as
a potential device for considering the degree to which a
608
particular project is intrinsically oriented toward transit.
ITDP (2014) showed similar studies on quantifying TOD by
using the TOD scoring system within walking distance. They
focused on scoring a new development depending on the
principles of walking, cycling, connecting, mixing, densi-
fying, compacting, and shifting. Similarly, Papa and
Bertolini (2015) quantified TOD at the city level by
measuring the TOD degree for an urban area, as an extent
to which urban development is concentrated along the rail
corridors in the city.
3. Data collection
The E-W LRT line of Addis Ababa, the capital city of
Ethiopia, is selected as the study area. Addis Ababa is
known as the home to the Africa Union and the diplomatic
capital of Africa. Thus, the city government aims to stim-
ulate a sustainable transport system and believes that TOD
can be an appropriate strategy to achieve sustainable
development. The city is the central economic zone of
Ethiopia that covers 527 m2 and includes 10 districts (sub-
cities), as seen in Fig. 1.
The policy vision of Addis Ababa centers on creating
additional housing and employment with a sustainable
transport system. To do so, the city-regional government
launched the first LRT system on September 20, 2015 and is
planning to establish the bus rapid transit. Hence, knowing
which of the areas in the region require transit connectivity
is an advantage. Realizing this benefit, the city-regional
government proposes two linear lines in the major corridor
of the city, namely, E-W and NeS lines (Fig. 2). The E-W line
is 17 km long and connects Ayat neighborhood to
Fig. 1 Addis Ababa city map.
E.A. Teklemariam, Z. Shen
Torhailoch, passing through the main centers of the city,
Megenagna, Meskel Square, Leghar, and Mexico Square. The
NeS line with a total length of 16.9 km passes through
Merkato, Lideta, Leghar, Meskel Square, and Gotera con-
necting Menelik II Square to Kality. The full extent of the
railway network is 31 km and comprises 39 stations.
The data used in this research are collected from gov-
ernment departments and field surveys. The secondary
data include land use, road networks, public transport
networks, and population. Furthermore, spatial data anal-
ysis using ArcGIS and SMCA are employed to assess the TOD
index. To present the methodology for developing the TOD
index, this study covers 22 existing stations of the E-W LRT
line.
4. Methodology
Evaluating TOD by using an index requires measuring the
factors that influence transit developments around transit
stations. These factors are related to the urban develop-
ment around transit nodes and the transit system. These
factors are also identified as spatial and non-spatial and
have various scales depending on the existing conditions of
different transit areas. Due to various perceptions of the
concept, different authors have emphasized TOD mea-
surement in various ways. Bernick and Cervero (1997)
focused on the measurement of a built environment,
explicitly measuring density, diversity, and design to suc-
cessfully approach TOD. Kamruzzaman et al. (2014) con-
ducted the same analysis of the existing built environment
that can ease facilitation for TOD planning. Cervero and
Bosselmann (1998) emphasized visual simulation
LRT corridor in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Fig. 2 Addis Ababa LRT map.
techniques, believing that such techniques convey a
comprehensive array of environmental choices.
In the present study, the concept of the TOD index
developed by Evans et al. (2007) is used to measure spatial
criteria and create an index to reflect existing TOD levels.
For measuring TOD around transit nodes, demarcating the
analysis area in which TOD can be measured is important.
Calthorpe (1993) elaborated that the concept of TOD is
built within a typically comfortable walking distance from a
station. No fixed rule to the distance exists, and the typical
comfortable walking distance ranges from 400 m to 800 m.
To measure the TOD level of a station area by using an
index, a 10-min walking distance of 800 m radius is devel-
oped (Schlossberg, 2007), which is relevant to the TOD
planning of Addis Ababa. Once the TOD study area is
demarcated, the variables that outline the SMCA for the
TOD index are specified. Thus, when such an index is
computed for each station area, recommendations can be
made on how to improve TOD around stations.
4.1. Identification of indicators
As mentioned in the literature, measuring the TOD levels of
areas means measuring the various indicators that define
the characteristics of TOD. These indicators are density,
land-use diversity, urban design, and distance to transit
(proximity), all of which are crucial for TOD. High urban
densities are essential for TOD because of the effective use
of land values around transit nodes. High density develop-
ment near stations also makes transits convenient and en-
courages ridership. Similarly, the diverse use of activities
creates a balanced and consistent flow of ridership
throughout the day. Proximity reduces regional congestion
and pollution and creates healthy walkable neighborhoods.
Design also plays a significant role in creating user-friendly
609
environments by encouraging pedestrians and bike users.
The utilization capacities of public spaces and parking fa-
cilities are fundamental indicators for TOD. Having public
spaces/green areas for TOD is essential as people come
together and enjoy their neighborhood. Providing optimum
parking spaces for cars and bicycles is also important. On
the basis of the above discussion, the indicators are sub-
sequently divided into measurable indicators, as presented
in Table 1. This list of indicators must fulfill the aim of TOD
measurement.
After calculating all indicators, SMCA is adopted to
compute the TOD index. GIS-based SMCA can be used to
assess multiple spatial indicators (Beukes et al., 2011). To
bring all spatial indicators into comparable units, the
maximum standardization method is used, where the
maximum indicator achieves value is 1, and the minimum is
0. The indicators have a directly proportional relationship
with the TOD index. Therefore, high values positively
contribute to the TOD index value.
4.2. Calculation of indicators
4.2.1. Density
4.2.1.1. Population density. The first indicator is popula-
tion density, which measures the proportion of residents
within each service area of 800 m. The 2017 population
census is used to identify the population density of dis-
tricts. By computing the population of a district with its
respective area, the population density data per district are
analyzed as follows in Formula 1.
PD Z NPOA ð1Þ
where PD Z Population density, NP Z District population,
A Z District area.
PA Z PDOSA ð2Þ
610 E.A. Teklemariam, Z. Shen

Table 1 Indicators and measurement variables of TOD.

Criterion Indicator Reference, Index
How dense are the - Population density People per m2
transit stations? - Commercial density Commercial/job per m2
Land-use diversity - Land-use mix Mix percentage
Destination to - Land-use mixedness Mixed-use index
accessibility
Distance to transit - Pedestrian path Walkable distance to
- Intersection density reach stations
Number of intersections
Design - Parking utilization Urban design principles:
- Open areas, green parking, open spaces,
spaces and design elements

where PA Z Buffer area population, PD Z Population
density, SAZ Buffer area coverage, TOD area Z 2.01 m2.
After finding the number of populations within each
800 m, population density is calculated. The population of
each resident is used to approximate the number of pop-
ulations that falls into the buffer.
Pd Z PROSA
where Pd Z Population density of the buffer area, PA Z
Population residence area, SAZ Buffer area coverage.
Each house unit holds five persons (according to Addis
Ababa’s standard and regulation).
4.2.1.2. Commercial density. Similarly, commercial den-
sity is calculated using the same method of calculating the
population density. First, the quantity of a retail building is
counted within a service area. The building footprint data
are used to approximate proportion.
CD Z NCOSA
where CD Z Commercial density, PA Z Number of com-
mercial activities, SAZ Buffer area coverage.
4.2.2. Land-use diversity
Land-use diversity is a critical measure to compile the TOD
index. Such diversity requires a balanced mix of different
land uses and is widely measured using an entropy method.
A high entropy value indicates high land-use diversity
within an area. The formula used to calculate this index is
the equation employed by Frank et al. (2006), depending on
the actual data availability. The land-use types considered
for this indicator are pure residential, mixed residential,
commercial, administration, service, religious place, and
open space. Fig. 3 shows the existing land use of a single
station.
Land  use mix Z  A = ðlnðNÞÞ
b3 Z Area Service; b4 Z Area Administration; b5 Z Area Open
space; b6 Z Area Religious.
4.2.3. Destination accessibility
4.2.3.1. Land-use mixedness. Land-use mixedness is used
to assess destination accessibility, which indicates the
easiness to access places within short trips. Land-use
ð3Þ
mixedness is also different from land-use diversity. It
measures the mixedness of residential land use with
other land uses. Non-work trips can be made on foot if
the residential land use is sufficiently mixed with other
land-use types. Zhang and Guindon (2006) revealed that
land-use mixedness can be computed using the following
equation:
X  X 
MlðiÞ Z Lo O ðLr þ Lo Þ ð6Þ
j j
where Ml(i) is the mixedness index of the catchment area
ð4Þ within 800 m radius; Lr and Lo refer to residential and non-
residential land uses, respectively. For each residential
point of “j”, the proportion of non-residential is calculated.
The mixedness value can range from 0 to 1; and the
balanced land-use mixedness is 0.5, implying equal share
between residential and non-residential land uses.
4.2.4. Distance to transit
4.2.4.1. Pedestrian path. Pedestrian path is calculated on
the basis of the length of accessible roads for pedestrians
within the analysis area by using ArcGIS. The unit of mea-
surement used is meters. All road networks are reclassified
on the basis of slow traffic, which is comfortable for pe-
destrians. Fast traffic roads that are inconvenient for pe-
destrians are removed from the road network data.
Schlossberg and Brown (2004) adopted the concept of
approximating walkable/cyclable path on the basis of the
ð5Þ reclassification of road networks.

where Area Z (b1/a)*ln (b1/a) þ (b2/a))ln (b2/a) þ (b3/a))
ln (b3/a) þ (b4/a))ln (b4/a) þ (b5/a))ln (b5/a).
P5
Therefore, A Z ðbi =aÞ  lnðbi =aÞ; where A Z Total
iZ1
m2 of all five land uses presented within the 800 m catch-
ment area, b1 Z Area Residential; b2 Z Area Commercial;
4.2.4.2. Intersection density. Intersection density is used
to measure the number of junctions of road networks
within the analysis area. High densities of intersections may
correspond to comfortable and walkable environments and
easily reach destinations (Ewing and Cervero, 2010).
Hence, intersection density is one aspect of walkability
LRT corridor in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Fig. 3 Existing land-use around St. Michael station.
because it helps shorten routes. Literature identifies
intersection frequency as a significant impact between
walking and transportation. ArcGIS is used to compute the
indicator.
4.2.5. Design
The design dimension investigates the built environment
related to the urban design and space utilization of the
analysis area, such as amenities, usage of parking areas,
and open/public spaces. This indicator influences the
quality of the city and provides a pleasant design around
transit nodes. Parking utilization indicates the efficient use
of spaces. Open/public spaces and surface parking are
investigated using GIS and aerial maps.
5. Result and discussion
The TOD index results of all 22 stations are presented in
Table 2. Stations with the highest and lowest TOD levels can
be compared with each other using the TOD index results.
This study is new for Ethiopia, thus the reference value may
differ from the literature. Thus, TOD index values must be
compared with each other depending on the existing con-
dition of neighborhoods for an improved TOD planning.
Depending on these results, stations that accommodate
transits to different transportation modes have high TOD
index scores. These stations are Megenagna, Mexico, Sta-
dium, Torhailoch, St. Ureal, and Gurdshola 1. Due to such
developmental characteristics around the nodes, scores for
criteria such as land-use diversity and density are high.
Moreover, transit services for these stations are compara-
tively higher than those for other stations.
Stations with the lowest scores along the LRT corridor
are Management Institute, Meri, Ayat, and CMC stations.
These nodes are mainly residential neighborhoods. All sta-
tions within the walking distance of transit nodes do not
accommodate parking lots for motorized and non-
611
motorized users. Safety, amenities, and open spaces for
green areas and other purposes are also deficient within
each station.
The final TOD index results are classified into four cat-
egories depending on the current characteristics of each
transit station. The highest TOD index value ranges from
0.82 to 0.91, whereas the lowest ranges from 0.45 to 0.54.
As noted, stations with high TOD index scores can reach
high TOD levels in terms of the characteristics of a place.
Table 2 shows the data used to support the definition of
TOD planning in each individual station.
This table gives a clear insight into the contribution of
each criterion toward the final TOD index. The results
indicate that transit nodes need improvements or should
incorporate new TOD. Moreover, this information can pro-
vide an improved understanding of how stations have good
potential for future growth. The TOD index of each station
along the corridor of the E-W line is spatially predicted in
Fig. 4.
According to the results, the top five stations are pre-
sented on the web diagram below. Megenagna, Mexico, St.
Estifanos, Stadium, and Gurshola 1 stations show high TOD
levels. These stations are the core of the city, which means
that they comparatively have maximum development
among all the stations, but they still hold potential for
improvements. Megenagna station has a relatively high
score in population density and in the balance between
residential and non-residential uses. The station is a major
transport hub and transfer point of the city. Megenaga
station is currently regarded as a significant urban devel-
opment area in Addis Ababa. However, the diverse uses of
activities and priorities to pedestrians need improvement
around this station area. Mexico and Stadium stations have
diverse uses of activities within the walking distance of the
study area. Addis Ababa is a polycentric city, and the hi-
erarchy of the development is along the network of the
LRT. Thus, it helps neighborhoods to have active character
612 E.A. Teklemariam, Z. Shen

Table 2 Criteria and TOD index values for all 22 stations.

Station Name Criteria
Density Diversity Distance Distance to Transit Design
Accessibility
Population Commercial Land-use Mixedness Pedestrian Intersection Parking Open Final Rank
density density diversity path density space index
Ayat 0.98 0.33 0.49 0.06 0.27 0.86 0 0.47 0.48 21
Meri 0.96 0.17 0.40 0.16 0.28 0.91 0 0.51 0.50 20
CMC 0.59 0.07 0.33 0.07 0.27 0.95 0 0.45 0.45 22
St. Michael 0.96 0.20 0.55 0.17 0.21 0.93 0 0.61 0.59 15
Civil Service 0.92 0.16 0.75 0.82 0.28 0.96 0 0.48 0.56 18
Management 0.95 0.17 0.72 0.80 0.27 0.78 0 0.47 0.54 19
Institute
Gurd Shola 1 0.94 0.18 0.72 0.76 0.29 0.35 0 0.82 0.82 5
Gurd Shola 2 0.96 0.07 0.68 0.86 0.26 0.57 0 0.65 0.71 11
Megenagna 0.95 0.48 0.31 0.81 0.27 0.62 0 0.86 0.91 1
Lem Hotel 0.83 0.50 0.58 0.75 0.52 0.73 0 0.72 0.74 10
Hayahulet 1 0.94 0.38 0.92 0.75 0.21 0.74 0 0.34 0.56 17
Hayahulet 2 0.94 0.08 0.58 0.78 0.23 0.87 0 0.42 0.58 16
St. Urael 0.75 0.29 0.64 0.45 0.23 0.84 0 0.76 0.70 12
Bambis 0.57 0.27 0.74 0.74 0.23 0,87 0 0.59 0.63 14
St. Estifanos 0.63 0.16 0.77 0.37 0.43 0.48 0 0.94 0.85 3
Stadium 0.60 0.31 0.78 0.67 0.52 0.36 0 0.92 0.82 4
Lagehar 0.87 0.33 0.78 0.59 0.41 0.38 0 0.84 0.79 6
Mexico 0.85 0.35 0.78 0.55 0.42 0.56 0 0.87 0.89 2
Tegbared 0.90 0.32 0.79 0.65 0.31 0.70 0 0.82 0.79 7
St. Lideta 0.94 0.21 0.73 0.78 0.27 0.74 0 0.78 0.78 8
Coca-cola 0.39 0.31 0.61 0.79 0.27 0.92 0 0.87 0.78 9
Tor Hayiloch 0.29 0.22 0.51 0.80 0.41 0.86 0 0.61 0.69 13

zones, but improvements are still needed. Similarly, St.
Estifanos and Gurdshola 1 stations have diverse uses of
activities within walking distance from the station. How-
ever, more or less, these stations provide transit systems
with intended hierarchies in terms of their current services
and sizes. Further attention is given to vehicular access,
which makes all stations not pedestrian user-friendly pla-
ces. St. Estifanos station can become a vibrant and
pedestrian-friendly area because of the public squares and
public spaces found within walking distance of the station.
Therefore, the TOD index can be used to make a TOD policy
by comparing different stations and identifying specific
problems of each station (see Fig. 5).
Fig. 6 presents a web diagram of the next seven stations,
namely, Leghar, Tegbared, St . Lideta, Coca-cola, Lem
Hotel, Gurd Shola 2, and St. Ureal. E-W LRT line intersects
the main corridor of the city connecting the urban with the
suburban areas with the transit system; thus, stations have
high potentials for TOD. These stations relatively share
similar patterns as they have high TOD index scores, which
imply that all stations lack good pedestrian paths, diverse
uses, and parking for motorized and non-motorized users.
As such, the stations seem to have the potential for im-
provements and new developments. Thus, in TOD policy
decisions, these stations should improve certain criteria or
indicators by identifying specific problems.
Except for Torhailoch station, all stations in Category 3
have high urban density scores, and these stations are
Bambis, St. Michael, Hayahulet 2, Hayahulet 1, and Civil
Service stations. The web diagram for these stations is
presented in Fig. 7 and each station seems to have a high
potential for improvement. These stations are sufficiently
close to the high centers of growth, yet they have low TOD
scores. Therefore, these stations can be prioritized for
improving the TOD around them. For example, the TOD
policy for Torhailoch station can enhance access to the
station, accommodating diverse uses and user-friendly en-
vironments to enhance the area. The TOD policy within
these stations should incorporate different commercial and
other services. Torhailoch is currently a significant trans-
portation hub and transfer point to the new expansion of
the city where the LRT line ends and transfers to bus lines;
therefore, an improved pedestrian path is recommended to
get easy access to another transport mode. As noted, to
improve the TOD quality in this significant corridor, all in-
dicators should be incorporated within these stations. Pri-
orities should be given to land-use diversity, mixedness,
transit to interchange from one mode of transport to
another, and user-friendly stations.
The lowest TOD scores are recorded for Ayat, Manage-
ment Institute, Meri, and CMC stations. The characteristics
of these stations are similar to those of suburban areas,
dominated by low-density residents in the outer district of
the city. TOD index scores significantly drop due to the
extreme importance of land-use diversity and density
within walking distance from stations. These stations
LRT corridor in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 613

Fig. 4 TOD index for the 22 stations of the E-W line.

A. Category 1: Top five stations

Fig. 5 Web diagram for the top five stations.

B. Category 2: Sixth and 12th ranks

614
Fig. 6 Web diagram for Category 2 stations.
C. Category 3: 13th and 18th ranks
relatively share a similar pattern. Further effort should be
made to improve the TOD around these stations by applying
all the involved indicators. The TOD policy must improve
land-use diversity; balance the relationship between resi-
dential land use and other land uses; and improve parking,
pedestrian-friendliness, and access to transport modes (see
Fig. 8).
5.1. Architectural and urban design characteristics
of nodes
The architectural and urban characteristics of each station
are analyzed, in addition to the initial results. Both factors
are analyzed according to street type specification (i.e.,
vehicular lane widths, number of lanes, pedestrian ac-
commodations, street trees, and light requirements), land-
use mix (in relative percentages of commercial, civic, res-
idential, and other uses), proximity to the urban core (in-
crease attractiveness), and closeness to nature (public
spaces, rivers, green areas). These scenarios are presented
E.A. Teklemariam, Z. Shen
if each result solidifies the character of the place to support
TOD. Thus, from each category, one station is selected for
further illustrative maps and details, depending on the
architectural and urban importance of each node.
5.1.1. Category 1 stations
St. Estifanos station is one of the five stations ranked in
Category 1, located in the core of the city. This station is
distinguished as an excellent location, with better access
and road infrastructure with proximity to entertainment
and conventional facilities compared to other stations (see
Table 3).
This neighborhood includes public spaces, such as public
squares (civic open spaces), green areas, civic spaces, and
stadiums (see Fig. 9).
The land use of the area is balanced and includes
schools, shopping malls, hotels, and office towers within
800 m walking distance from the station. Existing buildings
and uses to transition to high development intensity are
intended for future TOD. The historical importance of the
LRT corridor in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 615

Fig. 7 Web diagram for Category 3 stations.

D. Category 4: Bottom four stations

Fig. 8 Web diagram for Category 4 stations.

place, where the United Nations Economic Commission for 5.1.2. Category 2 stations
Africa headquarters and city palaces are located within Lagehar station is one of the earliest and historic cores of
walking distance from the station, provides opportunities the city. This neighborhood includes the oldest railway
for development (see Fig. 10). station in the city, indicating that the area accommodates a
616 E.A. Teklemariam, Z. Shen

Table 3 Characteristics of Category 1 stations.

Rank Node Street Type Specification Land-use Mix Proximity to the Urban Core Closeness to Nature
1 Megenagna Medium High High High
Mexico Medium High High Medium
St. Estifanos Medium High High High
Stadium Medium High High High
Gurdshola 1 Medium High Medium Low

Fig. 9 Existing land use and vehicular access of St. Estifanos station (top right) and section of the main arterial street (bottom).

Fig. 10 Meskel Square (left), Meskel Square during religious festivities (right).
LRT corridor in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 617

Table 4 Characteristics of Category 2 stations.

Rank Node Street Type Specification Land-use Mix Proximity to Urban Core Closeness to Nature
2 Lagehar Medium High High High
Tegbared Medium High High Low
St. Lideta Low High Medium Medium
Coca-cola Low Medium Medium Medium
Lemhotel Medium Medium Medium Low
Gurd Shola 2 Low High Medium Low
St. Urael Low High High Medium

Fig. 11 Existing land use and vehicular access of Lagehar station.

618 E.A. Teklemariam, Z. Shen

Fig. 12 Existing land use and vehicular access of Torhailoch station and section of the main arterial street.

Table 5 Characteristics of Category 3 stations.

Rank Node Street Type Specification Land-use Mix Proximity to Urban Core Closeness to Nature
3 Torhailoch High Medium Medium Medium
Bambis Medium High Medium Low
St. Michael Medium Medium Medium Low
Hayhulet 2 Low Medium High Low
Hayhulet 1 Low High High Low
Civil Service High High Medium Low

relative percentage of commercial, civic, residential, and
other users with good access connectivity within a specific
study area. Among the stations in Category 2, Leghar sta-
tion tends to have the highest score in architectural and
urban design. Development is ongoing, and the new
development displays an integrated mixed-used develop-
ment to foster a neighborhood employment center with
significant regional retail and residential uses within the
convenient walking distance from the train station. The
existing condition of the location, building height, and
different activities in the area indicate the potential of the
place for improvement (see Table4).
The historic railway station is built to connect Ethiopia
to the capital of Djibouti. The station is the main core of
the city. The architectural style of the buildings and
neighborhoods is French, reflecting the nationality of the
builders. The existing road section of the main arterial
street accommodates the same in St. Estifanos station (see
Fig. 11).
5.1.3. Category 3 stations
Torhailoch station is a significant transportation hub and
transfer point to the new expansion of the city where the
LRT line ends. Torhailoch station is one of the most urban
development areas of Addis Ababa. The area has a high
potential for housing because of the closeness to public
transportation. Residential units with major governmental
offices dominate the place. The street pattern prioritizes
motor vehicles, giving discomfort to pedestrians. The major
streets are dominated by government buildings, making the
streets frontage inactive and not user-friendly. This node is
considered to have a great potential for TOD because of its
location and closeness to public transport (see Fig. 12 and
Table 5).
LRT corridor in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 619

Fig. 13 Existing land use and vehicular access of Meri, Ayat, and CMC stations.

5.1.4. Category 4 stations
CMC, Meri, and Ayat stations are the modern suburbs in the
eastern part of Addis Ababa. Management Institute station
shares the same characteristic pattern with the three other
stations, but this station includes certain services and
governmental offices. When the city horizontally expands
its development, new housing policies offer low-density
residents to live in the outer district of the city. These
neighborhoods accommodate blocks of residential units
where shops, services, and institutions are located along
620
Table 6 Key design guidelines for TOD derived from
indicators.
Dimension/ Recommended guideline
Indicator
Density - Provide high densities to enhance
transit investments
- Allow high-density development
- Allow taper densities with distance
from stations
- “Wedding cake” density
development
- Allow tall buildings, following the
existing development of areas (set
floor area ratios)
- Ensure comfortable walking dis-
tances between points (i.e., 800 m)
- Provide affordable housing options
(housing typology)
Diversity - Intensify land uses (provide com-
mercial uses, jobs, parks, civic cen-
ters within walking distance of the
transit).
- Provide services within a radius of
800 m (at least six services)
- Avoid monotony in terms of use and
appearance
- Avoid uniform planning regulations
- Create a sense of identity depending
on the environment of the place
- Avoid long streets (break up with
parks and other public spaces)
Public space - Provide accessible and useable green
spaces that comprise 20%e40% of
neighborhoods and must be within
800 m.
- Include natural elements to design
public spaces (rivers, fountains,
green areas, trees)
- Make public spaces the focus of
building orientation and pedestrian
activity (i.e., cluster benches and
sitting ledges, provide special public
arts, accommodate outdoor activ-
ities, encourage water features, and
discourage large setbacks)
- Provide large shade trees
- Create landmarks and gateways to
development
Connection/Density - Provide small blocks to comply with
intersection the standard of walking (on an
average block of 400e500 m)
- Provide pedestrian/cyclist-friendly
streets that directly connect local
destinations
- Avoid cul-de-sacs or dead ends
Pedestrian/Cyclist - Design wide sidewalks wherever
orientation possible
- Provide safe street crossing with long
pedestrian signal timing on wide
streets
E.A. Teklemariam, Z. Shen
Table 6 (continued )
Dimension/ Recommended guideline
Indicator
- Provide continuous sidewalk
networks
- Give priority to pedestrians and cy-
clists when designing projects
- Limit cars on commercial streets
- Apply traffic calming devices (i.e.,
speed bumps, medians, low speeds,
signal timing, and narrow roadways)
- Introduce shared bikes around transit
stations
Parking/Car - Create segregated bus lanes
movement - Limit motorized traffic speed
- Eliminate minimum parking
requirements
- Provide enclosed parking buildings if
possible
- Create awareness on the need to
prioritize people over motorized in
the street design
User-friendliness - Ensure high-quality design of main
transit stops
- Provide attractive, comfortable,
informative, and sheltered transit
stops
- Ensure their accessibility and safety
to all users (handicapped, children,
elders)
- Ensure modal integration (i.e., con-
nections between buses and trains)
the train line. The area is designed with a grid pattern of
streets that is different from the other part of the city. The
neighborhood includes a courtyard playground within the
blocks designed and equipped for children’s recreation.
These four stations have low TOD index values. Thus, this
new expansion neighborhood needs new TOD policies and
proposals. The main arterial street section of these stations
is the same as that of Torhailoch station (see Fig.13).
6. Recommendation
After identifying the significant hotspot indicators, the design
guidelines related to these indicators are made certain. Many
discussions on TOD in academic literature to date are limited
to planning and policy measurements, such as integration of
land use and transit and implementation of development and
control (Curtis et al., 2009). Thus, urban design issues related
to TOD indicators are quite limited to date. Therefore,
depending on the local nature of the environment and system
of the local governance, specific principles and models of
urban designs related to TOD are recommended in this article.
The recommended guidelines of TOD designs are suitable for
the Addis Ababa context.
Moreover, depending on the dimensions identified in the
TOD index and its results, design guidelines are
LRT corridor in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 621

Table 7 Criteria holding the potentials for improvement of each station.

Number Station name Criterion with the most potential for improvement as inferred on the results
1. Megenagna Density, diversity, pedestrian connectivity, connection, parking, and user-
friendliness
2. Mexico Density, diversity, pedestrian connectivity, connection, parking, and user-
friendliness
3. St. Estifanos Density, pedestrian connectivity, transit, parking, and user-friendliness
4. Stadium Density, pedestrian connectivity, connection, parking, and user-friendliness
5. Gurdshola 1 Density, pedestrian connectivity, connection, parking, user-friendliness
6. Lagehar Density, diversity, open space, pedestrian connectivity, parking, connection,
7. Tegbared and user-friendliness
8. St. Lideta
9. Coca-cola
10. Lem Hotel
11. Gurd Shola 2
12. St. Urael
13. Torhailoch Density, diversity, pedestrian connectivity, open spaces, parking, connection,
14 Bambis and user-friendliness
15 St. Michael
16. Hayhulet 2
17. Hayhulet 1
18. Civil Service
19. Management Institute New TOD policy starting from 400 m buffer
20. Meri
21. Ayat
22. CMC

recommended for improving specific criteria or indicators, 7. Conclusion

namely, density, diversity, public space, pedestrian/cyclist
orientation, car movement and parking, connection, and
transit system (see Table 6).
Based on the information in the web diagram and
architectural and urban analysis of each station, design
guidelines are recommended for improving specific in-
dicators. For Megenagna and Mexico stations, TOD policy
should improve urban density, diversity, walkability for
pedestrians, parking, and the safety of transit stations. St.
Estifanos station must improve commercial density,
pedestrian connectivity, transit, parking, and user-
friendliness of the neighborhood. TOD policy for Stadium
and Gurdshola 1 stations should focus on improving urban
density, pedestrian connectivity, connection, parking, and
user-friendliness of transit nodes. Gurdshola 1 should also
improve the user-friendliness and access of the transit in-
dicator. Almost all stations in Categories 2 and 3 must
improve density, diversity, open space, parking, pedestrian
and cyclist orientation, and user-friendliness. An improve-
ment in the latter should mean an increase in TOD for an
improved accessibility and functionality of the node.
The last four stations should focus on developing new
TOD areas starting within 400 m walking distance from the
station. New TOD should be incorporated in these stations.
Thus, a TOD index can be used to make TOD planning by
comparing stations located in different parts of the city.
Thus, planners and designers should focus on the detailed
criteria and indicators before proposing TOD for a node (see
Table 7).
This article uses the approaches of quantifying TOD around
existing stations of Addis Ababa through the TOD index to
measure the TOD of transit stations. The 5D principles are
employed to measure the development and related factors
that influence ridership. The literature review provides the
indicators related to the study area that are needed to
measure the potential of TOD. The indicators selected for
this research are density, diversity, destination accessi-
bility, distance to transit, and design, all of which are the
ideal and well-established indicators of TOD around transit
stations. The result shows that only five out of 22 stations
have high TOD index scores because of the existing char-
acteristics of these stations. Consequently, four stations
have low TOD index scores, as the existing built environ-
ment is mainly a residential neighborhood. Therefore, the
E-W LRT line of Addis Ababa has a high potential for TOD
because the development is along the LRT line.
This article elaborates how the TOD index can be useful
for planners and designers to plan TOD by comparing the
existing characteristics around different transit stations.
Each station should be treated according to its unique
characteristics and problems to obtain the best TOD index
results. The TOD index indicators cannot only improve
transit nodes but also can be involved in improving Addis
Ababa at large level. Therefore, the TOD index can improve
development around transit stations and access to transit
at various locations in the city. The index is also helpful in
identifying which parts of the city have high or low scores
622 E.A. Teklemariam, Z. Shen

for its development. For this significance, the methodology Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook,
can make it easy for planners to inform planning, funding, third ed., vol. 17. Transport Research Board of the National
and investment policies for TOD. By improving such kinds of Academies, U.S.A.
developments around transit nodes, the TOD planning sys- Evans, J.E., Kiran, U.B., Katherine, F.T., 2007. Traveler response
to transportation system changes. Transit Cooperative
tem can be further helpful in making each station more
Research Program, Washington, DC (Chapter 14): Road Value
accessible, functional, and vibrant than before. Pricing.
Ewing, R., Cervero, R., 2010. Travel and the built environment. J.
References Am. Plann. Assoc. 76, 265e294.
Frank, L., Sallis, J., Conway, T., Chapman, J., Saelens, B.,
Bachman, W., 2006. Many pathways from land use to health:
Atkinson-Palombo, C., Kuby, M.J., 2011. The geography of advance
association between neighborhood walkability and active
transit-oriented development in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona,
transportation, body mass index, and air quality. J. Am. Plann.
2000-2007. J. Transport Geogr. 19 (2), 189e199.
Assoc. 2, 75e87.
ITDP., 2014. TOD Standard v2.1. Institute for Transportation &
Kamruzzaman, M., Baker, D., Washington, S., Turrell, G., 2014.
Development Policy.
Advance transit-oriented development typology: case study in
Belzer, D., Sujata, S., Jeff, W., Ellen, G., 2011. Transit-Oriented
Brisbane, Australia. J. Transport Geogr. 34, 54e70.
Development (TOD) and Employment. Reconnecting America and
Papa, E., Bertolini, L., 2015. Accessibility and transit-oriented
the Center for Transit-Oriented Development, Washington, DC.
development in European metropolitan areas. J. Transport
Bernick, M., Cervero, R., 1997. Transit Villages in the 21st Century.
Geogr. 47, 70e83.
McGraw-Hill, New York.
Park, Y., Huang, S., Newman, G., 2016. A statistical meta-analysis
Beukes, E.A., Vanderschuren, M.J.W.A., Zuidgeest, M.H.P., 2011.
of the design components of new urbanism on housing prices. J.
Context-sensitive multimodal road planning: a case study in
Plann. Lit. 31 (4), 435e451.
Cape Town, South Africa. J. Transport Geogr. 19, 452e460.
Parker, T., McKeever, M., Arrington, G., Smith-Heimer, J., 2002.
Bostic, R., Marlon, B., Evgeny, B., Andrew, E.r, Seva, R., Raul, S.,
Statewide Transit-Oriented Development Study: Factors for
Huê-Tâm, J., 2018. Sustainable and Affordable Housing Near
Success in California.
Rail Transit: Refining and Expanding a Scenario Planning Tool.
Renne, J.L., 2009. From transit-adjacent to transit-oriented
Los Angeles. M.E.T.R.A.N.S. Transportation Center.
development. Local Environ. 14 (1), 1e15.
Calthorpe, P., 1993. The Next American Metropolis e Ecology.
Renne, J.L., Wells, J.S., 2005. Research Results Digest 294 - Transit-
Community and the American Dream. Princeton Architectural
Oriented Development: Developing a Strategy to Measure Suc-
Press, Canada.
cess. Transport Research Board of the National Academies.
Cascetta, E., Pagliara, F., 2008. Integrated railways-based policies:
Schlossberg, M., 2007. From TIGER to audit instruments: using GIS-
the regional metro system (R.M.S.) project of naples and cam-
based street data to measure neighborhood walkability. Trans-
pania. Transport Pol. 15.
port. Res. Rec.: Journal of the Transportation Research Board
Cervero, R., 2004. Transit-Oriented Development in the United
48e56.
States: Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects. Transportation
Schlossberg, M., Brown, N., 2004. Comparing transit-oriented
Research Board of the National Academies.
development sites by walkability indicators. Transport. Res.
Cervero, R., Bosselmann, P., 1998. Transit villages: assessing the
Rec.: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 34e42.
market potential through visual stimulation. J. Architect.
Thomas, R., Bertolini, L., 2014. Beyond the case study dilemma in
Plann. Res. 15 (3), 181e196.
urban planning: using a meta-matrix to distil critical success
Cervero, R., Ferrell, C., Murphy, S., 2002. Transit-oriented devel-
factors in transit-oriented development. Urban Pol. Res. 32,
opment and joint development in the United States: a literature
219e237.
review. T.C.R.P. Research Results Digest.
Thomas, R., Bertolini, L., 2015. Defining Critical Success Factors in
Curtis, C., Renne, J.L., Bertolini, L., 2009. Introduction. In:
TOD Implementation Using a Rough Set Analysis Journal of
Curtis, C., Renne, J.L., Bertolini, L. (Eds.), Transit-Oriented
Transport and Land Use.
Development: Making it Happen. Ashgate e-Book, 3e12.
Zhang, Y., Guindon, B., 2006. Using satellite remote sensing to
Dittmar, H., Poticha, S., 2004. Defining transit-oriented develop-
survey transport-related urban sustainability. Part 1: method-
ment: the new regional building block. In: Dittmar, H.,
ologies for Indicator Quantification. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs.
Ohland, G. (Eds.), The New Transit Town - Best Practices in
Geoinf. 8, 149e164.
Transit-Oriented Development. Island Press, pp. 19e39.
Evans, J.E., Pratt, R.H., 2007. Transit-oriented development,
transit cooperative research program (T.C.R.P. In: Report 95: