La actividad V: El movimiento de Rotación de la Tierra

What is transit oriented development? Even though it has been understood as an urban form with a high quality pedestrian environment, a mixture of land uses with various densities in close proximity to transit corridors or stations, the emphasis of these attributes in the definition of TOD varies across fields and latitudes. The idea of urban development or the built

environment with high transit orientation exists before the automobile era. However, it is after the advent of automobiles that the definition and implementation of TOD is challenging as a result of significant changes on travel patterns and thus on urban development, such as the emergence of suburbanization, and thus some scholars argue that TOD should not be seen as a panacea in order to address this phenomena (Dittmar & Poticha, 2004).

In the urban design field, TOD emerged as a concept characterized by the organization of urban growth in compact urban forms supporting transit, promoting the location of activity nodes within walking distance of transit stations, generating pedestrian environments connecting to local destinations, providing a mixture of different housing typologies in terms of densities and costs, making development oriented towards high quality public spaces and encouraging infill and redevelopment measures along transit corridors (Calthorpe, 1993).

Another approach towards the definition of TOD suggests this concept should be understood in terms of its performance. In this way, TOD can be measure and assessed by different actors in relation to the achievement of five goals. First, the location efficiency goal refers to assess the accessibility the transit node provides to users and residents in relation to connect them with their destinations at the local and regional levels. Second, the rich mix of choices goal seeks to evaluate the diversity of the urban environment in close proximity to

28

benefits introduced by the transit investment. Fourth, the place making goal refers to the

influence of urban design features such as pedestrian infrastructure and public spaces creating a more vibrant place that is attractive for visitors and riders. Fifth, the assessment of how a TOD environment make a transit station or stop more vibrant place instead of being a transit node facilitating the flow of passengers towards their destinations (Dittmar & Poticha, 2004).

In the smart growth literature, TOD has been conceived as part of land use and economic development strategies to generate more compact urban forms, focusing on higher densities along transit corridors. The smart growth movement seeks to reduce urban sprawl patterns

characterized by low densities, car-oriented developments, and homogenous urban environments. In opposition to urban sprawl, the smart growth approach suggests to promote more compact urban developments, pedestrian friendly with a mixture of land uses, transit, and the

revitalization of the urban environment. The smart growth approach also seeks to preserve green areas from being urbanized through suburbanization patterns such as urban sprawl. In this way, smart growth is understood as a land use planning strategy that promotes higher densities along transit corridors in order to dis-incentivize the use of automobiles and contribute on the reduction of urban sprawl patterns based on the idea to give priority to transit investments over investments for highways (Knaap & Talen, 2005).

A distinction in the smart growth literature highlights the difference between the concepts transit-adjacent development and transit-oriented development. The former refers to

developments located next to or adjacent to transit investments but they do not necessarily take all the advantages in terms of location near transit, especially in terms of densities and

transportation modes. The difference in the transit-oriented development concept relies on the connectivity this urban environment provides in terms of local accessibility, pedestrian and bike

29

friendly environments, mixture of land uses with high-density developments including office and retail spaces (Renne, 2009). This distinction becomes important given that in addition to smart growth policies focusing on concentrating development in close proximity to transit, the quality of the built environment including additional features such as public spaces, pedestrian

infrastructure and transfer between transportation modes becomes relevant.

In the new urbanism literature, TOD is a concept embraced by advocates of more compact urban forms with high quality walking environment, with a mixture of land uses and several housing typologies and transit friendly. The new urbanism movement is mainly focused on the urban design approach and thus on the physical aspects of the urban environment in terms of architecture and urban space (Knaap & Talen, 2005). In this approach, transit is seen as an additional factor that makes the urban environment more livable but urban transport is not the focus of attention on this approach. The TOD concept in the new urbanism literature has a stronger connection with how the urban space benefits from a transit friendly environment rather than how the built environment is developed in relation to transit investments.

In the transportation planning field, transit agencies have defined TOD according to some features characterizing this type of urban form in close proximity to transit nodes such as high quality pedestrian environments, mixture of land uses, and high-density developments within a diverse urban environment. Local governments in US metropolitan areas have defined TOD from a regulatory approach by determining specific zoning frameworks for transit zone districts, specifying changes on floor area ratio (FAR) in relation to the proximity to transit nodes, with the aim to leverage investments with a more permissive zoning standard (Cervero et al., 2004). However, some studies have challenged the idea of the necessity to have transit for TOD. This idea questions to what extent transit plays an important role in areas considered TOD in relation

30

to the reduction of trips by automobiles. The study of household characteristics and travel

behavior of residents in areas in close proximity to rail stations in New Jersey found that housing typologies, density, access to bus services, and availability of parking facilities (off-street and on-street) are playing a more important role explaining the reduction of road congestion and automobile pollution (Chatman, 2013).

Studies looking at the capacity of transit to generate TOD have been mainly focused on rail investments. The well-known study looking at land development impacts of the Bay Area Rapid Transit System (BART) in San Francisco found TOD features around two BART stations: Pleasant Hill and Fremont. This study conducted matched-pair analyses between BART

corridors with freeways corridors in order to compare land use changes between both areas. This study also conducted analysis of land use changes over time around selected BART corridors and stations. The findings of this study suggest a significant difference with more multifamily

developments along the BART corridor than the control area. The findings suggest multifamily housing developments tended to occur more in higher density areas and closer to transit stations (Cervero & Landis, 1997). This study conducted predictions of land use changes with binomial logit and regression models. This study also found the supremacy of downtown San Francisco attracting developments after the implementation of BART.

The study of the implementation of the light rail transit (LRT) in Denver (Colorado, USA) and the impacts of this transportation investment on land use and urban form was conducted by looking at land use and development changes within a half mile areas around current and proposed rail transit stations. The comparison between the study areas in terms of the increase on residential units, square feet of retail and office spaces suggests TOD designated areas within half a mile transit, especially in the downtown area, have experienced a more

31

intense land use change and higher concentration of developments from 1997 to 2010. At the regional level, TOD areas concentrated 65.6% of the residential development, 59.9% of office development and 18.6% of retail development (Ratner & Goetz, 2013). These findings suggest smart growth policies promoting developments in TOD areas not only attract investments but also increase densities and the mixture of land uses.

Another study conducted in Minneapolis (Minnesota, USA) estimated the effect of the light rail transit (LRT) on land use change. This study estimated land use changes over time with logit models and a quasi-experimental design with a difference in difference estimation looking at the effect of proximity to the LRT within half a mile before, during and after the construction of this transit project. At the corridor level, the study found that proximity to the LRT increases the likelihood of land use change on single family and industrial land uses (Hurst & West, 2014). The results of this study suggest land parcels within half a mile of LRT stations experience a small increase in the likelihood of land use change during the operation of the system. The study of the expansion of the Line B of the Metro system in Mexico City which opened between 1999 and 2000 has been studied in terms of the impacts on land use and density (Erick Guerra, 2014). This study compares the percentage of residents and population densities between 1994 and 2007. The findings suggests Line B had an impact in terms of increasing densities around stations but little to no impacts in relation to commercial land uses due to the absence of commercial developments in downtown areas served by this transit investment.

Despite the remarkable experience of Curitiba encouraging high density along BRT corridors, little is known about the extent by which BRT systems can generate or stimulate TOD (Gakenheimer et al., 2011). Within the range of mass transportation investments, BRT systems have been seen by some local actors as temporary investments without the capacity to generate

32

transit-oriented development (TOD) features along the BRT corridors. Emerging studies in Latin America looking at development impacts of BRT are at an early stage. One study conducted with data at the corridor and station levels in Quito and Bogota with quasi-experimental designs found mixed results. Some areas around stations have high development activity but other areas around stations have fewer development activity. In both cities, the findings suggest the strongest effect is taking place around the BRT terminals and stations built in the first stages of the systems (Rodriguez et al., 2015). This finding is related to the fact that stations built at the early stage have had more time to experience development or redevelopment while the BRT terminals imply the construction of large transportation hubs including land acquisition measures. However, the study lacks a method to determine if the treatment and control areas are similar before treatment as well as the data is not measured and analyzed at the parcel level.

Empirical evidence on BRT’s effects on urban development, redevelopment, and land use change is still limited. The capacity of BRT systems to promote TOD is still an open debate characterized by some skepticism. The emergence of the bus rapid transit oriented development (BRT-OD) concept in the literature is still at early stages. This concept is based on the idea that BRT systems can generate the same impacts that have been found on rail-based systems in terms of ridership, development, property values and land use (Zegras et al., 2016). Tools and barriers to promote TOD with bus rapid transit were identified as part of a survey conducted with planners from 27 cities implementing BRT systems in different parts of the world (Cervero & Dai, 2014). The top five tools identified as part of this survey are infrastructure improvements in TOD, zoning incentives and density bonuses, capital funds for TOD and streamline permitting, but the effectiveness rate of these tools received a medium to low rating by participants

33

promote TOD are lack of dedicated funding for TOD, absence of TOD plans, lack of institutional coordination, little local expertise with TOD and weak political support.

The emergence of the BRT-OD concept is still in an early stage considering the recent implementation of BRT systems, the few studies looking at land use and development impacts and the challenge of research methods that can capture the effects of the BRT system on urban development. In the next section, a review of the relationship between bus rapid transit and affordable housing is conducted based on an equity approach. The review seeks to discuss the extent by which the literature has explored if the development impacts of BRT generated or not opportunities to provide access to land and housing for low-income groups.

34

Table 1 Selected studies relationship BRT with property values, land use and development

City (Country) Authors Data Source Results

Bus Rapid Transit – BRT

Latin America

Bogotá

(Colombia) (D. A. Rodriguez & Targa, 2004) 494 multifamily residential properties in a 1.5-km area around two corridors of Bogotá, Colombia’s BRT

Premium of 6.8 to 9.3% for every 5 minutes walking time closer to BRT station

(Perdomo-Calvo et

al., 2007) 304 residential properties and 40 commercial properties with or without access to Bogotá, Colombia’s BRT

No premium was detected in 5 out of 6 tests. When significant, a 22% premium for properties with BRT access was detected

(Ramon Munoz-

Raskin, 2010) 130 692 new properties registered by the Bogotá, Colombia Department of Housing control between 2001 and 2004 and within BRT or its feeder lines

Premium for properties less than five minutes walking from BRT’s feeder lines.

(Rodríguez & Mojica, 2009)

Asking prices of residential properties belonging to an intervention area

(N = 1407 before, 1570 after) or a control area (N = 267 before, 732 after) and offered for sale (2001 – 2006) within 500m and between 500m and 1km

Properties offered during the year the extension was inaugurated and in subsequent years have asking prices that are between 13% and 14% higher than prices for properties in the control area

(Bocarejo et al.,

2012) Population density, housing, commercial, and office built areas at UPZ level (Zoning and Planning Unit)

Significant increase in density relative to zones where the system is not available. This increase is even greater in outer zones served by feeder routes.

Presence of the BRT does not induce a higher increase in built areas for commercial, office, or even residential use

(Daniel A Rodriguez, Vergel-Tovar, & Camargo, 2015).

Bogotá: i) new area built (m2_{) per} area/zone (2001-2010); ii) number of building permits issued per area/zone (2001-2010); and iii) changes in actual land use between years.

Quito: i) the number of new housing units offered per area/zone (2002-2011); ii) the new area built, in square meters per area/zone (2002-2011); and iii) the average offering price ($/m2) new units per year.

Bogotá: i) built area: control (18% and 10,6% increased), treatment (43.8%; 27.57%; 18.76); b) building permits: control (1.04 and 0,75 permits/ha), treatment (2.29, 2.21 and 1.90 permits/ha); c) land use (m2 _{of change): control (commercial 0.91, residential 0.21), treatment} (commercial 4.70, 2.49, 2.33, residential 19.13 and -4.57, 6.39, 4.81). Quito: i) housing units (Trolebús-South extension- change): single family control (-100%), treatment (105%), apartments control (208%), treatment (178%); ii) built area: single family control (- 100%), treatment (179%), apartments control (219%), treatment (200%); iii) average offering price: single family control (-100%), treatment (35%), apartments control (23%), treatment (29%). (Combs &

Rodríguez, 2014)

Pre- and post-test household level data on vehicle ownership, mobility needs, and financial resources.

Lower odds of vehicle ownership for higher wealth households, relative to similar households in a control area

35

BRT access (location trunk and feeder routes).

Urban form (density, street network design, land use diversity, and destination accessibility).

relationship becomes insignificant)

Increase in vehicle ownership among lower wealth households in trunk-served areas (full models)

(Cervero & Dai,

2014) Cadastre land parcel data in Bogota (1km trunk and 500m feeder routes buffer areas)

BRT Bogota percent changes FAR: 5% (phase 1); 7% (phase 2); 5% (phase 3); 7% (feeders); rest of city (10%).

North America

Los Angeles (California, USA)

(Cervero & Duncan, 2002)

3803 sales of properties in multi-family housing in Los Angeles during 2000

No evidence of appreciable effects Pittsburgh

(USA) (Perk, Mugharbel, & Catalá, 2010) 6,654 observations of all properties within one-half mile of the nearest station on the East Busway (property value of at least $10,000 and no more than $750,000)

From 101 to 100 feet from a station increases property value approximately $18.90; and moving from 1,001 to 1,000 ft increases property value by approximately $2.71

Eugene (USA) (Nelson et al., 2013) Employment data change within 0.25 and 0.50 miles of BRT stations. LED data collected for Lane County

jobs grew within 0.25 miles of BRT stations

Within 0.25 miles of BRT stations, jobs increased by more than 10%. Between 0.25 and 0.50 miles from BRT stations, several sectors lost jobs

Boston (USA) (Perk et al., 2012) Condominium units sales price 2000/2001 (n=437) and 2007/2009 (n=895); Condominiums sales by ward 2000/2001 (n=437) and 2007/2009 (n=895)

Average sale price per square foot change 71.4% (2000-2005), change -11.5% (2005-2009), change 51.7% (2000–2009). Condo sale price BRT premium approximately 7.6 %

increase number of parcels converted to condominium classification (2003 to 2009)

Asia

Seoul (Korea) (R. Cervero & C. D.

Kang, 2011) 187,000 parcel observations (the majority of which were residential properties) within 2150 m of a BRT stop and half kilometre. 52,000 single-family residential parcels tracked for the 2001– 2007 period

Land price premiums of up to 10% for residences within 300 m of BRT stops and more than 25% for retail and other non-residential uses over a smaller impact zone of 150 m

Seoul (Korea) (Jun, 2012) Monthly rents residential and non- residential spaces by land use zone (LUZ) 2003 interregional Input-Output

Transaction Table. 2006 Household Travel Survey. Employment and

household data. 23 land use zones (LUZ)

BRT did not significantly affect rent, changing monthly rent per m2 by an average of US$1.00

CBD: Commercial and industrial monthly rents increased by US$3.50 and US$2.70 per m2_{. Residential rentals increased $0.60 per m}2 Beijing (China) (Deng & Nelson, Asking prices previously owned Asking price of apartments in the BRT catchment area (500mts) was

36

2010) apartments (RMB/m2) in catchment area (N=252 in 2003; N=265 in 2004; N=525 in 2009) and control area (N=304 in 2003; 325 in 2004; N=487 in 2009) 2003 (before the opening of BRT), 2004 (construction phase) and 2009 (4 years after the full operation of BRT)

1.08% (2003), 1.12% (2004) and 11.04% (2009) higher than that in the control area.

Average values of residential properties near a BRT station increased faster (annually 2.3% higher) than those not served by the BRT (2004-2009)

37