The Impact of Bus Rapid Transit on Land

The Impact of Bus Rapid Transit on Land Development Ph. D Student: Taotao Deng Supervisor: Professor John Nelson Professor Bill Neill Centre for Transport Research University of Aberdeen http: //www. abdn. ac. uk/ctr/ CTR seminar, 17 th February 2010

Presentation Overview 1. Introduction 2. Critical review of literature : Gaps 3. Methodology 4. Beijng — BRT line 1 5. Analysis of BRT Corridor 6. Conclusions

1 Introduction 1. 1 Urban transport problems Do we deserve these? Sustainability of urban transport development ? ? ?

1 Introduction 1. 2 Limited development of rail transit High investment costs High operating costs Long construction period Rail-based transit is recognized as a good solution to the growing traffic congestion problem, but the construction investment and operating deficits have caused an enormous debt burden on the city. Cost-effectiveness? ? ? ü Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is considered as a lower cost rapid transit solution.

1 Introduction 1. 3 Major Elements of BRT Definition “Rapid mode of transportation that can combine the quality of rail transit and the flexibility of buses”. --- Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Exclusive Busway Advanced Vehicle Enhanced Station Bus Rapid Transit Off-board Fare Collection High-Quality Bus Systems; Frequent Service Metro-Bus; ITS Applications Busway Systems; Surface Metro;

1 Introduction 1. 4 Some BRT examples Curitiba – Metrobus Brisbane – South East Busway Bogotá – Trans. Milenio Quito – Trolebús Photo source: Karl Fjellstrom, ITDP

1 Introduction 1. 5 Research objectives Research Objectives The research seeks to shed light on the impact of BRT on land development. By addressing this question, it is expected to make a contribution in two areas: 1) To better understand whether BRT systems could deliver a high quality service? 2) To examine whether BRT benefits, specifically travel time saving, has influenced land development around BRT stations. The proposed work is intended to fulfill the following objectives: • 1) Carry out a comprehensive literature review focused on the impacts of Mass Transit systems on land development • 2) Conduct a BRT passenger survey to investigate public perception of BRT service. • 3) Conduct interviews with selected stakeholders to identify the possible impact of BRT on land development • 4) Collect longitudinal data to evaluate the spatial and temporal impacts of Beijing BRT line 1 on land development • 5) Formulate policy recommendations on future development of BRT.

2 Literature Review 2. 1 Gaps BRT has become an efficient mobility solution to traffic problems. The impact of BRT on land development remains largely unexplored. BRT experience in Asian cities has been less recorded, although some BRT systems have been successfully introduced in Asia. A growing body of evidence suggests BRT has a positive impact on land value uplift. Understanding whether capitalization effect occurs is becoming increasingly important, as land value uplift conferred by BRT could be part of strategies contributing to BRT project funds. A detailed study should be carried out to evaluate the performance of Bus Rapid Transit, including technical performance, customer perception and land development impacts, in support of the development of more informed guide to BRT investment policy.

3 Methodology 3. 1 Research process flowchart Literature Review SWOT analysis of BRT in Chinese context BRT corridor analysis “Soft data” “Hard data” BRT passenger survey Interviews with stakeholders Real Estate Agents Decision makers Conclusion and suggestions “Hard data” Longitudinal analysis Business owners

3 Methodology 3. 2 fieldwork process The route and stations of Southern Axis BRT Line 1

3 Methodology 3. 3 The transport investment life cycle Project development Planning Phase BRT proposal Construction Phase Feasibility study Construction study Operation Phase Trial operation Full operation Year March 2003 April 2003 Early 2004 December 2005 Figure: Timeline of key events in the evolution of Beijing Southern Axis BRT line 1

4 Beijing — BRT line 1 4. 1 BRT development in China Beijing ü National Transport Policy BRT is promoted as a lower cost rapid transit solution. Existing BRT systems • • • Proposed BRT systems The first BRT line was launched in Dec. 2004 in Beijing. 10 cities have implemented BRT systems. More than 15 cities are now constructing or planning BRT systems.

4 Beijing — BRT line 1 4. 2 Study area description 1) Economic growth • High-speed economic development since 1978 • The per capita GDP: 63, 029 Yuan/year in 2008, the second highest in China 3) Striking trend of vehicles growth 2) Rapid Urbanization • Population: 16. 95 million in 2008 • Population density: 22, 546 people per km 2 in urban core districts in 2008 • Tremendous urban growth: 242. 2% growth from 1997 to 2007 Figure 2: The striking trend of vehicle growth in Beijing from 1998 to 2007. Source: Beijing Statistical Yearbook, 2000 - 2008 p Vehicle ownership reached over 3 million in 2007 p Private cars: an eightfold increase in only 9 years Serious traffic congestion: Year Roadway (km/h) Bus (km/h) 1994 2004 45 < 20 16. 7 Source: Beijing Traffic Management Bureau 9. 2

4 Beijing — BRT line 1 4. 3 Motivation to investment BRT Widening roadway • Building flyover • Expanding highway network • A temporary relief Growth rate of vehicles is much faster than that of the road network. n Beijing authority has been faced with increasing difficulties in paying off the debts, subsidizing Metro and LRT operation, and expanding the rail network to increase coverage. n

4 Southern Axis BRT line 1 4. 4 An Overview of BRT line 1 ① Advanced vehicle ② Enhanced station ③ Off-board fare collection ④ Screen door system ⑤ Exclusive busway ⑥ Barrier ⑦ Overpass p Pilot line: 5. 5 km, Dec. 2004 (1 st in China) p Full line: 16. 5 km, Dec. 2005 p From Qianmen (City centre) to Demaozhuang (a southern residential region) p Time span of implementing BRT: < 2 years p Most lanes are physically segregated in the median of the road

4 Beijing—BRT line 1 4. 5 Major elements Exclusive busway Advanced vehicle Enhanced Station Bus Rapid Transit Pre-board fare collection Frequent service ITS Applications

4 Beijing BRT line 1 4. 6 Technical performance Operations Management Information Transit Priority System ITS Technology Ticketing System Traffic light priority Passenger Information Monitoring System n Technical performance Ridership: Average daily trips are around 150, 000 with the highest reported capacity up to 260, 000 on 01/10/2007. • Operating speed : 22 km/h on peak; 26 km/h off peak; almost 40% travel time reduction. Service frequency: 1. 5 min (two vehicles) on peak; 2 -3 min off-peak • Fare structure: 1 Yuan by cash; 0. 4 Yuan by smart card • Capital costs: US$ 5 million/km; 1/15 of the cost of Beijing Metro Line 4 Physically segregated busway •

5 BRT corridor analysis 5. 1 Passenger survey: modal shift Modal shift • 12. 4% said they had a car alternative for the journey • This surveyed modal shift from private car is encouraging, considering that car ownership in Beijing is generally lower than many western cities • A high-quality bus-based rapid transit can attract modal shift. n Motivation to use the BRT • 52. 3% believed that BRT was more convenient than car for their trip ---- BRT is a competitive alternative to the private car. • 6. 2% concerned about the negative impact of car on environment ---- environment impact becomes an increasingly important factor to concern in China n

5 Analysis results 5. 2 Passenger survey : travel-related characteristics (1) 1) Before the operation of BRT, how did passengers previously undertake this journey? (N=525) 2) Which transport mode do BRT users normally use to access a BRT station? Public transport systems, walking and cycling are the main modes used. Travel by bus accounted for 75. 4% ---mainly because many conventional bus lines were cancelled or shortened 7. 2% of trips on the BRT line 1 were new trips ---highly likely to be generated by the BRT Most people took green transport modes (bus, walking, Metro/LRT, cycling) to access the BRT Only 6. 1% of the total respondents took the bike ---lack of secure bicycle storage For choice users, • walking: 52. 3%, the most common way • park+ride: very few (3. 1%) “park and ride” is underdeveloped in China

5 Analysis results 5. 2 Passenger survey: travel-related characteristics (2) 3) Trip purpose 4) Trip frequency Taken as a whole, the majority of passengers (47. 4%) were work-related commuters (travel to work or travel on business) The percent of “Travel to work” to choice users is almost twice as that to captive users. ---BRT is more reliable than private car during the rush hour Recreational activities and shopping are less popular to car users ---BRT is less competitive than car in spare time. Taken as a whole, most respondents (41. 1%) used BRT more than once a day. ---BRT may have certain loyal passengers, who always use BRT to travel to work. Respondents who used BRT 1 time/day only account for 10. 7%. ---people usually use the same transport mode for a return trip.

5 Analysis results 5. 2 Passenger survey analysis: travel-related characteristics (3) 5) Evaluation of the BRT service Seven attributes, including speed, reliability, safety, convenience, frequency, comfort & cleanliness and overall service quality, are measured. --- respondents have strong positive opinions on the BRT service. --- 85. 5% of passengers rated overall satisfaction of BRT service as “very satisfied” or “satisfied”. --- in particular, respondents thought BRT was fast and convenient. 6) Suggestions for improvement Overcrowding problem. suggestions for improving the BRT service mainly relate to BRT capacity enhancement --- Launch more BRT routes --- The hours of services should be extended Vehicle interior: not always kept clean Shelter: could not provide passengers effective protection from the bad weather. Crowding problem Vehicle interior Station problem

5 Analysis results 5. 3 Respondents` perception of living near BRT stations (1) Advance the Economy Through BRT Existing house Beijing BRT line 1 property attractiveness Respondents were asked to indicate whether they lived within walking distance from BRT stations. 43. 4% of passengers (N=228) were local residents who live near BRT stations; 56. 6% of passengers (N=297) did not live near any BRT station. Key characteristics of the local residents` profile: all respondents within walking distance of a BRT station House under construction Demographics - 52. 7% male - 85. 9% aged from 18 to 49 - 50. 0% had college education or above - 58. 9% earned ¥ 20005999 Travel behaviour - 52. 2% work-related trip - 66. 8% use BRT at least once a day - 61. 5% walk to a BRT station Satisfaction of BRT -Highly satisfied with BRT service - Joint top 3 consideration to take BRT service: speed, reliability and convenience.

5 Analysis results 5. 3 Respondents` perception of living near BRT stations (2) Project development 1) When did those residents move to be near the BRT corridor? BRT proposal Feasibility study Construction phrase Trial operation Full operation Year March 2003 April 2003 Early 2004 December 2005 Timeline of implementing Beijing Southern Axis The trial operation did not attract a large number of residents After the full operation, residential properties became more attractive. ---proximity to the BRT corridor can reduce the time and money cost of commuting, and this has significantly improved the property attractiveness near BRT.

5 Analysis results 5. 3 Respondents` perception of living near BRT stations (3) 2) How far away from respondents` houses to their nearest stations? (N=228) 3) Would you like to move nearer a BRT station? Relocation demand of respondents (N=297) Actual distance from respondents` houses to the BRT system, indicating that BRT has a large attractiveness distance. 68. 5% lived within 500 metres radius around BRT stations; 14. 0% of respondents travelled over 1000 m to take the BRT service, 50% took bus and 31. 2% walk to a BRT station. BRT line 1 has greatly improved accessibility for communities Most people (49. 5%) were interested in a house along the BRT corridor. 29. 0% of respondents did not show interest in housing near BRT corridor, mainly 5 reasons: ---visitors in Beijing ---get heavily subsidized accommodation ---workplace which was far from the BRT corridor --- could not afford housing --- more concern about other public resources, such as a high-quality school et al.

5. Analysis results 5. 4 Summary of passenger survey n Travel-related characteristics: • 47. 4% of all the respondents were work-related commuters • 41. 1% used BRT more than once a day • 46. 7% normally used bus to access BRT while 33. 9% walked to a BRT station n Impact on modal shift • • The passenger survey confirms that BRT offers an innovative approach to providing a highquality transport service. 85. 5% of passengers rated overall satisfaction of the BRT service as “very satisfied” or “satisfied” 12. 4% of BRT passengers switched from car to BRT is very likely to generate many new trips. n Impact on the property attractiveness • 14. 0% of respondents travelled over 1000 m to take the BRT service • 75. 0% of respondents thought BRT was important to their residential location choice • 46. 1% moved to a place near BRT stations after the full operation of BRT • 49. 5% of non-resident passengers showed interest in a house along the BRT corridor BRT has improved the attractiveness of residential property along its corridor.

5 BRT corridor analysis 5. 5 Decision makers` viewpoint The primary findings from discussion with decision makers (7 in-depth interviews were held with 13 practitioners ) The introduction of the BRT line 1 has a substantial impact on transit-supportive land development. The travel time savings has made locations near a BRT station more desirable for development. Many residential projects, specifically condominiums, were built after the implementation of the BRT system, and this is mainly due to the accessibility enhancement in the southern area. BRT also has negative effects on nearby properties resulting from noise, pollution, and traffic intrusion. However, the value of accessibility provided by BRT line 1 is significantly stronger than these nuisance effects. BRT line 1 has provided some opportunities for joint development, but busway station is not well integrated into surrounding land development. For BRT project, promoting land development is currently not within the scope of transport planners. The importance of physical infrastructure was emphasized by decision makers. The commercial projects were less referred in the interview, and it is expected to take a longer time to examine its impact.

5 BRT corridor analysis 5. 6 Opinions from local real estate agents The primary findings from discussion with 35 local real estate agents include: The BRT line 1 has a high profile in the property market. There was generally a consensus on the prosperous property market, such as rising property values, rents, and real estate performance, resulted from the opening of BRT. Overwhelming majority (94. 3%) believed that the operation of the BRT Line 1 had caused a noticeable change in property prices proximity to the BRT corridor. The property value uplift conferred by the BRT mostly occurred after its full operation and happened within 500 metres distance from a BRT station. BRT was fundamental to many customers` interest in the local area. From real estate agents`s perspective, most customers would like to pay a premium (10% to 25% of rental or capital value) for properties near the BRT corridor. 85. 7% of respondents believed that BRT had provided development opportunities, and become a driver for property development along its corridor.

5 BRT corridor analysis 5. 7 Survey with business owners Visits and interviews with some business owners have revealed that BRT line 1 is very likely to have improved business opportunities for people to work in BRT station areas. After the opening of BRT line 1, more customers travel from downtown to southern area. BRT service may attract many new trips to boost the patronage of nearby businesses. The survey was conducted only 4 years after the full operation of BRT line 1. Further investigation on commercial sector needs to be done after a longer period.

5 BRT corridor analysis 5. 8 Land value capture analysis: overall comparison Pre-owned houses prices change in Beijing from 2003 to 2009 Property prices rose at a high rate Property market in Beijing booms due to tremendous consumption demand, the Olympic Games effect and government`s support policy External factors, especially the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games, present economic crisis and government policy on supporting property market, affecting both control and test units are reasonably similar. Pre-owned houses prices comparison between catchment and control areas Property prices for both catchment and control areas increased dramatically, benefiting from excellent regional property market. Properties adjacent to a BRT station gain a relatively faster increase (2. 3% annually) than those not served by the BRT system, and this trend is more apparent after the operation of BRT in 2005.

5 BRT corridor analysis 5. 9 Land value capture analysis: longitudinal analysis (1) Locations on catchment areas and control areas

5 BRT corridor analysis 5. 9 Land value capture analysis: longitudinal analysis (2) 1) Hypothesis 1: H 0 : There is no significant difference in property prices for catchment and control area at a time point. H 1 : There is a significant difference in property prices for catchment and control area at a time point. Hypothesis 2: H 0 : There is no significant difference in property prices in an area over a period of time. H 1 : There is a significant difference in property prices in an area over a period of time. A one-way ANOVA method with contrast tests was used to for testing hypotheses 1 and 2. Station Dahongmen. Xili Contrast Ca 03 -Co 03 Ca 04 -Co 04 Ca 09 -Co 09 Hypothesis 1 p-value 0. 106 0. 535 0. 763 Accept H 0 √ √ √ Contrast Ca 03 -Ca 04 -Ca 09 Co 03 -Co 04 -Co 09 Hypothesis 2 p-value Accept H 0 0. 517 √ 0. 000* X 0. 126 √ 0. 000* X Heyinanzhan Ca 03 -Co 03 Ca 04 -Co 04 Ca 09 -Co 09 0. 118 0. 112 0. 000* √ √ X Ca 03 -Ca 04 -Ca 09 Co 03 -Co 04 -Co 09 0. 232 0. 000* 0. 295 0. 000* √ X Liuyingmeng Ca 03 -Co 03 Ca 04 -Co 04 Ca 09 -Co 09 0. 741 0. 744 0. 000* √ √ X Ca 03 -Ca 04 -Ca 09 Co 03 -Co 04 -Co 09 0. 445 0. 000* 0. 810 0. 000* √ X Note: Ca 03—Co 03 means the contrast fro the catchment and control in 2003, and so forth. * Indicates significance level <0. 05;

5 BRT corridor analysis 5. 9 Land value capture analysis: longitudinal analysis (3) Project development Planning Phase Construction Phase Operation Phase Year 2003 2004 2009 There is no significant difference between mean prices of catchment and control areas in 2003 (before the opening of BRT line 1 ) and in 2004 (during the construction phase of BRT). BRT line 1 might be not bring remarkably effect to Dahongmenxili station than its paired area BRT has brought about significant impact on Heyinanzhan and Liuyingmen staions. Mean value did not changed significantly during the period 2003 -2004. Mean value did change significantly during the period 2004 -2009. This finding proves the property value uplift do occur to properties adjacent to BRT stations and this effect is much more evident after a relatively short period (5 years) of BRT operation.

5 BRT corridor analysis 5. 9 Land value capture analysis: longitudinal analysis (4) 2) Hypothesis 3: H 0 : There is no significant interaction effect between time and area. H 1 : There is a significant interaction effect between time and area A repeated measures ANOVA method with tests of was used to compare mean value of properties in catchment and control areas over time. Station Dahongmen. Xili Heyinanzhan Liuyingmeng Hypothesis 3 within-subjects contrasts p-value Accept H 0 the period: 2003 -2004 0. 704 √ the period: 2004 -2009 0. 680 √ the period: 2003 -2004 0. 046* X the period: 2004 -2009 0. 021* X the period: 2003 -2004 0. 002* X the period: 2004 -2009 0. 004* X * Note: Indicates significance level <0. 05; The statistical analysis suggests improved accessibility conferred by BRT is capitalized into higher real-estate prices, and this capitalization effect is particularly evident in the places which previously lack mobility by Mass Transit system. The results also imply that the positive impact of BRT on property value uplift is more evident over time.

6 Conclusions and discussion n A low cost rapid transit system is achievable: • BRT can offer larger passenger capacity, higher operation speed, and more reliable and comfortable service than conventional bus. • BRT can be built faster, and cheaper than comparable rail system. n A significant transport improvement • BRT line 1 has a large attractiveness distance, and attracts a large number of work-related trips. • It has gained a high satisfaction over passengers, attracted modal shift from private cars, and possibly generated many new trips. n Improve property attractiveness • BRT as an emerging form of transport system is generally appreciated by stakeholders. • It has improved the residential and commercial property attractiveness in the southern region and provided some opportunities for transit-oriented development. n Property value uplift • Improved accessibility conferred by BRT is capitalized into higher real-estate prices. • The capitalization effect mostly occurs after the full operation of BRT, and is more evident over time and particularly observed in a place which lack mobility by Mass Transit system. • The values of residential properties near a BRT station increased faster (annually 2. 3% higher) than those not served by the BRT.

Thank you for your attention. Questions and Comments? For more information: Taotao Deng: r 01 td 7@abdn. ac. uk