Mexico City’s Suburban Land Use and Transit Connection: Effects of Line B Metro Expansion

Over the past half century, government agencies in Mexico City have invested heavily in high-capacity public transit, particularly the 225-kilometer Metro system. Nearly all of this investment has been in central locations of the metropolis. Only recently has service coverage been extended into the periphery, which has accounted for the majority of postwar metropolitan population growth. The Metro’s Line B, which opened in phases in 1999 and 2000, significantly expanded Metro coverage into the densely populated and fast-growing suburban municipality of Ecatepec. Comparing travel behavior and land use measures at six geographic scales, including the investment’s immediate catchment area, across two time periods—six years before and seven years after the investment opened—this paper investigates the effects of one of the first and only suburban high-capacity transit investments in Mexico City. While the investment sparked a significant increase in local Metro use, most of this increase came from people relying on informal transit, rather than cars. This shift reduced average transit expenditures and travel times for local residents. However, it also increased government subsidies for the Metro and had no apparent effect on road speeds. In terms of land use, the investment increased density around the stations but appears to have had little to no effect on downtown commercial development, where it might have been expected to have a significant influence. In short, the effects of Line B demonstrate much of the promise and problem with expanding high capacity transit service into the suburbs. Ridership is likely to be high, but so too will be the costs and subsidies, while the effects on car ownership and urban form are likely to be modest.

[1]  Robert E. Lang,et al.  OFFICE SPRAWL: THE EVOLVING GEOGRAPHY OF BUSINESS , 2000 .

[2]  L. Frank,et al.  Urban form, travel time, and cost relationships with tour complexity and mode choice , 2007 .

[3]  R. Cervero Alternative Approaches to Modeling the Travel-Demand Impacts of Smart Growth , 2006 .

[4]  Urban Leviathan: Mexico City in the Twentieth Century , 1996 .

[5]  Daniel J. Graham,et al.  Is the Mexico City metro an inferior good , 2009 .

[6]  B. Taylor,et al.  Nature and/or nurture? Analyzing the determinants of transit ridership across US urbanized areas , 2008 .

[7]  John R. Meyer,et al.  The Urban Transportation Problem , 1965 .

[8]  R. Noland,et al.  The Role of Metro Fares, Income, Metro Quality of Service and Fuel Prices for Sustainable Transportation in Mexico City , 2011 .

[9]  Zhi Liu DETERMINANTS OF PUBLIC TRANSIT RIDERSHIP ANALYSIS OF POST WORLD WAR II TRENDS AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE NETWORKS. , 1993 .

[10]  Hong-wei Huang,et al.  The Land-Use Impacts of Urban Rail Transit Systems , 1996 .

[11]  Matthew E. Kahn,et al.  Effects of Urban Rail Transit Expansions: Evidence from Sixteen Cities, 1970-2000 , 2006 .

[12]  B. Pushkarev,et al.  Public Transportation and Land Use Policy , 1977 .

[13]  José A. Gómez-Ibáñez,et al.  Big-City Transit Rider snip, Deficits, and Politics: Avoiding Reality in Boston , 1996 .

[14]  D Pickrell,et al.  Transportation and Land Use , 2020, International Encyclopedia of Human Geography.

[15]  M. Kuby,et al.  Factors influencing light-rail station boardings in the United States , 2004 .

[16]  Geoff Gardner,et al.  Mass rapid transit systems for cities in the developing world , 2003 .

[17]  Darío Hidalgo Comparación de Alternativas de Transporte Público Masivo - Una Aproximación Conceptual , 2005 .

[18]  V. Rivera,et al.  Implementing Sustainable Urban Travel Policies in Mexico , 2011 .

[19]  R. Cervero The Transit Metropolis: A Global Inquiry , 1998 .

[20]  Robert Cervero,et al.  The Half-Mile Circle: Does It Best Represent Transit Station Catchments? , 2012 .

[21]  Ming Zhang The Role of Land Use in Travel Mode Choice: Evidence from Boston and Hong Kong , 2004 .

[22]  Douglas R. Porter,et al.  Transit-Focused Development: A Progress Report , 1998 .

[23]  R. Cervero,et al.  TWENTY YEARS OF THE BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM: LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS , 1997 .

[24]  R. Cervero Transit-Oriented Development's Ridership Bonus: A Product of Self-Selection and Public Policies , 2006 .

[25]  J. Landis,et al.  DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS OF URBAN TRANSPORT: A US PERSPECTIVE , 2003 .

[26]  C. Nash International Transport Forum , 2010 .

[27]  David M Levinson,et al.  Density and Dispersion: The Co-Development of Land Use and Rail in London , 2007 .

[28]  K. Gwilliam Cities on the Move : A World Bank Urban Transport Strategy Review , 2002 .

[29]  H. Dittmar,et al.  Location Efficiency: Neighborhood and Socio-Economic Characteristics Determine Auto Ownership and Use - Studies in Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco , 2002 .

[30]  G. Giuliano LAND USE IMPACTS OF TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS: HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT , 1986 .

[31]  D. Chatman Residential Choice, the Built Environment, and Nonwork Travel: Evidence Using New Data and Methods , 2009 .

[32]  Xinyu Cao,et al.  Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: A focus on methodologies , 2008 .

[33]  Reid Ewing,et al.  Travel and the Built Environment , 2010 .

[34]  E. Guerra The New Suburbs: Evolving travel behavior, the built environment, and subway investments in Mexico City , 2013 .

[35]  Clifford J. Wirth,et al.  Transportation Policy in Mexico City , 1997 .

[36]  Matthew E. Kahn,et al.  The effects of new public projects to expand urban rail transit , 2000 .

[37]  Robert Cervero,et al.  Cost of a Ride , 2011 .

[38]  R. Cervero,et al.  TRAVEL DEMAND AND THE 3DS: DENSITY, DIVERSITY, AND DESIGN , 1997 .

[39]  Jeffrey Kenworthy,et al.  Urban Design to Reduce Automobile Dependence , 2006 .

[40]  Marlon G. Boarnet,et al.  L.A. Story: A Reality Check for Transit-Based Housing , 1995 .

[41]  Paavo Monkkonen The Housing Transition in Mexico , 2011 .