Bus rapid transit impacts on land uses and land values in Seoul, Korea

Transport Policy

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 102-116

  Cervero, Robert ^a   Kang, Chang Deok ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b University of Seoul   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Bus rapid transit; Capitalization; Hedonic price models; Land use; Land use planning; Multilevel models; Value capture

Indexed keywords

BUS TRANSPORT; INVESTMENT; LAND MARKET; LAND USE CHANGE; LAND USE PLANNING; NUMERICAL MODEL; PRICE DYNAMICS; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK; TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT; URBAN TRANSPORT; ZONING POLICY;

SEOUL [SEOUL (ADS)]; SEOUL [SOUTH KOREA]; SOUTH KOREA;

EID: 78349309923     PISSN: 0967070X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.06.005     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Bae C., Jun M., Park H. The impact of Seoul's subway line 5 on residential property values. Transport Policy 2003, 10(2):85-94.
2. Banister D. Unsustainable Transport: City Transport in the New Century 2005, Routledge, London.
3. Banister D., Lichfield N. The key issues in transport and urban development. Transport and Urban Development 1995, E&FN Spon, London. D. Banister (Ed.).
4. Bartik T. Measuring the benefits of amenity improvements on hedonic models. Land Economics 1988, 64(2):172-183.
5. Bhatta S., Drennan M. The economic benefits of public investment in transportation: a review of recent literature. Journal of Planning Education and Research 2003, 22:288-296.
6. Boarnet M. Spillovers and the locational effects of public infrastructure. Journal of Regional Science 1998, 38(3):381-400.
7. Boarnet M., Chalermpong S. New highways, house prices, and urban development: a case study of toll roads in Orange County, CA. Housing Policy Debate 2001, 12(3):575-605.
8. Boarnet M., Haughwot A. Do Highways Matter? Evidence and Policy Implications of Highway's Influence on Metropolitan Development 2000, Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, Washington, DC.
9. Cambridge Systematics, Cervero, R. and Aschuer, D., 1998. Economic Impact Analysis of Transit Investments: Guidebook for Practitioners. National Academy Press, Washington, DC. Transit Cooperative Research Program, Report 35, National Research Council, 1998; with Cambridge Systematics and D. Aschuer.
10. Cervero, R., 1997. Transit-induced accessibility and agglomeration benefits: a land market evaluation. Working Paper 691, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, Berkeley.
11. Cervero R. The Transit Metropolis: A Global Inquiry 1998, Island Press, Washington.
12. Cervero R. The property value case for transit. Developing Around Transit: Strategies and Solutions that Work 2004, Urban Land Institute, Washington, DC. R. Dunphy (Ed.).
13. Cervero R., Landis J. Twenty years of the bay area rapid transit system: land use and development impacts. Transportation Research Part A 1997, 31(4):309-333.
14. Dowall D., Monkkonen P. Consequences of the Plano Piloto: the urban development and land markets of Brasilia. Urban Studies 2007, 44(10):1871-1887.
15. Du Hongbo, Mulley C. Relationship between transport accessibility and land value. Transportation Research Record 2006, 1977:197-205.
16. Estupinan N., Rodriguez D. The relationship between urban form and station boardings for Bogotá's BRT. Transportation Research Part A 2008, 42:296-306.
17. Ewing R. Transportation infrastructure and urban growth and development patterns. Transportation Infrastructure: The Challenges of Rebuilding America 2009, American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service, Chicago, Report Number 557, pp. 27-39. M. Boarnet (Ed.).
18. Gatzlaff D., Smith M. The impact of the Miami metrorail on the value of residences near station locations. Land Economics 1993, 69(1):54-66.
19. Giuliano G. Land use impacts of transportation investments: highway and transit. The Geography of Urban Transportation 2004, 237-273. The Guilford Press, New York. S. Hanson (Ed.).
20. Hall P. A European perspective on the spatial links between land use, development and transport. Transport and Urban Development 1995, E&FN Spon, London. D. Banister (Ed.).
21. Huang H. The land-use impacts of urban rail transit systems. Journal of Planning Literature 1996, 11(1):17-30.
22. Levinson H., Zimmerman S., Clinger J., Rutherford S. Bus rapid transit: an overview. Journal of Public Transportation 2002, 5(2):1-30.
23. Martinez F., Henriquez R. A random bidding and supply land use equilibrium model. Transportation Research B 2006, 41:632-651.
24. McMillen D., McDonald J. Reaction of house prices to a new rapid transit line: Chicago's midway line 1983-1999. Real Estate Economics 2004, 32(3):463-486.
25. Perez P., Martinez F., Ortuzar J. Microeconomic formulation and estimation of a residential location choice model: implications for the value of time. Journal of Regional Science 2003, 43(4):771-789.
26. Polzin S., Baltes M. Bus rapid transit: a viable alternative?. Journal of Public Transportation 2002, 5(2):47-69.
27. Pushkarev B., Zupan J. Public Transportation and Land Use 1977, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
28. Rabe-Hesketh S., Skrondal A. Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using STATA 2008, STATA Press, College Station, TX, USA.
29. Raudenbush S., Bryk A. Hierarchical Linear Models: Application and Data Analysis Methods 2002, Sage, Newbury Park, California.
30. Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Land Value and Public Transport 2002, Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, London.
31. Rodriquez D., Targa F. Value of accessibility to Bogotá's bus rapid transit system. Transport Reviews 2004, 24(5):587-610.
32. Rodriquez D., Mojica C. The land value benefits of bus rapid transit: the case of Bogotá's transmilenio. Landlines 2008, 24:2-6.
33. Rosen S. Hedonic prices and implicit markets: product differential in pure competition. Journal of Political Economics 1974, 82:34-55.
34. Ryan S. Property values and transportation facilities: finding the transportation-land use connection. Journal of Planning Literature 1999, 13(4):412-427.
35. Seoul Development Institute Toward Better Public Transport. Seoul Development Institute, Seoul Metropolitan Government 2005.
36. Seoul Development Institute, 2005b. Monitoring Service Level of Seoul Bus System. Seoul, Korea: Seoul Development Institute Seoul, Seoul Metropolitan Government.
37. Seoul Metropolitan Government Achievement and Present State of Public Transit Reform in Seoul, 2009 2009, Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seoul.
38. Stigler S. Fisher and the 5% level. Chance 2008, 21(4):12.
39. Voith R. Changing capitalization of CBD-oriented transportation systems-evidence from Philadelphia, 1970-1988. Journal of Urban Economics 1993, 33(3):361-376.
40. Vuchic V. Bus semirapid transit model development and evaluation. Journal of Public Transportation 2002, 5(2):71-96.
41. Zhou B., Kockelman K.M. Neighborhood impacts on land use change: a multinomial logit model of spatial relationships. The Annals of Regional Science 2008, 42:321-340.