There's a growing body of research relating transport infrastructure (particularly transit) to land values, mostly in suburban situations. But how can we identify and quantify the potential benefits of proposed transit facilities to CBDs and the inner city?
Most transit facilities don't stack up in traditional benefit:cost analyses, but may afford great benefits in amenity, livability and the socio-economic wellbeing of our city centres. How can we evaluate those benefits and include them in the benefit:cost equation? Or, if we are stuck with some sort of MCA, what measures are available to allocate scores to such benefits in such a way that they can be weighed against implementation costs?
The same question applies also to active transport infrastructure.
You may want to begin with looking at "Transit-Oriented Development and Joint Development in the United States:
A Literature Review" http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rrd_52.pdf
I use Spatial Interaction Models calibrated in the bid-rents, which are related to the values of the property. Then changes in the system can lead to new bid-rents and to changes in property values. The values of the policies is assessed by the changes in property values in a Hedonic price approach.
Have a look at this article. It may help: "Dubé, J., F. Des Rosiers et M. Thériault et P. Dib. 2011. Economic Impact of a Supply Change in Mass Transit in Urban Areas: A Canadian Example. Transportation Research- Part A, 45:1, 46-62."
I'm sure you are looking for some type of equation or model in which to work from but I think the purpose of design is whether or not it fits its environment in which it will operate. I think that just because you build something of sound quality, it doesn't necessarily mean it will work or it is what people will want.
If you take a look at a new highway that was constructed in the state of Texas recently that was touted at having the highest speed limit in the US, you will find that it was a waste of money and time building it because it did neither of what was advertised. One, it was advertised has a faster route between Austin and San Antonio, which is not true, the route does not go directly into San Antonio, you must get off first in another town before another 40 minute drive on another highway before going to SA. As you can see from this article (http://www.kvue.com/video/featured-videos/SA-group-calls-for-boycott-of-Highway-130-boondoggle-178967861.html) it was not thought through correctly.
But what about transit systems that work in a different way? In a way that is designed for specific purposes? For example, the radial design of cities is still considered the best (future) prototype of cities and communities. Transit systems (i.e., high speed rail) move individuals of differing levels of purpose from one part to another part of the city in a quick move. What I mean by this is for people who work in the city, they ride a train system that is only for them which means from work to their home area. Whereas, individuals who live, visit, or passing through ride a different rail system that is designed to stop at more locations. If you take a look at the design of what was once, and by many today still, the perfect design of an efficient city, EPCOT, you will see that it was created in mind with every single purpose that an individual would have in the city and out lying areas of the city (communities). Every part has a purpose, and when created with a transit mode that is designed for that purpose you will find an efficient means of transportation. You can take a look at these websites that explain in more detail about the design, but at no point was "research," model extraction, or cost-benefit taken into concern. This was all created by one man who knew what people needed and wanted. Just like Steve Jobs, he never had to do any research, he just knew this is what worked.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_Prototype_Community_of_Tomorrow_(concept)
https://sites.google.com/site/theoriginalepcot/
Click on 'EPCOT Model' for more details of design
To help provide somewhat of an answer to the question, here are a few answers
- Look for purpose of area and transit (does the area you are building in only for middle income families/individuals or high income individuals/families? Does it run through residential areas only or both commercial and residential and where is the switch off and difference in payload?)
- Transit design need...
Thank you all for your valuable advice. I'm particularly interested in the impact of new transit facilities on pre-existing CBDs. That is, the land is already highly developed, there is little or no scope for additional development (TOD or other) around the new facilities (although changes in use may be possible), and the land use is predominantly commercial.
The funds for the infrastructure come from public revenue derived largely from property rates, and hence the decision whether to build is ultimately made by local politicians, not private interests. What help can professional transport planners give them?
From a health benefit point of view for nearby residents contact:
Matt Burke @ Griffith
Billie Giles-Corti @ Uni Melbourne
Fiona Bull @ UWA
I think I remember from work I was involved in in Perth that residents closer to train stations walked more than those that weren't.
Thanks, Nick. In this case, the new facility would not substantially change walking distances at the CBD end, although there may be some health benefits associated with transit passengers attracted from cars walking to and from the service at the residential end.
Hi Harry,
There are a number of studies that examine changes in property values, travel behavior, quality of life, and economic development surrounding the Transmilenio BRT project in Bogota. Message me and I'll send you pdfs or links to the studies I'm aware of. Good luck!
-tab
Dear Harry,
You might like to contact Robin Hickman at UCL. His profile is at http://iris.ucl.ac.uk/iris/browse/profile?upi=RHICK55 and he has spent a great deal of time looking at the costs and benefits of various transport infrastructure development options in urban areas, with models applied to London and other major cities. Much of this focused on the technique of visioning and backcasting, so superimposing solutions on urban areas and working out the most cost effective methods to get there. For example, in London, a challenge he helped to address was to meet the Mayor's challenge for a 60% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030 through the most economical route.
There will be a significant overlap between his areas of expertise and your question.
Regards,
Andrew
I should elaborate further. What if there is no change in accessibility (a relatively easy thing to measure, one way or another, and to monetise)?
Q1. Is there evidence for uplift in the commercial economy from, say, introducing bus lanes into the CBD?
Q2. Is there a model for estimating uplift in the commercial economy from making the streetscape more pleasant?
Dear Harry
a way to estimate the value of the interventions is to use stated preferences techniques whereby by administering a questionnaire to a representative subsample of the population you are interested one can estimate via the appropriate development of an experimental design the data necessary to estimate the willingness to pay for the variables you are interested in.
see for example a paper I have published on this type of issue
http://www.openstarts.units.it/dspace/handle/10077/5952
regards
Edoardo
Dear Harry,
Well done regarding the research, I wish you well in it. I also have been reading around this concept in South Africa. It is particularly interesting that you mentioned your interest on the impact of transit facilities in CBDs (where potentials for growth is somehow saturated). I realise that often times urban planners bargain on the 'value creation' potentials of transit facilities development and often ignore the 'value enhancement/retention' (if any) especially in CBDs.
I am looking at the case of the Gautrains (but on the affect property values on the sustained run) in the Gauteng area of South Africa. I will keep you posted on my findings as they come in.
Perhaps to look at the network effects (Metcalfe's Law) arising out of such a proposal-focusing on the total value of the existing network of accessibility if new nodes and links are added. There are a number of forums/blogs which might provide further insights...
https://www.google.com.my/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=2_MVVciHMoi7uAT034HYDg&url=http://seattletransitblog.com/2013/09/02/metcalfes-law-in-transit-planning/&ved=0CB0QFjAA&usg=AFQjCNExjD7hi1Z_3Im0tTTmlDZdmav-pg&sig2=TW-cEibfb35m8QuBXHNmXQ
https://www.google.com.my/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=2_MVVciHMoi7uAT034HYDg&url=http://portlandtransport.com/archives/2009/09/applying_metcal.html&ved=0CCMQFjAB&usg=AFQjCNGRzpYoIYdjlKDqpKrO5lDE6XHrqQ&sig2=gG9Khe5-YxmutaR5d5nhrQ